Lefty Resource Library

Posting articles as I go

Tag: activism

Continuing segregation and implications for social change

How to social change? Often changing bits of the system, like laws, doesn’t actually change the culture, so are activist energies best put into changing the culture, or is working on individual aspects still helpful etc. This article makes it seem like desegregation in the US did absolutely nothing:

‘And so, sixty years after Brown, it is clear that the notion of segregation as a discrete phenomenon, an evil that could be flipped, like a switch, from on to off, by judicial edict, was deeply naïve. The intervening decades have shown, in large measure, the limits of what political efforts directed at desegregation alone could achieve, and the crumbling of both elements of “separate but equal” has left us at an ambivalent juncture. To the extent that desegregation becomes, once again, a pressing concern—and even that may be too grand a hope—it will have to involve the tax code, the minimum wage, and other efforts to redress income inequality. For the tragedy of this moment is not that black students still go to overwhelmingly black schools, long after segregation was banished by law, but that they do so for so many of the same reasons as in the days before Brown.’

http://m.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/04/the-failure-of-desegregation.html?utm_source=tny&utm_campaign=generalsocial&utm_medium=facebook&mbid=social_facebook

Calling ‘in’ – a communicative tool that plays on the idea of calling someone out

‘I don’t propose practicing “calling in” in opposition to calling out. I don’t think that our work has room for binary thinking and action. However, I do think that it’s possible to have multiple tools, strategies, and methods existing simultaneously. It’s about being strategic, weighing the stakes and figuring out what we’re trying to build and how we are going do it together.

‘So, what exactly is “calling in”? I’ve spent over a year of trying to figure this out for myself, and this practice is still coming to me daily. The first part of calling each other in is allowing mistakes to happen. Mistakes in communities seeking justice and freedom may not hurt any less but they also have possibility for transforming the ways we build with each other for a new, better world. We have got to believe that we can transform.

‘I start “call in” conversations by identifying the behavior and defining why I am choosing to engage with them. I prioritize my values and invite them to think about theirs and where we share them. And then we talk about it. We talk about it together, like people who genuinely care about each other. We offer patience and compassion to each other and also keep it real, ending the conversation when we need to and know that it wasn’t a loss to give it a try.

‘I picture “calling in” as a practice of pulling folks back in who have strayed from us. It means extending to ourselves the reality that we will and do fuck up, we stray and there will always be a chance for us to return. Calling in as a practice of loving each other enough to allow each other to make mistakes; a practice of loving ourselves enough to know that what we’re trying to do here is a radical unlearning of everything we have been configured to believe is normal.’

http://www.blackgirldangerous.org/2013/12/calling-less-disposable-way-holding-accountable/

“there can be no expectation that the system will act morally of its own accord”

From an article on leakers and whistleblowers
http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2013/09/15/the-banality-of-systemic-evil/?h=LAQECfGG_&s=1&_r=0&

Abbott’s intense negative campaign and lessons for the left

“He’s just finished writing a rip-roaring new guidebook on how to be a successful opposition.It’s the Abbott model of how to destroy a government. And guess what? The Labor Party noticed.
Rule No.1: Don’t give the government a thing. Fight it up hill, down dale, day in day out. Be strident, be angry, be unreasonable. Apply maximum pressure and see what cracks.

Rule No.2: Don’t allow the government to control the narrative.  Make a lot of noise. Fill the airwaves with angry dissent and maximum outrage. Generate an impression of disorder. If you control the narrative, you control the psychological battlespace.”