Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth

Welcome to Infoshop News
Thursday, September 09 2010 @ 07:39 AM UTC

Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action

Anti-War ActivismFor over 500 years, the white colonizers of this hemisphere (and most of the world) have subjected people of color to lifetimes of enslavement, torture, occupation, internment, police brutality, poverty, drug abuse and so on.
Even after being beaten, raped, segregated, and silenced people of color the world over have risen up to their oppressors and oppressive institutions only to have their messages and rage co-opted by so-called “allies” within the mostly white progressive, anti-war movement – righteous anger channeled into more “acceptable” avenues whose purpose is not active engagement with that which oppresses us but in the creation of photo opportunities and press releases. In effect, we as people of color are not only further marginalized but tokenized as well.

In addition, we argue that the current anti-war movement is rendered irrelevant by its refusal to address the critical component of white supremacy. The racist anti-war movement is devoid of any self-critical process to acknowledge or address how white supremacy contributes to the oppression of people of color within the movement, so how could it possibly have an analysis of how white supremacy oppresses people of color around the world? Essentially, how can one speak of ending oppression while engaging in the same or similar (in principle) oppressive behavior one claims to oppose?

Aside from providing one the opportunity to pat oneself on the back, what purpose is served, or more explicitly, how are activists supporting the people of occupied Iraq and occupied Palestine by marching on the offices of warmongering corporations on a Saturday when no one is there?

Given this reality, if we as people of color maintain our continued involvement in their spectacle of “resistance,” outside of our disruption of this spectacle, it will further empower their smug entitlement and white supremacy.

Rather, we encourage unity between people of color in order to create nodes of actual resistance led by people of color.

Therefore, on Saturday, March 21, 2009 in Washington, D.C., radical people of color will stand in solidarity with the people of Iraq and Palestine in our common struggle against white supremacy, colonialism, imperialism, and oppression in all its forms and make our presence felt outside of what is conventionally allowed by the racist anti-war movement.

This will be a space of unity, empowerment, and self-determination wherein it will be made explicitly clear that we will no longer be marginalized, tokenized, and ultimately silenced by those who claim to speak in our names or in the names of our family and friends fighting for liberation around the world.

Meet us at 12 noon at 23rd St. & Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, D.C.. Look for the brown and black f(l)ags.

Bring your voice! Bring your rage! Bring da noise!

A Brownie A Day Keeps Whitey Away,

D.C. Anarchist People Of Color

Philadelphia Anarchist People Of Color
Share
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Ask
  • Kirtsy
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Twitter
  • SlashDot
  • Reddit
  • MySpace
  • Fark
  • Del.icio.us
  • Blogmarks
  • Yahoo Buzz

Trackback

Trackback URL for this entry: http://news.infoshop.org/trackback.php?id=20090312224810852

Here's what others have to say about 'Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action':

Smack A White Boy, Tell your Enemies from your Friends | illvox: anarchist people of color, race, anarchy, revolution
[...] on the left: sadly, I don’t think this could explain all of it. There were slightly more cooler heads over on infoshop.org’s coverage, but still many people acted a fool, to put it bluntly. I don’t think there’s any [...] [read more]
Tracked on Sunday, March 22 2009 @ 04:37 PM UTC

Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action | 41 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: engine summer on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 12:27 AM UTC
i think this is really good except for the title and the closing salutation. those sound like you are against white people and not just white supremacy. in fact i would say it transmits a highly essentialized view of race which is not helpful to combating white supremacy which has a similar view. for real, props for calling out white supremacy on the left - but is that the only thing wrong with the left? are leftists of color "better"? is there some reason that speaking the tongue of racial antagonism (and essentialism) is ever appropriate to an anarchist project of collective liberation?

it's also been left really unclear what the parameters of this action are, other than where/when it is to transpire...
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Brennus on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 03:37 AM UTC
It's left open on purpose.

