white power structure

Yesterday, Trump was permitted to fear monger about black and brown neighborhoods in the United States. And the hysteria about violence in the early 90s should be instructive.

Not one of the violent and bigoted policies cultivated a lasting legacy of peace and prosperity for troubled communities. Not one addressed the actual problems that lead to violence. Each policy was punitive and insulting. Furthermore, all polices rehabilitated racist tropes about poor black communities and poor immigrant communities. All policies embraced mass incarceration, which has led to a problematic reliance on private prisons.

Trump was permitted to imply that we need to disarm black and brown people. In light of his support of the NRA at the debate, we know Trump is relying on white power structure and anti-black fear of a dangerous other to generate support for his views. When Trump nods towards self-defense strategies for handling crime and violence, part of his plan is to arm white people and to disarm everybody else. That’s what all his yelling about Stop and Frisk was all about.

This is a threat to peace in the United States and it’s a direct attack on black and immigrant self-defense. It’s also a further demand in a long line of demands for immigrants to fully assimilate now or to face the racist disciplinary violence black people have historically endured.

More Parents Of Color Think Racism Is Holding Back Their Children In School
The facts are on their side.

From the article:

In many states, school districts that serve minority populations receive less state and local funding. These schools tend to have less-experienced teachers. Students of color face disproportionately tough discipline compared to white students.

“It’s racism, it is. People can deny it, or try to explain it away, or say slavery ended, but that doesn’t mean that with the snap of a finger, peoples’ attitudes, policies and procedures did not continue to perpetuate the same cycle that oppresses black and brown people,” said Miles, whose children currently attend or have graduated from schools in Schenectady, New York. Miles is an organizer for Citizen Action of New York, and has worked around issues of school funding inequities.

Parents of color (rightfully) don’t trust white power structures to keep the best interest of their children at the forefront. Empower black & brown educators at every chance you can get.

Nobody asked me before I was born, “Hey, girl. Do you wanna be born in to a system of oppression where your people will literally be murdered for no reason, and their murderers will be let go, routinely. And that will just be one of hundreds of facets of this White Power structure. But, girl, if you would like to take on that burden, please do mark Black on this box.” Nobody asked me. I love being Black, but I would love being Black more if I could get some White privilege with it.
—  Crissle, The Read Podcast, “Imitation of Life” 6.17.2015
Racism = privilege + power

In order to be racist, you need to possess two traits. The first is privilege: A structural, institutional, and social advantage. White people occupy positions of racial privilege, even when they are disadvantaged in other ways. White women, for example, consistently make more than black women, because they benefit from racial attitudes. Furthermore, you also have to have power: the ability, backed up by society, to be a strong social influencer, with greater leeway when it comes to what you do, where, and how. For instance, white people benefit from privilege and power when they aren’t arrested for drug crimes at disproportionate rates, while black people experience racism when they’re arrested, and sentenced, for the same crimes. This reflects a racial power imbalance in the justice system. People of colour talking about white people don’t occupy positions of privilege or power. Therefore, they cannot be racist. Racism is structural, not personal.

What better way to maintain a power structure–white supremacy, patriarchy, capitalism, a binary and rigid gender system–than to drill the lessons of who is dominant and who is subordinate into the bodies of children.
—  Eli Clare
Black capitalism is a hoax. Black capitalism is represented as a great step toward Black liberation. It isn’t. It is a giant stride away from liberation. No Black capitalist can function unless he plays the white man’s game. Worst still while the Black capitalist wants to think he functions on his own terms, he doesn’t. He is always subject to the whims of the white capitalist. The rules of Black capitalism and the limits of Black capitalism are set by the white power structure.
—  Huey P. Newton, Black Panther Party, 1969
THE STORY OF O-JAY Z: An Emcees Assessment of 4:44

by Wise Intelligent

OK, JAY Z has always been, IMO, one of the dopest writers/emcees to ever pick up a pen. He’s ALWAYS been that dope to me, and has never released an entirely “wack” album. I am a fan (of a lot of emcees). Sometimes I’m a satisfied fan, and still some other times a disappointed fan, and critical from that vantage point - but NEVER a “hater.”

