this is really good ...she talks about DAN uniting with people of color and
the movement against criminal injustice
FREE RADICAL: chronicle of the new unrest
by L.A. KAUFFMAN
www.free-radical.org
--------------------------------------------------------
[to subscribe, write freeradical-request@lists.riseup.net with the word
subscribe in the email subject or body]
--------------------------------------------------------
BLACK COMEBACK:
An interview with KAI LUMUMBA BARROW . . . . .Issue #11
What if there was a revolution and nobody noticed?
OK, "revolution" is too grand a term, but the event in question is
undeniably historic: the creation, in the United States, of a
direct-action-based alliance across racial lines, between the predominantly
white movement against corporate globalization and the predominantly people
of color movement against criminal injustice.
You won't read about it in the mainstream media, but then, they didn't see
Seattle coming either. More troubling is how little discussion there seems
to be in radical and progressive circles about this nascent alliance: its
necessity, potential, and pitfalls.
Kai Lumumba Barrow has been a major figure behind the recent resurgence of
direct action within movements of color. She works fulltime as an organizer
for SLAM!, the Student Liberation Action Movement, based in the City
University of New York, especially Manhattan's Hunter College. Since the
mid-Nineties, SLAM! has been a pioneering activist force on the East Coast,
mobilizing working-class students of color in a series of savvy and daring
campaigns for educational access, economic justice, and other issues.
This past summer, SLAM! brought the largely white New York City Direct
Action Network (NYC-DAN) and other groups together to plan a joint action
against the Republican Party Convention in Phildadelphia, focused on
questions of criminal injustice. The process was a bumpy one -- in
particular, there was resistance within NYC-DAN to what some felt was a turn
away from the group's focus on corporate globalization, resistance that many
activists of color viewed as racist -- but the coalition held, and holds to
this day.
In this frank and wide-ranging interview, Kai Lumumba Barrow places this
development within a broad historical context, focusing particularly on the
troubled state of the black liberation movement over the last 25 years and
its current revitalization. She sheds light both on why African-American
radicals moved away from direct-action protest beginning in the mid 1960s,
and why she and other activists of color are experimenting with it anew
today.
-----------------
Kai Lumumba Barrow: I was raised by a black nationalist family, so I came to
activist struggles early. It's difficult for me to say when I was
politicized, because it seems like it's always been there. But I guess
probably '68, the Democratic Convention, stands out for me.
I was born and raised in Chicago. My parents were involved in various
organizations and we lived in a co-op building where a lot of Panthers and
Yippies and so forth came and stayed during the Convention. I was about 10,
and I remember feeling close to some of the folks who were staying in our
house before the Convention began. You know, you're a kid, and you're the
homeowner's kid, so you get a special kind of attention. People were nice to
me, and I felt they were my friends.
So when Daley turned his pigs on the people, and the people came back to the
house, bleeding and beat up, I felt personally hurt. I felt like, they did
this to my friends.
After that I read Malcolm X, and I wanted a revolution. That's it, I
thought, we're going to do this. In high school, I was a knucklehead:
conscious, but not active. But I went to college thinking, this is where the
revolution is going to happen. I went to a historically black university in
Atlanta, and I was really taken aback: It was the Carter years, and Reagan
was beginning to show his ugly head, and there was no movement.
COINTELPRO had done a serious job on the Panther Party and then also the
Black Liberation Army. There was underground stuff happening but it was way,
way submerged. There wasn't any real movement specifically in black
communities any more. And I was on this campus with the bourgeoisie, the
black bourgeoisie, and I was really freaked out. Like, what is going on?
(laughter)
But then I got active around anti-apartheid work, building student
organizations on campus, and doing a lot of work at that time around Assata
Shakur and Joanne Little and other political prisoners.
I also became a member of the Republic of New Africa, whose full name was
the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Africa. It focused on
establishing a nation for black people in five states in the South. Doing a
lot of institution-building, in that sense. We started a school, a Saturday
school, did a lot of political prisoner work, and a lot of political
education work. Training and that sort of thing.
I stayed with that in different capacities for several years. I went back to
Chicago and started doing a lot of police brutality work there, still doing
prisoner support work, and ended up here in New York in the early 90s, still
staying with the same issues, around police brutality and prison work.
LAK: In the U.S., the tactics and techniques of direct action were really
pioneered by the black freedom movement of the Fifties and Sixties, but by
the early Seventies, those tactics are rarely seen in movements of color,
especially in black movements. How did that come to be?