It's against white people on purpose. I'm white and I'm against white people. Not just white supremacy. White people shouldn't exist. At least not as white people.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: engine summer on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 02:21 PM UTC
thats all well and good for you and me and whoever else has read "race traitor" and can talk about whiteness as a social construct. but at face value, whatever the intent those 2 lines read just like any old vernacular articulation of racial bias.

it also seems to imply that its impossible for white people to be anti-white supremacy (or anti-whiteness or anti-white or however you want to put it) which is pretty saddening. if thats the case the only answer is to exterminate white people. "the continuing appeal of nationalism", anyone?

again i think the rest of this is really good.... but i feel like those 2 parts are a good example of why anarchy and identity politics dont mix and i question their inclusion.
Moderation
Authored by: Admin on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 01:13 AM UTC
Flamebait deleted.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Dirty Hands on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 01:58 PM UTC
the reactionary freak-out commentary over at ararchistnews.org about this piece is highly entertaining.

---
Peace, Love, & Insurrection...

Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: punk on Saturday, March 14 2009 @ 01:17 PM UTC
it is this piece that is reactionary, im sure not the commentary.

race nationalism has absolutely no place in anarchism and never will. maybe some crazy communists like using because it makes them feel good, but other than that it is pure reactionary garbage.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: automatonsrevolt on Thursday, March 26 2009 @ 11:18 PM UTC
I agree that "race nationalism" is crap and should be opposed, but I don't see this as race nationalism. It's identity politics for sure but I don't see the statist element. But maybe I'm just a moron whitey who should shut up anyway.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: beret on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 02:24 PM UTC
I'd like to point out that "People of Color" is a bullshit construct as well. Most "POC" don't identify as such, but as Guatemalans, Chinese, Aborigines, etc. and I think it's dumb to lump them all into one overarching category. I'd also like to point out that there are many people generally considered white that are oppressed due to race. (Irish Travelers, Chechens, Persians) I agree that the anarchist movement has a LONG way to go toward actual equality (I know, what a antiquated term) but the whole "Smack a White Boy" "Browney a day keeps whitey away" is needlessly antagonistic. The language of this is stupid and counterproductive.

Just my two (toned down) cents. Hopefully it stays up this time.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: automatonsrevolt on Thursday, March 26 2009 @ 11:22 PM UTC
If people of color choose to self-identify as such I don't think anyone has the right to tell them not to. If they think it is productive for them, then I think they know what is best for themselves. Yes it's good not to essentialize and lump people in categories but I think this is a different situation where people are claiming that identity category themselves rather than being lumped together by others (white people).
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: JackR on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 03:22 PM UTC
White guilt bullshit.

Can I (though not entirely white) organize Radical White People?
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 04:08 PM UTC
The title "Smack A White Boy" is rediculous and sounds alot like the kind of reverse racism that is commonly found in the publications of Marxist groups like the RCP and the ISO. Also this is exactly the kind of thing that white supremacist groups will point to and say that anarchists hate white people. We really should not be helping the white power groups.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: alta fuoco on Friday, March 13 2009 @ 04:19 PM UTC
I don't want to be a butthead, but how is calling for another, smaller protest that is also speaking the same language of those who yall call "the racist anti-war movement," any more critical or severe in its attack on white supremacy? which is to say, how are your methods, "actual resistance" and those you critique, false?

My not-so-humble critique is that I don't think the way we identify ourselves and find affinity in that changes our capacity to make attacks--on white supremacy or on other systems of oppression and exploitation. I believe the only thing that may change that is our different practices. So if you are saying "gather with us, and we will attack the police and 'policing," then I would see a difference, but if you say "The only way our attacks will matter is if they come from an authentic source," then I feel you are grossly mistaken. I think the only way to locate and contribute to an anti-white supremacist discourse is in anti-white supremacists practices, especially the ones that become attached to us, habits and inclinations maybe.

