Opinion
Shifting activism, shifty allies
By Terri Moise ’17
February 4, 2016
Tags opinion
James Baldwin once said, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” In this day and age, many individuals have dedicated their time and lives towards the deconstruction of the current power structures that are present within the world. All of this is done in the hopes of achieving equality for all people, all cultures and all identities.
Taking this into account, it is vital that we learn from our predecessors and elders while simultaneously recognizing the need to offer our own criticisms of and ask the necessary questions about their actions.
In an article submitted to The Chronicle of Higher Education, a multimedia platform that provides information to educational professionals across the entire United States, there were numerous critiques made about the actions and ideologies of “black campus activists.” In “What Black Campus Activists Can Learn From the Freedom Summer of 1964,” Professors of Africana Studies Heather Merrill and Donald Carter make numerous claims about how current forms of activism neglect to appreciate the history of past movements and how it is imperative that activists remember the lessons taught by the actions of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.
The article argues that black activists must remember a tradition of compassion and acceptance of other individuals in order to forward their agendas. Furthermore, the authors suggest that student activists have chosen to utilize race as a “weapon,” all in the effort to discredit individual faculty members and administrators and may not have “invested the critical thinking and discussions” when constructing their arguments and implementing their chosen tactics.
It is important to note that I appreciate the effort made to spark dialogue as conversation is vital toward the change and advancement of any movement, and as the article states, “this requires focus, coalition building, thoughtful long-term planning and coordinated action.”
While the arguments in the article seem to have been well intentioned and thoroughly fleshed out, upon further evaluation and critical analysis, there are a number of issues that must be addressed. First and foremost, Merrill and Carter seem to ignore the transformative nature of activism and how the discourse surrounding issues of white supremacy, the need for institutional change and activism itself have changed. The article reads to me as a means to garner sympathy for white allies who disagree with tactics that no longer center on their assistance or feelings. Rather than searching for the creation of “exclusive black spaces,” “reverting to racial nationalism” and “rejecting potential allies,” many activists are searching for the removal of the racial dichotomy surrounding blackness and whiteness that continues to prevail in U.S. society and focusing on increased acceptance and unity of cultural and identity-based differences. Although compassion is indeed a factor in this focus on acceptance and unity, the prevailing message is that this acceptance should not reinforce assimilation or erasure, nor should individuals have to cater to the forms of activism that are deemed respectable to those who do not care to assist in the liberation of oppressed groups.
The article trivializes issues of inclusion and seeks to group student responses into one issue, namely police brutality against black and brown individuals. Merrill and Carter choose to overlook the diversity that is present within student thought, as there is no disclaimer or mention that activism is not solely grounded in racial issues or specific racial identities.
To further problematize the article, a few questions must be posed. Must student activists aim to please specific parties, and what is the consequence of mistakes in activism? While some mistakes have indeed been made in some forms of activism, the idea that activism must purposely appeal to specific individuals, especially individuals that are in positions of power within the current system of supremacy, forces me to question whether or not allies are actively interested in the empowerment of marginalized groups or want to be recognized as pseudo-warriors for the right thing, knowing they can sleep peacefully at night without worry.
Yet, the most glaring issue present in the article is the inclusion of the Black Lives Matter movement to infantilize student activists and trivialize their experiences. Interestingly enough, these same experiences are what the authors expect marginalized students to use as teaching tools, neglecting the emotional labor that is forced upon these students. I must question if the authors recognize how problematic it is to use student experiences both as teaching tools and as a means to spark dialogue as if these experiences were the next theory to be discussed on the syllabus.
To find Professors Heather Merrill and Donald Carter’s article, go to chronicle.com