KLB: There was a major shift in the political expression of the black
liberation movement in the mid-Sixties. I have recollections of looking at
the civil rights movement, Dr. King, and the dogs and that sort of thing,
and I have recollections of my family saying, Why are they allowing
themselves to be beaten and attacked by these pigs, by these racist pigs?
Why are they not fighting back?
So there were two predominant tendencies regarding which way forward for our
people. It's reductionist to say it, but it was primarily Malcolm X versus
Dr. King, and you choose your camp. And I tended to be in the Malcolm X
camp - still do, frankly.
The Black Panther Party, as the heirs of Malcolm X, said we're not going to
just stand by idly, we're going to utilize self-defense in order to get our
movement forward. And at that time the Party did engage in a lot of direct
action, from taking over the state capitol in California - that was a direct
action - to various activities that were going on in communities around the
country.
Now, though, the black liberation movement is at a really crucial stage in
its development. We've seen a lot of our leadership and a lot of our
comrades killed and imprisoned and driven crazy, exiled, because we stood up
against oppression. And at this point there seems to be a reassessing of
which way we should we go. We've engaged in a critique around the standard
leadership model, the hierarchical leadership model; we've done a critique
around the party model; we've done a critique around every possible model
that we know exists, and at this point we're in the process of re-building.
So as a people, within different movements, we've been stunned to some
degree for a really long time. Since the early to mid Seventies. I think the
experiment with armed struggle models, underground models, hit us really
hard. The Party as a large movement kind of stopped at that point. There
have been smatterings of different things that have occurred since then, but
I don't think we've really been able to capture the imagination of our
communities in any broad way since that period.
So we've been kind of in this stalemate, and I think what's happening is
that we're starting to look back to, well, the Fifties. (laughter) This
dawned on me maybe about a year or so ago, and I was really pissed. I was
like, damn it, we're going backwards. (laughter)
So we're starting to reassess the utilization of direct action and civil
disobedience, but we're coming at it, I think, more militantly than in the
Fifties. We've seen it as a way to engage more of our community. Primarily
what we've been doing since the Seventies is rallies and permitted protests
and those sort of things, that have been more or less non-confrontational. I
think we're starting to say, wait a minute. We've been using a multitude of
non-confrontational tactics, and I think at this point some of us are
starting to escalate some of the tactics that we're utilizing, understanding
that we're also the most victimized by the state for participating in those
tactics.
We took the position in the past that nonviolent civil disobedience placed
us in a very passive position, so we started engaging in armed struggle or
at least self-defense. We didn't have enough experience with that perhaps,
or we didn't have enough support for that, and we were beat. We were beat
pretty badly.
We're trying to come back from that, get it together and figure out how
we're going to move forward. Taking the best of both self-defense and
militancy while still being accountable to our communities.
LAK: What were your feelings about Seattle when it happened?
KLB: Why the hell am I in New York at a SLAM! meeting? I had planned to go -
I was so mad!
For all the obvious reasons, I thought it was great. I was really
disappointed by the coverage - I don't know if there were more people of
color in Seattle than the none I saw in the media.
The morning after, my partner and I were on the train, reading the paper.
And we were smiling and high fiving each other. I lived at the time in Bed
Stuy, so the train was filled with black folks - and everybody was
smiling.(laughter) I had some good conversations with a couple of folks on
the train, about how this is necessary, and it's about time, and this
reminds me of the old days. People were overwhelmingly supportive. Nobody
said, "Oh, they shouldn't have thrown the rock at the Starbucks." (laughter)
But, in terms of their weaknesses, Seattle, D.C. - even Philly and L.A. -
these mass convergences require a week's worth of time in order to
participate, dollars in order to travel, support. If a whole group of people
go somewhere for a week, there's a whole lot of work that's not getting
done, and who's going to do it? Whether that's taking care of the children,
or working 9 to 5. It's very difficult for people of color, even young
people of color, young working-class people of color, to participate in mass
convergences.
I thought Seattle was a great experiment, and it was great that labor came
out. But there was clearly a class distinction between the people who
organized and participated in Seattle versus where I come from. Access to
cell phones? Please, we're just getting walkie-talkies. The utilization of
technology, organizing on the Internet: What's that phrase, the digital
divide? It's there. Make no mistake about it, it's there.
So the organizing and the building for that action clearly indicated that an
intelligentsia, a bourgeois class, had organized it. They had the equipment,
they had the contacts. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's really
important to acknowledge that.
So to some degree, I thought it was great to see it, and I felt really
heartened that people were in the streets. I also felt disconnected, and I
felt envious - player hate. (laughter) I felt like, you know, why don't we
have the resources to do this kind of work?