On another related note, why is the term "imperialism" always at the forefront of APOC's lexicon? Perhaps, because there are many theories of imperialism (despite Lenin's being a more popular one), I am misinformed about the way it is used in APOC-related texts? What is meant by imperialism and anti-imperialism, and how is that different, which is to say how would an anarchist anti-imperialism be able to avoid the pitfalls of solidarities with the state-form? We could ask, how specifically in DC on March 21st could this be practiced?

Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Al Ligator on Saturday, March 14 2009 @ 01:55 PM UTC
This idea is just as good as the idea of urging people not to read the "Go Light" zine because it had pictures depicting people with African ancestry as indigenous people as opposed to 'civilized' people.
Did APOC also urge people to vote for Obama too, just curious?
origin of phrase?
Authored by: redandblack on Saturday, March 14 2009 @ 10:32 PM UTC
possibly the dead prez song "fuck the law"?

not sure where dead prez heard it from.
origin of phrase?
Authored by: Al Ligator on Sunday, March 15 2009 @ 12:47 AM UTC
According to their video for that song, robbing pizza delivery people is revolutionary.
origin of phrase?
Authored by: CaseyFord on Sunday, March 15 2009 @ 02:24 AM UTC
You mean the video for "Hell Yeah"?

And yeah, getting free food for you and your crew when you're all broke and hungry is definitely not revolutionary.
origin of phrase?
Authored by: Al Ligator on Sunday, March 15 2009 @ 03:36 PM UTC
Yea, I had the wrong video, and I guess I should clarify, I obviously have no hang ups on stealing from the pizza business obviously, but tips from workers themselves I do, especially since the delivery people are put in such a precarious situation and they tend to be just as angry as we are about their situation.
origin of phrase?
Authored by: HPWombat on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 04:00 PM UTC
One of my friends was a pizza delivery guy and got robbed at gun point. If your petty crew is robbing poor people I hope your crew gets fucked.

---
embrace the dork side
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: AnarchoS on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 02:12 AM UTC
I hate racism and I think that RPOC has a strange way of fightin against racism.

Theyr concept sounds like "Fight Racism with Racism?" # What? that doesent go together well.

I am from a mixed ethnic background and had a lot of expirience with racism and opression.

I think that theyr concept will never work and I always found racist remarks in theyr anouncments.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Andrea on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 08:58 AM UTC
The concept of "reverse racism" is ludicrous. If you're not a white person and are backing up this notion, it reflects your level of self-evaluation. If your a part of the dominant group, what exactly are you owed? What does a "minority" oppressed group EVER owe the privileged? This makes no fucking sense. Explain to me how that does. Oh stop the presses, the white boy didn't get accepted to UCLA even those his scores were the same as the black boy's? Grow the fuck up. Institutionalized racism attacks "minorities" on a daily basis, and no, this has nothing to do with an "eye for an eye" treatment. It's merely an open up your eyes and find what we're experiencing outside of reading a fucking book about it. Did you know that even white male ex-convicts have a slightly higher chance of getting calls back from employers than even a black male with no record? Wait what?!?! Racism trumps work skill and talent? WHATS THIS WORLD COMING TO!

What privileges AT THE VERY LEAST aren't available to the dominant group? You may say a poor white person is extremely disadvantaged. But come on, their potential barriers look drastically different from the person who is percieved as a "upward mobile minority".
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: veranasi on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 12:45 PM UTC
You are forgetting about reality. Privilege is always situational. A poor white person from Hazzard, KY, is going to have little chance of "upward mobility" in Anacostia. And vice versa. This is because there is a reversal of dominance. Further, there is an element of appearance whether it is skin privilege or decorum. If you are toothless and look stereotypically redneck, no one is going to take you seriously. And "who has skin privilege?" is very real part of life that incredibly divisive amongst communities of people of color. You are judged on your appearance, esp if you look different and are assumed to have cultural values outside of the dominant scheme.

