Against Racism and Oppression: July 2008 Archives

There is a puzzle in the front page of the current Quest,  Marjorie Skwire is quoting Howard Mansfied:

"I know a farmer who says he has had the same ax his whole life. . . .he has only changed the handle three times and the head two times. Does he still have the same ax?"

This question could be applied to us.  As we grow and change we tend to put on, and take off identities as if they were clothing.   I was my mother's boy, my father's son, a school child, a football player, a scout leader, a Liberal Religious Youth, a young radical, a trade union organizer, a college teacher, a community organizer, a married man, a divorcee, again a married man, and now a widower.  I was young, middle aged, and now I am called an elder, and I get discounts once again.  

I once was called a "half breed,"  and that hurt.  I now call myself an Indian and proud.  Since the merger of the Unitarians and the Universalists, I have been a Unitarian Universalist but that is a very elastic identity, since it has contained a lot of different theological understandings and spiritual practices as I have grown and changed.  Oh yes, I wrote a lot of reflection papers back in theological school as I acquired my "ministerial identity."  I guess that being clergy has become part of who I am.

I eat like a vegan, and check that box of when I go to a retreat, but I support indigenous hunting and fishing rights.  I vote Democratic, but call myself an Independent.  

Of course, the person changes as our identities change, especially as we become more aware of our  selves and less subject to the definitions of others.

Howard Mansfield who possed the question:

"Does the farmer have the same ax?  Yes...he possesses the same ax even more than a neighboring farmer who may have never repaired his own ax.  To remake a thing correctly is to discover its essence."

In the era of European world conquest and colonialism and its aftermath we have experienced the imposition of the concept of race.  While race is a social construction, not a biological fact, race nevertheless becomes part of our understanding of who the "I" is in the "I."   We can say for most people in the United States "race" helps to define them,  yet it is possible to become aware of how this social construction called "race" functions, and join in deconstructing racism.  In subsequent entries,  I will continue to reflect on the subject of identity and race.  

"Today represents a milestone in our nation's efforts to remedy the ills of our past," said Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Congress has issued apologies before - to Japanese-Americans for their internment during World War II and to native Hawaiians for the overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom in 1893. In 2005, the Senate apologized for failing to pass anti-lynching laws.

Gbemisola Olujobi writing in truthdig points to racist stereotypes about Africans as oversexed and promiscuous are hampering the efforts of international health organizations to effectively battle the AIDS epidemic.  So we get quotes like this from a participant in the 10th International AIDS Conference:

"AIDS would be brought under control only if Africans restrain their sexual cravings."--Dr. Yuichi Shiokawa;

or this, "Sex, love and disease do not mean the same thing to Africans as they do to West Europeans [because] the notion of guilt doesn't exist in the same way as it does in the Judeo-Christian culture of the West."--Professor Nathan Clumeck of the Universite Libre in Brussels, quoted in Le Monde section of The Manchester Guardian Weekly, Dec. 14, 1993.

Olujobi argues that this stereotype prevents the world community from focusing on the true cause of AIDS "such as poverty and the conditions that poverty creates--malnutrition, low immunity, stress, poor sanitation, overcrowding, poor access to health care, substandard health care, rural deprivation and urban squalor--all of which will facilitate the spread of AIDS or, indeed, any other disease."

This is a rewrite of a Journey Toward Wholeness statement on our work from several years ago, adapted for the present stage of our work. 

_________________________________________________________

Among Unitarian Universalists the soul work of anti-racism has been  based of the premise that racism and its effects are embedded in all social institutions as well as in us and won't change without deliberate engagement in both analysis and action.

In our community of faith there have been advocates for three different ways of overcoming racism.

1. Anti-bias or prejudice reduction

2. Diversity or multiculturalism

3. Anti-racism based on a power analysis of systemic oppression

Those who diagnose racism as personal prejudice would have us create programs to reduce prejudice. If we think that racism continues because whites don't understand or appreciate people of color, then we develop programs to foster diversity and promote interaction between different races and cultures.  We promote multiculturalism as a means to overcoming racism And if we perceive that racism is caused by the systemic misuse of power then we must become aware of who that power privileges and who that power oppresses, and work to create both awareness and change in the relations of power.

It is good that many Unitarian Universalists have been working to reduce their  personal prejudices and develop multicultural competency.  We need to be aware of our prejudices and we need to learn to appreciate other cultures, both are essential efforts but because they do not address the systemic misuse of power and the  imbalances of power in our institutions they do address the structures that give rise to racism in generation after generation. 

To deal more effectively with systemic racism it is important to have an accurate diagnosis of racism and to use terms that have clearly understood meanings in our common analysis. The Unitarian Universalist anti racism effort has been premised on the following analysis: 

The definition: Racism is prejudice in the context of the systemic misuse of power. 

That racism operates at the personal, institutional, and cultural levels.