THAT SAID, I’ve listened to the new 4:44 album. I thought it was dope (in a Hip Hop way). I tried to go into it without the influence of other people’s opinions of the album weighing too heavily on my own. Firstly, the tracks I liked most were/are - Kill Jay Z, Caught The Eye, and 4:44. I found the album in its totality to be the same braggadocious Jay Z just from the vantage point of a more experienced 47 year old. I mean at his age, if you can’t part some wisdom gained from past experience you shouldn’t say shit in the first place. its like Chuck D said “At my age if I can’t teach, I shouldn’t even open my mouth to speak.”

I WOULDN’T CALL IT, as many have, a “WOKE” album. I know for some, songs like “The Story of O.J.” played a part in helping them formulate  that opinion of the album. As well as referring to himself as Nat Turner, and suggesting the rich white and powerful are going to kill him for saying “too much.” However, I don’t think he said much. He invoked Lauryn Hill as an example, but Lauryn challenged the Pope on pedophilia in the Catholic Church - AT THE VATICAN on CHRISTMAS!!! She denounced American capitalism before a federal judge. Lauryn courageously peeled the skin off of white racism, police terrorism and the oppression of black people and women LIVE ON MTV UnPlugged. She literally forfeited the commercial lime, deliberately and conscientiously, because the lifestyles of the “rich & famous” did not bode well with her psychosocial, psychospiritual and or political orientation. 4:44 couldn’t have been a skit in that reality.

APART FROM the recordings that addressed his personal life in detail the album was Jay Z, i.e., dope, witty, clear and lyrically unparrelled as he always is. As far as the “WOKE(NESS)” he didn’t expound on anything he hasn’t peppered his schemes with in previous offerings. He’s always had, and occasionally invoked, the knowledge he displayed on this album in his past works. He’s never been stupid, or oblivious to the racial politics of the USA. Many black people not considered “woke” are aware of the racism they face day in and day out in this white power-structure, its hard not to be.

FOR THE RECORD, in this assessment of the record I intentionally avoided going in on the several, usual, on time and on schedule contradictions, like say - the billionaire “field nigga” with maids, butlers and no underground railroad  or Bacon’s Rebellion to free other “field niggers” (his being black stopped that comparison just short of a Bill Maher moment) -  almost suggesting that the acquisition of wealth by an individual in this oppressive system is black liberation, and or  “collectively” surmounting this racialized, antiblack power-structure is as simple as having “credit” after all that’s how “the Jews did it” (but did they?)

I chose not to point out how the album - like all Jay-Z albums is rooted in economic determinism as the ONLY measure by which to interpret the world; and or how the album does not seem to address racism from the vantage point of an entire people vs an entire antiblack power-structure, rather on the individual & personal level only.

In my assessment of the album I decided to let the incredible emcee that Jay Z is - live, and not diminish that by addressing what many of us know Jay Z is not, and has not been - by deliberate, conscious and intentional choice, and not because of ignorance nor “sleep.” That being - a BLACK NATIONALIST!

IN CONCLUSION its a dope ass album! No I.D. delivered. Jay Z delivered as he does more often than he does not. But for me, if the album strikes you as “WOKE”, either you’ve awaken in the second level, second phase sleep in the same dream (ala inception), or I’ve altogether never understood what it means to be woke? In short, I thoroughly enjoyed the album…


so let me get this straight

- you say you’re for the lgbt community

- you give money to corporate causes for marriage equality

- you record a coming out story for your friend who’s doing a podcast series on dan savage’s it gets better campaign

- you say you accept all lgbt people

but then you

- misgender trans people

- you get on grindr and specifically say ‘no fats, no femmes, not into blacks or asians, it’s just a preference’

- you say trans people are weird and ugly and you want nothing to do with them

- you gather around yourself a bunch of garbage people who basically think this way without any second thoughts about how legit ridiculous or stupid you look

- you funnel money into circuit parties in LA, Chicago, Palm Springs and Fire Island with the explicit intent of making the social/political argument of LGBT living a strictly white, male, cisgendered and heteronormative experience