If we look at the Vietnam War protests, we see how those protests - because
of a capacity to utilize the system, and money, and resources - tended to
overtake and coopt the black liberation movement, the American Indian
Movement, the Chicano movement and the Puerto Rican movement. I'm worried
that this network of people doing
direct action around corporate globalism is going to do the same thing to
emerging movements around criminal injustice. These are issues where people
of color are saying no, this is genocide, and we're building a movement. I
worry about globalization issues knocking that out of the box.
That's why I think the predominantly white anti-globalization movement has
got to engage in a domestic anaylsis of corporate globalization and what
effect it has on disenfranchised communities of color. The movement against
corporate globalization has to engage in an ongoing analysis about race and
imperialism, and how they play out in the United States, or else it will
completely undermine our work and continue to propel a racist and classist
system.
That's why I wanted to really look at how we could unite with the Direct
Action Network, or build a parallel alliance or network of people of color
that were focused on issues that affect people of color, and unite the two
major issues - corporate globalization and criminal injustice - as a place
that we can spring from.
-30-
City College SLAM!
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/6353/
Call to protest at the Republican Convention
http://www.brechtforum.org/mumia/html/rdk.html
************
FREE RADICAL is an e-column on the current upsurge in activism, written by
L.A. Kauffman (lak@free-radical.org). It aspires to weekly publication but
in practice appears irregularly.
This issue is archived at http://www.free-radical.org/issue11.shtml
************
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
L.A. Kauffman (lak@free-radical.org) is perhaps the first person in U.S.
history to be arrested for allegedly committing a crime by fax machine. (The
Manhattan D.A. declined to prosecute.) She is currently writing DIRECT
ACTION: RADICALISM IN OUR TIME, a history of U.S. activism since 1970. A
longtime radical journalist and organizer, she is active in a number of New
York City direct action campaigns. Her work has appeared in the Village
Voice, The Nation, The Progressive, Spin, Mother Jones, Salon.com, and
numerous other publications.
*************
TO SUBSCRIBE, write freeradical-request@lists.riseup.net with the word
subscribe in the subject or body of the email
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, go to the page:
http://lists.riseup.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freeradical
Back issues of FREE RADICAL are on the web at http://www.free-radical.org
All contents Copyright 2000 by L.A. Kauffman
FREE RADICAL is syndicated by Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
For information about reprinting FREE RADICAL, write to
info@free-radical.org
========================================================
_______________________________________________
to unsubscribe visit:
http://lists.riseup.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freeradical
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/6/_/794163/_/973205846/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
To Post a message, send it to: announce-dan@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: announce-dan-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
-- BEGIN included message
- Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:15:34 -0800
- From: "L.A. Kauffman" <lak@free-radical.org>
- Subject: [freeradical] BLACK COMEBACK
======================================================== FREE RADICAL: chronicle of the new unrest by L.A. KAUFFMAN www.free-radical.org -------------------------------------------------------- [to subscribe, write freeradical-request@lists.riseup.net with the word subscribe in the email subject or body] -------------------------------------------------------- BLACK COMEBACK: An interview with KAI LUMUMBA BARROW . . . . .Issue #11 What if there was a revolution and nobody noticed? OK, "revolution" is too grand a term, but the event in question is undeniably historic: the creation, in the United States, of a direct-action-based alliance across racial lines, between the predominantly white movement against corporate globalization and the predominantly people of color movement against criminal injustice. You won't read about it in the mainstream media, but then, they didn't see Seattle coming either. More troubling is how little discussion there seems to be in radical and progressive circles about this nascent alliance: its necessity, potential, and pitfalls. Kai Lumumba Barrow has been a major figure behind the recent resurgence of direct action within movements of color. She works fulltime as an organizer for SLAM!, the Student Liberation Action Movement, based in the City University of New York, especially Manhattan's Hunter College. Since the mid-Nineties, SLAM! has been a pioneering activist force on the East Coast, mobilizing working-class students of color in a series of savvy and daring campaigns for educational access, economic justice, and other issues. This past summer, SLAM! brought the largely white New York City Direct Action Network (NYC-DAN) and other groups together to plan a joint action against the Republican Party Convention in Phildadelphia, focused on questions of criminal injustice. The process was a bumpy one -- in particular, there was resistance within NYC-DAN to what some felt was a turn away from the group's focus on corporate globalization, resistance that many activists of color viewed as racist -- but the coalition held, and holds to this day. In this frank and wide-ranging interview, Kai Lumumba Barrow places this development within a broad historical context, focusing particularly on the troubled state of the black liberation movement over the last 25 years and its current revitalization. She sheds light both on why African-American