Polemic®

One of my hobbies over the last few years has been to read up on cycles of oppression. Like many with liberal parents, I heard the ravings of my parents against the Reagan Democrats: these people are too stupid to vote in their own interest. Thomas Franck’s What’s The Matter With Kansas explores that topic to some degree as well.

Why do people who have been systematically oppressed seem to—well—systematically oppress when given the chance? In Jewish history, an honest assessment of the behavior of Israel forces one to ask: how can a country filling up with what was left of European Jewry and Jewish refugees from Muslim countries be so numb, so utilitarian about the plight of the Palestinians?

The answer is simple. Oppression and violence literally numb your brain. These emotions operate at a lower, more primitive part of your brain than empathy and logic. When you force people into survival mode, this is what you get. Jews in 1948 were in survival mode.

In truth, the working class in America has been in survival mode since at least the early 1970s. Trade liberalization, no increase in real wages since the 1970s, destruction of entry paths to the middle class, and so on have made workaday America suffer enough to deaden their minds to the plight of others. This phenomenon is not limit to the inner city or to the immigrant worker shanty towns. It’s also expressed in the rusting small towns of the midwest, the Wal-Mart wastelands of America.

When you’re in survival mode, it’s easy to dehumanize others as trying to get a piece of the small crumbs of survival that are out there. It also demands explanation. And to the extent that right wing religion provides that answer—and gives people’s life meaning: it’s not about your physical survival, it’s about your spiritual survival, and for that you have to vote Republican—to that extent, it prevails.

What’s so different about Proposition 8 is that it is not like the Civil Rights movement in the sense  that it has anything to do with the pie. It’s not “allowing” someone else to take part in the New Deal the way Civil Rights was. The difference? People don’t see this issue as part of the source of their pain, they see it as part of their mission that relieves that pain. To uphold what they think is God’s law.

That any oppressed group voted for this initiative in strong numbers is therefore no surprise. But as Rev. Irene Monroe put it Prop 8 is not about black homophobia. Even if blacks had voted against Prop 8 in the 90-100% range, it’s debatable whether it would have passed or not.

Therefore, to the extent that any gay groups are using this to call out blacks, they are only displaying latent racism. It’s probably tough to watch the epoch-making election of Barack Obama on the same night that so many express hate towards you, so to the extent this isn’t based in racism, it’s based on being put into the mode where the lower survival instinct predominates, where those in control of their faculties can control you. So, this acrimony between the gay and black communities is, in my opinion, a symptom of the underlying problem and needs to stop.

It reminds me of black/Jewish acrimony. Blacks are correct to point out that in this country Jews have had an easier time than them; Jews are correct to point out that they were the target of the world’s only industrialized genocide. Comparing oppression as if to somehow create priority only furthers the cycle of pain, it does not transcend it.

Which is why as much as I respect and admire Rev. Monroe, I was frankly a bit shocked at a couple of the things she said on the radio yesterday regarding this.

First, she criticized gay use of Civil Rights era stories, accusing them of “appropriating” them. This is silly. Dr. King “appropriated” the stories from the Bible, some of them Jewish—The Promised Land, anyone? The point is, freedom from oppression is a universal struggle among all of us. It is not something that is the property of any group. The Civil Rights movement is owned by all humanity. To say otherwise is to deprive it of any transcendent meaning and make it just another one of history’s one uppings.

This does point out one big problem with the gay liberation movement. They don’t have the powerful symbols, the Jackie Robinsons, the Malcolm Xs, the Dr. Kings, or the Barack Obamas (lest I “appropriate” the parallel) that blacks had. It shouldn’t be required, but the practical effect would be enormous.

Second, she lectured the gay community on its “white privilege.” That’s picking a fight. See, white gays can “hide.” So, if you can “hide” that makes you more free? That’s nonsense. No one should have to hide. It’s not a feature, it’s a bug. Particularizing a universal struggle like this only once again works on the exclusive/survival level and does not break the cycle. It also again suggests a prioritization of one group’s oppression.

Third, she criticized the gay community for not appropriately reaching out to the black community and using them as tokens. Honestly, if you’re just going to get lectured on “white privilege” I’m not sure that outreach would go too well.

This is not a failure to be imputed to blacks as a whole or as an explanation for their vote. Some of the black leadership groups that one might reach out do come off as insular, just like many Jewish groups, or gay groups. Alas, everyone is mostly into their own problems.

Fourth, Mark Thompson, whom I also respect and admire, insisted that racism can only come from those in power. I strongly disagree. Institutional racism can only come from those in power, but even in one on one relationships someone can have the power to oppress another. And who runs what institution varies from place to place. To say that racism only goes with power again sounds dismissive of the oppression of other groups, even those that might share in some “white privilege” like Jews and white gays. That does not mean the absence of that oppression.

I wish people smart to cycles of oppression and violence would see the conflict between oppressed groups for what it is: divide and conquer.

The genius of King and Ghandi (and the Abrahamic story of the binding of Isaac in the Jewish tradition) is the breaking of that cycle. You have to use nonviolence to break that cycle. You have to refrain from engaging in white/male/straight/christian/ivy league privilege, from democratic majority power privilege to break the cycle of oppression too.

I’m not naive enough to suggest that you can always use non-violence, or that we need to all hold hands and have a kumbaya moment. But cold, calculating strategy requires at least the end of a circular firing squad.

P.S. The Obama era is going to be a tough time for some African-American groups. They are going to correctly point out that Obama’s election is largely symbolic and didn’t put hope back in the ghettoes. And they aren’t going to be heard as well as they used to be. I hope the messaging can be reworked to gain listeners. My suggestion would be the universalization of the struggle in the message, while working towards goals for the particular community. It may sound like a “sell out” but this is going to be a different era.