During the housing boom, rural folks didn't know what to make of the influx of middle class people of color moving out to buy up swaths of cheap property and thus raising property values hurting poor, rural, people of color and white folks who already lived there. I can tell you the over sentiment was similar to urban gentrification. And with the dominant force being white, the oppressors where "the others" You know why? Because, oppression isn't static.

Poor people of color aren't running about trying to organize contingents for marches, because contingents for marches is a "middle class" value. Poor white people aren't running around for the same reason. You'll find that both sectors of society are incredibly conservative and don't have time for "liberal"or "political" bullshit. They're too busy trying to fight the Man (police, politicians, poor neighbors) off their door steps, out of their house, neighborhoods, etc. And life sucks and there really isn't much to do about it. And crazy liberals, leftists, socialist, anarchists are too busy looking at tomorrow's pipe dream to actually give a shit about non-activisty oppressed persons.

"It's a dog eat dog world and I'm wearing milkbone pants." Every poor person knows that phrase. Meanwhile, some politico's are calling for some social war against people in their same political circle because apparently there is a hierarchy of opinion. That is a critique of activism all on it's own! That there is a power struggle in an anti-authoritarian movement? Do you think all white people have equal privileges? It's not even fair to say that all white males have equal privileges! Or white straight males! Or white straight males from protestant backgrounds!

This incredibly romanticized version of race needs to die. Because while all this "dictatorship of the proletariat" bullshit is going on, you have mixed race people wondering which side they should guilty about, you have people with disabilities, forced genders, othered/oppressed folks who are told they are being oppressive. And taking theory and making people feel like shit because they have a slightest differing opinion is oldest form of oppression. And! It only benefits the middle class; the only people who have time to pay attention to this.

Lose the Inquisition. And quit generalizing in an oppressive way.

Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: veranasi on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 01:03 PM UTC
And just to add, it's utterly bizarre that the most productive way that I as a white male, spend most of my time as an "ally" is confronting people who pull this on other oppressed people. Identity theory is supposed to be unifying to overthrow the norm.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Andrea on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 01:56 PM UTC
"You are forgetting about reality. Privilege is always situational."
Ummm, the situations I mentioned ARE the reality. These are real life situations which aren't uncommon at all. It couldn't be anymore crystal clear if you were dick gregory in blackface. If you want to pretend that they aren't, then that's up to you.

" A poor white person from Hazzard, KY..."
One still maintains her or his white privilege, which can't be ignored or overlooked on the basis of class disadvantage. And the assimilation of the Irish, Polish, etc. and later the advent of Cointelpro showed people what that means for them, for example.

"Poor people of color aren't running about trying to organize contingents for marches, because contingents for marches is a "middle class" value."
I agree with this. In my neighborhood the non-activisty poor are the ones who are the most tired of the bullshit and are trying to get their voices heard,
but the so-called "movement" is still being directed by vanguardist activist elites. That doesn't mean it can't and hasn't worked before, though. You have
to meet people where they're at, and not overstep boundaries. Unfortunately, as you know, it doesn't always work that way.

"And taking theory and making people feel like shit because they have a slightest differing opinion is oldest form of oppression. And! It only benefits the middle class; the only people who have time to pay attention to this."
Because I'm a fucking person of color who hates when people say the "she's pulling the race card" and "oh god, reverse racism" I'm being oppressive?
No, it doesn't work that way.

Yep, I'm aware. The model minority myth, bi/multi racial identities, immigrant status, class differences, academic privilege, etc.---those of us who identify as "people of color" have internal community conflicts/struggles too. What community doesn't?
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: HPWombat on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 02:19 PM UTC
Are you talking to anarchists, other individuals, the state, capitalists? Who are you complaining to? I think you are more concerned about how many people can receive the privileges of present society than overthrowing it.