- you get on roundtables at universities and minimize the contributions of lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered and genderqueer people because it’s politically necessary, then cover up your evidence with a series of quotes feigning ignorance or outrage that people don’t get you clearly enough and that they should read your book or treatise or dissertation on the subject

- you present your sexually open, highly privilege-oriented, very white, very middle-class marriage as the very paragon of LGBT living (as if LGBT people have to start living up to white middle-class standards to begin with)

- you funnel millions of corporate dollars into making the word 'gay’ visible, without really doing anything to change the fundamental idea of how LGBT people are valued or displayed

- you make the gym a terrible place to go to for fat queer people who are intimidated by your free and unrestricted use of performance-enhancing drugs, steroids, and a variety of bullshit supplements that only you can afford

- you petition the leaders of your gay pride parade to openly forbid anyone other than a cisgendered white gay male with a disposable income from marching because 'it’d be like splitting hairs’

- you think it’s totally OK to ask a trans person where their genitals are

- you think it’s completely OK to touch your gal pal’s boobs at the club because 'it means nothing’

- you use 'twerk’, 'turnt up’, the n-word, and AAVE whenever you want to, because black people are funny when they talk

- you don’t mind getting fucked up on drugs and having bareback sex because the social scrutiny for being sexually safe is not on you, it’s on those dirty coloreds who can’t stop having sex on the DL

- you love it when white boys pretend they’re beautiful black divas, especially when they get their finger up and starting dishing out sass, but you hate seeing real black women at the club or really anywhere else because you’re a racist pig who hates people not like you

- you don’t mind having to tell someone on one of these fucking apps that 'they need to hit the gym’, or that they should 'be sane’, or that 'fat is ugly’, that all people of color look the same, that all of our experiences working toward liberation from the oppressiveness of white cisgendered power structures is inherently not good enough because we don’t have a million dollar house in the suburbs to prove to the neighbors that we can be good queers too

- you don’t mind having to out catfishes on Tumblr because you think the world owes you for having it so hard as a blonde with a 6 pack

- you like to conflate abuse with BDSM and vice-versa

- and of course, you like Iggy Azalea

so tell me again how much you represent the LGBT community, tell me again how much you’re willing to sacrifice your perfectly put-together life as a white cisgender man for standing up for people’s rights 

tell me again how much you love LGBT people, how much you’d be willing to die for them, how much you want people who aren’t you to be accepted

tell us all so we can understand this obvious gap in logical thinking

tell us so we can finally get you

A. Peter Bailey's response to the Assassination of Malcolm X, 1965

“The following is exactly what I wrote 48 years ago in response to the assassination of Brother Malcolm:

Bro. Malcolm X has been assassinated. Once again, as has happened many times in U.S. history, a black man who was considered a threat to the white racist system has been murdered by other black men. Nat Turner, Denmark Vesey, Marcus Garvey and countless other black leaders were all destroyed by blacks working in alliance with the white power structure. We have to assume it was an alliance because the FBI and local police force and the press have constantly bragged that they have infiltrated the Black Muslim movement, thus they know every move the Black Muslims make. It this be true, and they are the ones who made the claims, then they are either lying about the infiltration or they knew that Bro. Malcolm’s life was in danger and made no attempt to stop the plotters. It is the same situation with the Ku Klux Klan. The FBI constantly brag that they have infiltrated the Klan, yet the Klan has been able to continue its campaign of brutality, harassment and lynching against black people. Again the question is if the Klan is infiltrated how are they able to operate so successfully? The FBI and the police force have almost completely immobilized the Communist Party and successful infiltration; only recently they and the NYC police force were able to infiltrate a small group of black men and accuse them of plotting the bombing of certain monuments. Yet now they and the press want us to believe that an organization, which claimed had been infiltrated by agents, plotted a crime of gigantic magnitude without the infiltrator finding out about it. It is no doubt that if the Black Muslims had planned to bomb or assassinate Wagner or some other comparable figures, they would have been halted before any such plan could succeed. The press is having a field day. It’s all so simple, a feud between the Black Muslims and Bro. Malcolm. Everything is in a tight little package. There are many of us who believe that there are others who desired the death of Bro. Malcolm. For instance those people who had him banned from France, those same people who worried about the effects of his trips abroad, those same people who dreaded the consequences of his trips South. He had spoken in Alabama and was due to speak in Mississippi. These people also would benefit from the removal of Malcolm X. He didn’t fir their pattern. He didn’t waste time criticizing Wallace, Barnett, Clark, Bull Conner and other individual villains speaking for white supremacy. He recognized that these men were products of an evil system, a system which has, for over 350 years, treated non-white people as sub-humans. He recognized that the above individuals were able to operate so freely because the system allowed them to do so. He realized that the power of the racists in Washington is so strong that they can block enforcement of any Civil Rights law. They might not be able to block the law from passing, but they could lock enforcement and laws without the desire and determination for enforcement are meaningless. He knew that powerful racists in the federal government had veto power over the selection of judges and that as long as they held this power, laws are totally meaningless. You let me select the judges and I don’t care what kind of laws you pass. The current situation in Selma is a perfect example of this lack of enforcement.