radicals moved away from direct-action protest beginning in the mid 1960s, and why she and other activists of color are experimenting with it anew today. ----------------- Kai Lumumba Barrow: I was raised by a black nationalist family, so I came to activist struggles early. It's difficult for me to say when I was politicized, because it seems like it's always been there. But I guess probably '68, the Democratic Convention, stands out for me. I was born and raised in Chicago. My parents were involved in various organizations and we lived in a co-op building where a lot of Panthers and Yippies and so forth came and stayed during the Convention. I was about 10, and I remember feeling close to some of the folks who were staying in our house before the Convention began. You know, you're a kid, and you're the homeowner's kid, so you get a special kind of attention. People were nice to me, and I felt they were my friends. So when Daley turned his pigs on the people, and the people came back to the house, bleeding and beat up, I felt personally hurt. I felt like, they did this to my friends. After that I read Malcolm X, and I wanted a revolution. That's it, I thought, we're going to do this. In high school, I was a knucklehead: conscious, but not active. But I went to college thinking, this is where the revolution is going to happen. I went to a historically black university in Atlanta, and I was really taken aback: It was the Carter years, and Reagan was beginning to show his ugly head, and there was no movement. COINTELPRO had done a serious job on the Panther Party and then also the Black Liberation Army. There was underground stuff happening but it was way, way submerged. There wasn't any real movement specifically in black communities any more. And I was on this campus with the bourgeoisie, the black bourgeoisie, and I was really freaked out. Like, what is going on? (laughter) But then I got active around anti-apartheid work, building student organizations on campus, and doing a lot of work at that time around Assata Shakur and Joanne Little and other political prisoners. I also became a member of the Republic of New Africa, whose full name was the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Africa. It focused on establishing a nation for black people in five states in the South. Doing a lot of institution-building, in that sense. We started a school, a Saturday school, did a lot of political prisoner work, and a lot of political education work. Training and that sort of thing. I stayed with that in different capacities for several years. I went back to Chicago and started doing a lot of police brutality work there, still doing prisoner support work, and ended up here in New York in the early 90s, still staying with the same issues, around police brutality and prison work. LAK: In the U.S., the tactics and techniques of direct action were really pioneered by the black freedom movement of the Fifties and Sixties, but by the early Seventies, those tactics are rarely seen in movements of color, especially in black movements. How did that come to be? KLB: There was a major shift in the political expression of the black liberation movement in the mid-Sixties. I have recollections of looking at the civil rights movement, Dr. King, and the dogs and that sort of thing, and I have recollections of my family saying, Why are they allowing themselves to be beaten and attacked by these pigs, by these racist pigs? Why are they not fighting back? So there were two predominant tendencies regarding which way forward for our people. It's reductionist to say it, but it was primarily Malcolm X versus Dr. King, and you choose your camp. And I tended to be in the Malcolm X camp - still do, frankly. The Black Panther Party, as the heirs of Malcolm X, said we're not going to just stand by idly, we're going to utilize self-defense in order to get our movement forward. And at that time the Party did engage in a lot of direct action, from taking over the state capitol in California - that was a direct action - to various activities that were going on in communities around the country. Now, though, the black liberation movement is at a really crucial stage in its development. We've seen a lot of our leadership and a lot of our comrades killed and imprisoned and driven crazy, exiled, because we stood up against oppression. And at this point there seems to be a reassessing of which way we should we go. We've engaged in a critique around the standard leadership model, the hierarchical leadership model; we've done a critique around the party model; we've done a critique around every possible model that we know exists, and at this point we're in the process of re-building. So as a people, within different movements, we've been stunned to some degree for a really long time. Since the early to mid Seventies. I think the experiment with armed struggle models, underground models, hit us really hard. The Party as a large movement kind of stopped at that point. There have been smatterings of different things that have occurred since then, but I don't think we've really been able to capture the imagination of our communities in any broad way since that period. So we've been kind of in this stalemate, and I think what's happening is that we're starting to look back to, well, the Fifties. (laughter) This dawned on me maybe about a year or so ago, and I was really pissed. I was like, damn it, we're going backwards. (laughter) So we're starting to reassess the utilization of direct action and civil disobedience, but we're coming at it, I think, more militantly than in the Fifties. We've seen it as a way to engage more of our community. Primarily what we've been doing since the Seventies is rallies and permitted protests and those sort of things, that have been more or less non-confrontational. I think we're starting to say, wait a minute. We've been using a multitude of non-confrontational tactics, and I think at this point some of us are starting to escalate some of the tactics that we're utilizing, understanding