---
embrace the dork side
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Andrea on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 02:25 PM UTC
It's funny that you keep responding to my comments with "who are you complaining to?" First off, I'm talking to vernasi, I'm not "complaining", and I certainly don't have to explain myself to you.

Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: HPWombat on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 02:29 PM UTC
So fucking what? You aren't my fucking leader. Stop talking down to people like they are stupid. And I reiterate, who the fuck are you talking to? You berate everyone and act like you have to answer to no one. Shut the fuck up then.

---
embrace the dork side
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Andrea on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 02:38 PM UTC
Why do I have to "shut the fuck up"? What's the point in saying that? You're getting angry over me responding to another user who I already mentioned.

Anyway, if you want to actually talk to me, my email is anarkafrica@mutualaid.org (Andrea, as posted), you can contact me and get to know me/find out more about me if you'd like. Otherwise, I don't see why you're getting so mad on here for me exercising some ideas.

Later all.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: HPWombat on Friday, March 20 2009 @ 02:39 PM UTC
Exercising your ideas? You are posting them in a discussion thread. You aren't special and no, I won't email you. Don't come back here if you don't want to be challenged.

---
embrace the dork side
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Gerald on Saturday, March 21 2009 @ 07:24 PM UTC

so we have established that the title is a little juvenile.
The whole piece has a lot of problems in it though, first off is the copious use of buzz words like "white supremacy" and "oppression" which are completely in accessible to people who have not been indoctrinated into activist culture.
Second, we have blatantly false statements like "The racist anti-war movement is devoid of any self-critical process to acknowledge or address how white supremacy contributes to the oppression of people of color within the movement" while discussions of race do not occur universally within the movement, they do occur, in fact I was once involved with a group that did virtually nothing but have these discussions. The real problem here is that we have no way of enforcing that these discussions do occur, due to a lack of structure and coordination.
Third, I don't think any anarchist can say that they are against all oppression because a revolution involves a certain amount of justified oppression against the ruling class.
Lastly the term "privilege" is being thrown around a lot, but in all the lists of supposed "privileges" which we (white, men etc) are supposed to have none of them are things I would view as privileges, I would view them as basic human rights, call them "privileges" only serves to alienate or guilt people, both of which are counter-productive.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: veranasi on Saturday, March 21 2009 @ 09:56 PM UTC
APOC's action was fucking brilliant today! It really did fill in the gaps in the above article. Kudos to APOC.

dc.indymedia.org
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Eyedea on Saturday, March 21 2009 @ 10:33 PM UTC
While I can applaud the public humiliation and blockade of a stupid ANSWER protest, obviously them being lackeys for socialist parties and all that jazz, I can't really see how this fits with APoC's rhetoric. They claim to be anarchists, or rather, "colored" anarchists that are ready and determined to expose the inherent racism in the anarchist "movement", and yet here they are attacking ANSWER, who have nothing to do with anarchists (alright, maybe the anarcho-liberals). Not that I'm cheering for APoC or anything, as I find counter-essentialism completely ridiculous and unneeded, at least among anarchists. I suppose this would have made sense if those APoC-ers had instead been insurrectionalist anarchists ready and determined to humiliate activists just for fun. Well, whatever, maybe APoC will spend all their time distracting and harassing activists, and that will finally give insurrectionalist anarchy some breathing room among anarchists of all stripes. Yaaaay!