The Civil Rights law passed in July 1964 was hailed by the press and others as The Supreme accomplishment. Now no more laws would be needed. Voting rights were guaranteed. Bro. Malcolm attacked this belief. He called the laws a fraud. Selma has proven him right. Hundreds of black people are being beaten and jailed for attempting, not to vote, but to register to vote. What is the response of the federal government? Strict enforcement of the recently passed law. No! The arresting of brutal local law officers. No! It’s the same tired call for more laws. 

Bro. Malcolm saw those things occurring and recognizing that the federal government was either unable or unwilling to protect the lives and property of black people, he called for a new approach. Domestically, he told black people to unite and adopt a program of self-defense: internationally, he called for black people to look elsewhere for allies in the struggle for human rights. He said that our struggle is only a part of the worldwide struggle where formerly oppressed people were throwing off oppression and asserting themselves. He told us to make use of the U.N., especially the Commission on Human Rights, as other minority groups have done, most notable the Russian Jews. He traveled throughout Africa, the Middle East and Europe telling any group who would listen that black people in the U.S. needed their help in their struggle for human rights. He felt that Afro-Americans have a psychological complex about being a minority and that if they tied their struggle to the struggles of oppressed people throughout the world, it would help them, psychologically, in their own struggle. 

These two approaches by Bro. Malcolm, the call for self-defense and the internationalizing of the racial struggle, profoundly disturbed the power structure and their allies. They first tried to brand him as a wild man advocating violence. I heard him speak publicly and privately many times and I never heard him tell black people to roam the streets indiscriminately shooting whites. He only called for self-defense, which is a basic element in all human society. His specific words were: “In those areas where the federal government is either unable or unwilling to protect the lives and property of black people, then black people should prepare to defend themselves.” Hardly a statement advocating violence. I would called it a reasonable statement. The Human Rights Struggle is already a violent movement; the violence all being committed by the white supremacists.

When Bro. Malcolm traveled abroad, they had their people watch him. They feared his eloquent and well-documented speeches to friendly audiences. Newspapers cooperated by completely blacking out reports of his travels abroad; newspaper columnists dropped hints about taking away his passport and by attempting to brand him a communist. They finally had him banned from speaking at a rally in France. He wasn’t even allowed by the French bureaucrats to contact the American embassy in Paris. He told us when he commented on the official that he didn’t know that France has become a satellite of the U.S., the man blushed and implied that the American embassy was involved in the ban. Incidentally, Bro. Malcolm said that the French Communist Party had refused to allow the rally to be held in their hall and had put pressure on other owners to deny their halls. All of these things make us feel that there are others who desire and would benefit from the removal of Bro. Malcolm.