that we're also the most victimized by the state for participating in those tactics. We took the position in the past that nonviolent civil disobedience placed us in a very passive position, so we started engaging in armed struggle or at least self-defense. We didn't have enough experience with that perhaps, or we didn't have enough support for that, and we were beat. We were beat pretty badly. We're trying to come back from that, get it together and figure out how we're going to move forward. Taking the best of both self-defense and militancy while still being accountable to our communities. LAK: What were your feelings about Seattle when it happened? KLB: Why the hell am I in New York at a SLAM! meeting? I had planned to go - I was so mad! For all the obvious reasons, I thought it was great. I was really disappointed by the coverage - I don't know if there were more people of color in Seattle than the none I saw in the media. The morning after, my partner and I were on the train, reading the paper. And we were smiling and high fiving each other. I lived at the time in Bed Stuy, so the train was filled with black folks - and everybody was smiling.(laughter) I had some good conversations with a couple of folks on the train, about how this is necessary, and it's about time, and this reminds me of the old days. People were overwhelmingly supportive. Nobody said, "Oh, they shouldn't have thrown the rock at the Starbucks." (laughter) But, in terms of their weaknesses, Seattle, D.C. - even Philly and L.A. - these mass convergences require a week's worth of time in order to participate, dollars in order to travel, support. If a whole group of people go somewhere for a week, there's a whole lot of work that's not getting done, and who's going to do it? Whether that's taking care of the children, or working 9 to 5. It's very difficult for people of color, even young people of color, young working-class people of color, to participate in mass convergences. I thought Seattle was a great experiment, and it was great that labor came out. But there was clearly a class distinction between the people who organized and participated in Seattle versus where I come from. Access to cell phones? Please, we're just getting walkie-talkies. The utilization of technology, organizing on the Internet: What's that phrase, the digital divide? It's there. Make no mistake about it, it's there. So the organizing and the building for that action clearly indicated that an intelligentsia, a bourgeois class, had organized it. They had the equipment, they had the contacts. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's really important to acknowledge that. So to some degree, I thought it was great to see it, and I felt really heartened that people were in the streets. I also felt disconnected, and I felt envious - player hate. (laughter) I felt like, you know, why don't we have the resources to do this kind of work? If we look at the Vietnam War protests, we see how those protests - because of a capacity to utilize the system, and money, and resources - tended to overtake and coopt the black liberation movement, the American Indian Movement, the Chicano movement and the Puerto Rican movement. I'm worried that this network of people doing direct action around corporate globalism is going to do the same thing to emerging movements around criminal injustice. These are issues where people of color are saying no, this is genocide, and we're building a movement. I worry about globalization issues knocking that out of the box. That's why I think the predominantly white anti-globalization movement has got to engage in a domestic anaylsis of corporate globalization and what effect it has on disenfranchised communities of color. The movement against corporate globalization has to engage in an ongoing analysis about race and imperialism, and how they play out in the United States, or else it will completely undermine our work and continue to propel a racist and classist system. That's why I wanted to really look at how we could unite with the Direct Action Network, or build a parallel alliance or network of people of color that were focused on issues that affect people of color, and unite the two major issues - corporate globalization and criminal injustice - as a place that we can spring from. -30- City College SLAM! http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/6353/ Call to protest at the Republican Convention http://www.brechtforum.org/mumia/html/rdk.html ************ FREE RADICAL is an e-column on the current upsurge in activism, written by L.A. Kauffman (lak@free-radical.org). It aspires to weekly publication but in practice appears irregularly. This issue is archived at http://www.free-radical.org/issue11.shtml ************ ABOUT THE AUTHOR L.A. Kauffman (lak@free-radical.org) is perhaps the first person in U.S. history to be arrested for allegedly committing a crime by fax machine. (The Manhattan D.A. declined to prosecute.) She is currently writing DIRECT ACTION: RADICALISM IN OUR TIME, a history of U.S. activism since 1970. A longtime radical journalist and organizer, she is active in a number of New York City direct action campaigns. Her work has appeared in the Village Voice, The Nation, The Progressive, Spin, Mother Jones, Salon.com, and numerous other publications. ************* TO SUBSCRIBE, write freeradical-request@lists.riseup.net with the word subscribe in the subject or body of the email TO UNSUBSCRIBE, go to the page: http://lists.riseup.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freeradical Back issues of FREE RADICAL are on the web at http://www.free-radical.org All contents Copyright 2000 by L.A. Kauffman FREE RADICAL is syndicated by Alternet (http://www.alternet.org) For information about reprinting FREE RADICAL, write to info@free-radical.org ======================================================== _______________________________________________ to unsubscribe visit: http://lists.riseup.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freeradical
-- END included message