:D
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: veranasi on Sunday, March 22 2009 @ 10:37 AM UTC
Right. But the part that was most surprising when you met them in person was they are post-left voices and have been. Meeting the people I thought I had been defending, (you can't generalize all people of color or their struggles) was slightly surreal. The messaging of the communiques are confusing, but they aren't pro-left. They are anti- "white people telling them they shouldn't alienate power structures".
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Eyedea on Sunday, March 22 2009 @ 03:02 PM UTC
My only problem with APoC-ers is their "white privilege" ideas and rhetoric. I mean, they act as if privilege is non existent among themselves as "a people". There is a flourishing petit bourgeois/middle class section among black and brown communities, and yet they (APoC) seem to ignore that and focus all of their energy on bashing "whitey" and their racial privilege. I mean, I have white skin, so I suppose I benefit in some minimal way from the privilege cast on me by the ruling class. All dominant values, morality, and privileges (etc) are bestowed (imposed) onto society's underlings by the ruling class. As long they (the ruling class) exist, privilege will exist. I can't help it if in "normal" social situations I'm granted a slight amount of leverage because I have light skin. So why lay a guilt trip on me? Not that my racial privilege takes on any relevance or worth when I revolt against Capital or the State, or even civilization itself. Privileges are like rights, they can be, and are, taken away faster than they're given out. Does my racial privilege matter if I were to fight back when I get arrested or if I were to squat a building? No. So yes, "life is complicated", and there's nothing I can do if society see's fit to entitle some bullshit privilege on me. Anyway, I wasn't even aware that APoC were post-left. I'm weary of that assertion, as they have an essay I wrote on their awhile back and it's about as far away from being post-left as one can get. It's basically a white guilt rant calling for increased support of black and brown nationalist militancy. I even cited the International People's Democratic Uhuru Movement as an organization to support, and they're straight up nationalist-socialists to my understanding; they even have a chairman and everything. Shit, maybe there were some things in there worth reading about, I really can't remember the whole essay. Anyways...just thinking aloud, as always.

:)
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: nostalgia on Sunday, March 22 2009 @ 04:00 AM UTC
The title is really just plain corny. "Smack a White Boy"... you're not going to do shit. I get tired of this shit, like I was at a convergence this summer and some clown was at the APOC discussion I was at talking about "I'm so totally sick of white anarchists, they oppress me, I'm so like totally not going to work with those white debbils anymore", then 2 days later I see this mutha fucka organizing an action with a crowd that was white as far as the eye could see. So many white people, in fact, that I could not get a ride to the action because all the seats were filled. I was like "the fuck are you doing?"

The concepts of privilege and oppression must be analyzed outside of the realm of abstraction. In an interpersonal interaction, the dynamic of privilege isn't as simple as a reduction to adding up oppression points based on race, gender, and sexual orientation. This denies the actual lived experience of real people, instead opting to rely on broad generalizations to analyze real life situations. Does a white boy from East Baltimore who grew up dealing with shootouts at school and chronic unemployment have privilege over a college educated black male from the suburbs? It depends on the situation.

I understand the importance of a race-based analyses, but when it becomes race reductionism it is problematic. White privilege doesn't exist simply because people find white skin more aesthetically pleasing, it exists because of the myriad experiences attributed to being white (accumulated wealth, education, an unspoken unison against a perceived common enemy). When a person of color grows up with these experiences and a white person doesn't, what do we infer about privilege?

I know from personal experience how biased this society is against people of color, and how institutionalized racism functions. But I also know that every interaction isn't as simple as "that guy is white and that guy is black, therefore...". People do ask questions. Take court for instance. People of color generally fare far worse in legal proceedings than our white counterparts, however, prior convictions, probation, parole, and the amount spent on lawyers also weigh very heavily in the outcome of a given case.