Bro. Malcolm was a considerate man, the most considerate man I had ever known. The press gleefully took his words out of context and tried to paint him as a monster when reporting his death. They claimed credit for there even being a Malcolm X. They scoffed at him by saying that he had a handful of followers, and, as one said, he had built up a myth. They were practically dancing over his body. The New York Times and the New York Herald Tribune, those pious, hypocritical prostitutes of the daily press, gave Zeus-like editorials about what a terrible man he was, the Herald Tribune saying that he was no loss to the Civil Rights movement. It must be said that the press devoted a fantastic amount of space and time to the death of such an “Insignificant” man. Their very press coverage of his death and the reaction of the people and others leaders showed that the Human Rights Movement suffered a considerable loss with the assassination of this articulate, forceful black man. He even presented an image that white America is not used to seeing in black men. They resented and feared not only what he was doing, but even more so the potential of what he could do in the future. Bro. Malcolm pointed this out very clearly when he told an antagonist on a radio program that if people like him would spend more time helping and protecting Rev. Martin Luther King and his followers and less time searching for material with which to attack him and other nationalists, the U.S. would be a better place to live.

Bro. Malcolm was a considerate man, a man who was always courteous to the people who worked with him. On the day that he was assassinated I spoke with him. He called me to the room where he was waiting for the rally to begin. this man who the press tries to paint as a monster called me backstage because he wanted to apologize for having spoken sharply to me the previous Saturday. He really hadn’t but he thought that he had called me backstage to apologize. He said that he had just been slightly upset. This is only one example of many such considerate acts that he did for people who worked for him. We talked of several other things in that room. I was one of the last five people that he spoke to before being assassinated. He was not feeling well and he mentioned to me that “The way I feel today I shouldn’t even be speaking publicly.” The press has combined with the police to tell so many lies about that day. One paper said that whites were banned from the rally; a lie only the press was banned; another said that an ambulance came to get him; another lie, we had to send two brothers over to the hospital to get a stretcher, which they brought back to the ballroom and placed Bro. Malcolm upon it and rolled him through the streets to the hospital. The brothers also reported that doctors refused to come to the ballroom; Bro. Malcolm laid on that ballroom stage for over 20 minutes. They say the police rushed right into the hall; another lie. I was sitting in the rear of the hall watching the entrance for the speaker who was expected. After hearing four shots I ran into the main hall, looked up front, saw nothing but confusion. The place sounded like a battlefield. I then ducked back out with groups of people running towards me and ducked into the bathroom, as the side area to avoid the shots. Then immediately after the last shots I ran out of the bathroom and down the center of the totally wrecked hall to the stage. Jumping onto the stage I saw Bro. Malcolm lying on the stage floor with bullet holes all over his chest. I leaned over him and saw that his skin was already getting that deathly look. There were several people administering to him when I got to the stage. I went into the room where others were holding his wife. I told her that someone had gone for the doctor, not knowing whether this was true or not. I then jumped from the stage and started to the rear of the hall to see if a doctor was on the way. It was then, almost ¾ of the way down the hall that I saw the first two cops and those two were just walking through the hall as though they were on a Sunday stroll. This, despite the fact that people were still screaming, crying and the place looked like a battlefield. I can categorically say that the police did not immediately react to the assassination in a professional way. The press lied about that too. And now members of the press have asked the police how a place so thoroughly guarded as the Mosque could be burned down so effectively. The press reporting after Bro. Malcolm’s assassination had been so blatantly an attempt to encourage blood-letting and suspicion among militant black groups that very few people in the black community have been fooled.”

Taken from “Witnessing Brother Malcolm X: The Master Teacher: A Memoir” By A. Peter Bailey. (pgs 110-119)

on the topic of finding mexican/latino accents (when speaking english) “funny”

when we are making jokes within our communities about our accents, which totally happens all the time,

(there are many examples-a few off the top of my head:  the whole #estarguars; when televisión mexicana shows skits of ppl mispronouncing words, george lopez comedy skits, or us making fun of how el chapo pronounced sean penn, SO MANY examples lol)

it is different from when someone outside a latino community, (be them white or of any other ethnicity) makes fun of us. it is ok for our own communities to find humor in our experiences and ways of being. but when it is a white-dominated media world that is making fun of our accents, that is what is so damaging

Because jokes about our accents have been used to justify the dehumanization and exploitation of latino communities as a primary labor force in the United States for DECADES

Racist humor has a purpose, it isn’t just racist for racism’s sake. when non-latinos make fun of our accents they are perpetuating a system that thrives off of latinos’ percieved “unintelligence.” Because this has historically allowed, and continues to allow, stereotypes to ensure that mexicans/latinos be percieved and treated as unintelligent, that the jobs that the poor take on (like fast food, cleaning) are not due to exploitation and also not the result of international policies, but rather that the people doing those jobs are so “lazy, dumb, can’t speak english therefore not smart, unmotivated” and that is why they don’t deserve a living wage, or they don’t deserve healthcare or “welfare” etc etc


this dates all the way back to white power structures (in regarding mexican immigration) implemented after 1848 when the U.S. absorbed mexican people living on their newly acquired territories as citizens of U.S. after the “treaty of guadalupe- hidalgo” that ultimately robbed the mexican government of half its land

In the case of the Americas, although a few diasporic Chinese returned to the homeland, the vast majority did not, and others remigrated to other points in the hemisphere. For example, among the first Chinese in New York City were remigrants from Havana, following a well-established and well-traveled path across the Caribbean waters from Havana to New York. Chinese coolies on Cuban plantations were sent to Mississippi plantations to fill an acute labor shortage in the 1860s (see Cohen 1984). Despite the Chinese Exclusion Act, Chinese on both sides of the U.S.-Mexican border interacted freely and frequently, while big Chinese merchant houses in San Francisco and Los Angeles opened and stocked branch stores in Mexico, Cuba, and Peru. Chinese labor contractors in California introduced Chinese workers to open up vast tracts of virgin land in Baja California for large-scale cotton cultivation in the Mexicali Valley.

Chinese huaqiao (immigrants) in the diaspora shared common experiences, whether as huagong, workers, or as huashang, merchants. Throughout the Americas, they entered already multiracial societies that were nevertheless dominated by European ethnicities and a white power structure. The exact nature of their work and social relationships in the workplace, and the exact nature of their businesses and business opportunities varied across time and space…

The use of indentured labor, based on formal contracts, seemed to have been a common practice throughout the Chinese diaspora in the nineteenth century, wherever European plantations thrived. It is known generally as the coolie system in Asia and in the Americas; the Dutch used it on their Southeast Asian plantations, the British employed both Chinese and East Indian coolies on their West Indian (Caribbean) estates after slavery; and of course, the Spaniards in Cuba and the newly independent Peruvians also adopted this system of labor. (Despite widespread use of the term “coolie” to refer to Chinese laborers, no formal indentured labor system involving Chinese existed in the United States.) My own work has examined Chinese indentured labor on the Cuban and Peruvian plantations of the mid to late nineteenth century (HuDeHart 1992).

The contracts were issued in both Chinese and Spanish and in duplicate, one to the coolie to be kept on his person for the duration of his bondage, the other to the contracting agency, which transferred it to the master when he purchased the contract. Printed in clear type in both versions, usually on a fine blue paper, it included the name of the onsite agent as well as the contracting agency in Havana or Lima, sometimes the name of the coolie ship, and was signed by the Spanish consul in China and the local authorities (local Portuguese authorities when the trade was transferred from the uneasy Chinese government in south China to the more amenable Portuguese colonial regime in Macao).

In the Spanish-language contracts, Cubans and Peruvians rarely referred to the Chinese as coolies or workers, but rather euphemistically as colonos asiáticos. On the other hand, and in an apparent inconsistency, those who bought their contracts were referred to as patrón or patrono, and in Peru, sometimes as amo, which is a paternalistic term for “master.” The contracts had the heading Libre Emigración China para la Isla de Cuba (or para el Perú)—Free Chinese Immigration to Cuba (or Peru)—which explains the references in the document to colono and not worker. In the Chinese-language version, the entirely different heading refers to a “Labor Employment Contract” (Gu-kong-he-tong), making no allusion to immigration or colonization, but only to work. Consistent with this construction, those who contracted with the Chinese were known as “employers.” Since the Chinese-language contract was supposedly read by local authorities to the recruited workers, presumably the Chinese knew they were going somewhere to work and not to settle permanently. In fact, to ensure this understanding, very few women were sent to Cuba or Peru.