Life is complicated.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: postcolonial77 on Sunday, March 22 2009 @ 05:45 PM UTC
As far as I can tell, this was an action call, towards activists, so it might understandably be lacking in some of the analysis or accessibility that you are faulting it for. Furthermore, this whole dynamic of dismissing of real movements or actions or grievances because YOU dont think they are necessary, or are "reverse racism"(silly), or are not being done right, or especially not anarchist enough, would be quite a good candidate for critique in a more indepth analysis. Read some feminist and anti racist lit. "Post colonial anarchism" is an essay thats free online. Theres a good feminist work whose authors name I cant recall about the difference betweene oppression and restriction being that oppression leaves you no other options (i.e. men cant cry, restriction, but women are always either "typical" and overly emotional, or cold and distant, oppression). Shit, I'm not trying to write an essay, but last point is that the whole concept of intersectionality is that you dont get "points"(as if winning something) added for oppressions but that they create unique situations.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 25 2009 @ 11:20 AM UTC
There's something missing in the debate here: the position of white ethnics in America and a class-based analysis of Europe. About a century ago my ancestors came to this country from Eastern Europe. Until 1848 they were serfs in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The serfs were a type of slave that was required to do farm labor on a specific piece of land. Serfdom in Eastern Europe lasted for hundreds of years. Western Europe profited greatly from the labor of serfs in Eastern Europe. If the serf tried to escape they were nailed to a tree by the ear for a few days. The serfs with messed up ears got extra lashings from the boss. I know it is very hard for us in modern America to imagine blond haired, blue eyed people being enslaved over in Europe at the same time African-Americans were enslaved in the USA but it really happened. In the United States, European immigrants who were not WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) were discriminated against by the English-American upper class. Immigrants from Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Scandinavia, Germany, Eastern Europe and Southern Europe were forced into their own ethnic enclaves and were quite poor. People who have ancestors from these countries/regions are known as white ethnics. A large percentage of white ethnics entered the middle class after World War II however many white ethnics are still poor in the US. Eastern Europe is very poor compared to Western Europe and it is correct to say that Slavic people born and raised in the United States or in Europe do not have much if any white privilege. During the Cold War NATO, a military alliance composed of the USA and Western Europe, was fully prepared to nuke Eastern Europe and the USSR. During the 1990s NATO was bombing the crap out of Serbia and Bosnia was a total warzone with concentration camps. Maybe the term white privilege should be limited to WASPs or people of Western European ancestry. If you go to Eastern Europe and start talking about white privilege you will be ridiculed and for good reasons. It is very wrong to say that all white people are privileged. It's also Americentric to limit the discussion of race and privilege to the United States. Europe and the rest of the world should be included in the discussion.





Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 25 2009 @ 12:26 PM UTC
I dont like being called a white person. In fact the whole idea of race upsets me. I would really prefer to be classified as human without any gender, race or nationality added to the classification. Gender and race are destructive ideas that should never have been created much less publicized and enforced by the state. I think we would be a lot better off without categorizing each other in terms of race, nationality and gender. APOC's Smack A White Boy call out though does the opposite and reinforces these rediculous categories that hurt us all. To answer an old question: What's wrong with identity politics? Everything.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: YaBasta! on Wednesday, March 25 2009 @ 03:15 PM UTC
" I would really prefer to be classified as human without any gender, race or nationality added to the classification."

It would be great if we could all be just humans, someday we will be. But not until we acknowledge the benefits we reap from the oppression of others, recognize it, and deconstruct it.

Only when we stop benefiting from our privilege can we move past it. As long as oppression of one group for the benefit of another (especially if that group happens to be your own) continues to shape our realities, we must constantly work to dismantle it rather than cover it up or ignore it.
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: HPWombat on Wednesday, March 25 2009 @ 05:02 PM UTC
Nobody is arguing that we ignore the problem. I'd prefer we talk about this stuff in real world scenarios where our unity would actually matter in how we approach these problems. The only people pressing forward this alienating identity politics is a small minority of POCs that are engaging the activist community. I've noticed that some positions from illvox deals with them attempting to tackle problems within POC communities. Awesome. I think all anarchists would benefit from abandoning activism and finding ways to handle stuff in their own communities rather than reify struggle.

---
embrace the dork side
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: frisky1819 on Thursday, March 26 2009 @ 01:48 PM UTC
Does this action validate the "Beat a Colored Boy" event?
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
Authored by: frisky1819 on Thursday, March 26 2009 @ 01:54 PM UTC
Further, I thought anarchism was about breaking down divisions, not build them up. Anarchists of Color makes as much sense as Jews for Jesus.