—  Evelyn Hu-Dehart, “On Coolies and Shopkeepers The Chinese as Huagong (Laborers) and Huashang (Merchants) in Latin America/Caribbean,” Displacements and Diasporas: Asians in the Americas (2005)

“In the aftermath to come, Americans should remain vigilant of the mainstream media’s tendency to blame-both-sides equally, regardless of the lopsided casualties of police violence. And whether or not Americans will agree or disagree with Johnson’s actions should not be the question we explore most. Focusing on his actions alone is a convenient diversionary tactic which enables America’s white supremacist power structure to delegitimize his anger and sweep the issue of state terror back under the rug. Instead, we should ask how are we going to communicate to police officers that if they wish ever again to be secure from the consequences of their violence, their top priority must be to stop terrorizing black and brown communities. That if they truly desire their own safety, they will first have to stop murdering people  —  or else more chickens, inevitably, will come home to roost.”

– Dallas Shooting: Where Peaceful Existence is Impossible, Violence is Inevitable

“as a [marginalized person], i am [in agreement with majority opinion/white power structures]!!!! other [marginalized people] who disagree are fake/whiny/2 liberal/somehow lesser than me.”

i hate this line of argument ANY time i see it 

ur personal opinion means nothing when like there is literal proof of how ppl are oppressed but okay whatever keep throwing other ppl under the bus to keep the model minority myth alive i guess

anonymous asked:

Do you mind explaining what mestizaje ideology is, and why you don't like it?

Mestizaje is this Latin American belief that all Latin Americans are mixed people.

It’s not false to say that there are Mestizos in Latin America. In fact, many MANY are. In some regions, the majority of people are mixed-race.
However, what Mestizaje sometimes does is conflate all the ethnic and racial identities found within Latin America into one ideal identity; you are Latinx therefore you are mixed.
Maybe this is coming from an Americanized standpoint of how race works, but just because my neighbor is asian and they’ve been my neighbor for 50 years, doesn’t mean I get to claim asian ancestry.

Speaking as a caribeño, mestizo to us generally (meaning it’s possible to have different meanings) means someone of tri-racial mixed heritage— African, Indigenous and European. Again, it is not wrong to believe that there are such people in the Caribbean, but it denies the fact that there are folks who are not mixed. Some people only have African or only have European or only have indigenous ancestry. It also ignores that there are Asian latinxs in the area who are just as Latinx as everyone else.

Mestizaje might be helpful for folks who don’t know that far back into their ancestry but it also causes racial and ethnic identities to be viewed as a national or regional thing. Here’s what it has the tendency of causing people to say and believe: “I’m from x country and in this country there are indigenous, Europeans and Africans therefore I am (as an individual person) all those things”.

That is flawed because not everyone is treated the same. Indigenous folks are treated like indigenous people. Look at the treatment of The Shuar and Quechua communities in Ecuador/Peru.
African descendants are treated as such. Look at various black communities in Colombia. Look at how many Afrodecendientes are in Colombia and then ponder on why no one ever knows that Colombia has one of the largest populations of black people in the region.

Mestizaje as an ideology does a very poor job at discussing white supremacist and racist power structures that continue to exist in Latin America. It denies that colorism affects us.

If you subscribe to the most basic tenets of feminism and women's liberation, and the eradication of the heteropatriarchy/male-supremacist hegemony

…then thank Black women. Black women pioneered feminist theory and praxis, and hell, even Gloria Steinem admitted to it in an interview. bell hooks, Angela Davis, Audre Lorde, Alice Walker, Patricia Hill Collins, Barbara Smith, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and so on. And it was Black women who brought us the Black Lives Matter Movement and coined the neologism “misogynoir”. White women do not- and never had a monopoly on feminism and women’s liberation. And in addition to the great many contributions (and even leadership) Black women made to feminism and women’s liberation remember there’s also Third World/anti-colonial feminism, Latina feminism, Xicana feminism, Asian feminism, Muslim feminists, Middle Eastern feminists, Indigenous feminists, butch lesbian feminists of Color, etc. So don’t be fooled by the horribly whitewashed photos of the Women’s March from around the globe. Feminists of Color/women’s liberationists of Color have always existed and have been in the thick of the struggle to liberate the female sex and abolish the heteropatriarchy/male-supremacist hegemony, along with the white/Western-supremacist power structure.