That we need to understand our history so that we may understand the historical context of race and racism in our nation, in our denomination, in the local church, and community.

We must extend the work to include a power analysis of the dynamics of racism so that we realize that racism not only has devastating consequences for people of color but it also provides undue privilege and power for white people in our society.

We must seek to understand the power of racism to shape our personal, social, and spiritual identities.

This is hard work, it is "soul work" -- because when we engaged in it with our whole being we find ourselves transformed at the most basic level.   Agreeing on a common language concerning racism is a challenging task. People need time to struggle with core concepts in order for that to happen. This process can be especially challenging for those of us who are white.  It calls us to again and again do the work of reflection.

As Marjorie Bowens Wheatley wrote:

"Once one acknowledges white privilege, it is both easier and more difficult to be intentional and committed to taking a proactive stance against racism. It is easier because white people are more informed and aware of what racism is, how it works, and its insidious nature. 

It is more difficult for the same reason because whites now have to face their own demons, and their own struggles about what it means to be a racist."

I recently committed People So Bold! to publicizing the work of a group of lawyers.  Several years ago, the Unitarian Universalist Association had an Independent Affiliate called Unitarian Universalist Network for Indigenous Affairs, which helped educate Unitarian Universalists about the problems and promise of Native American Indians and let UUs know about specific things they could do help.  In 2007 a new effort calling itself Unitarian Universalist Network for Indigenous Affairs has been established which presents educational website on world wide indigenous cultures.  It does not appear to be an advocacy organization for Native American Indian rights.  What should Unitarian Universalist who want to provide support for Native peoples do?  There are several organizations which I believe that we can and should support and our support could make a real difference.  First, let me introduce the lawyers.  

The Native American Rights Fund (NARF) is an non profit law firm that is committed the rights of Native people, its team of attorneys take cases and engage in publicizing other ongoing legal cases that are defending Native American tribes and organizations with

Founded in 1970, the Native American Rights Fund  is the oldest and largest nonprofit law firm dedicated to asserting and defending the rights of Indian tribes, organizations and individuals nationwide. The firm focuses its legal work on helping to realize these five mission areas.

Preservation of tribal existence

The future existence of the remaining Indian tribes in this country depends ultimately upon secure and permanent land bases, and the rights of self- determination necessary to preserve traditional customs and ways of life. Learn more.


Protection of tribal natural resources 

The natural resources found on Indian lands vary greatly. NARF concentrates its efforts in asserting tribal resource rights and protecting them from loss and exploitation by non-Indians. Major resource protection includes land rights; water rights; hunting, fishing and gathering rights; environmental protection; timber rights; and prudent development of mineral resources.


Promotion of Native American human rights 

The Native American Rights Fund is concerned with securing basic human rights for Native Americans in such areas as education, health, housing and religious freedom rights.



Accountability of governments to Native Americans

NARF focuses much of its efforts on guaranteeing that the federal and state governments are accountable for the proper recognition and enforcement of the many laws and regulations which govern the lives of Indian people.

Development of Indian law and educating the public about Indian rights, laws, and issues 

This involves not only the establishment of favorable court precedents in major areas of Indian law, but also the compilation and distribution of Indian law resources to everyone working on behalf of Indian rights. 

In the future I will be talking about the activities of Native American Rights Fund.

Do you recall the notion that was sometimes taught in our anti-racism trainings? It was argued that since People of Color didn't have power they couldn't be racists.  The problem is power is relative with the system of racism in the United States.  The present administration of the Cherokee Nation (Oklahoma) presided over by Principal Chief Chad Smith illustrates that oppressed people can be oppressors as well.  As a righteous young Cherokee named Shannon Prince writes in Indian Country Today ;

Cherokee people have historically been both oppressed and oppressors; but so often, that history of oppressing others is ignored or equivocated. It astounds me, as a Cherokee, that our people continued to own slaves after the Trail of Tears. After the Trail of Tears, after suffering and crying under horrendous brutality, the Cherokee knew exactly what dehumanization was: yet we continued to dehumanize others. We didn't have a problem with the unjust hierarchal system that gave some peoples rights at the expense of others; we only had a problem when it was used against us. While we cried on the Trail of Tears, we ignored the cries of blacks and, as a nation, were fine benefiting from the racial hierarchy when it allowed us to enslave others. . . .

As Cherokee, we should ask how our ancestors could turn from our teachings of duyukduh, which emphasizes balance, interrelatedness and respect for all peoples. We should ask how our leaders and Beloved Women could condone such injustice - and why Smith continues to do so. 

What my brother laments is the disgraceful attempt of Smith and his supporters to rob the descendants  of Cherokee slaves of their right to Cherokee citizenship.  This is a right guaranteed by the Cherokee constitution and by treaty, and upheld in a recent ruling by the Cherokee courts.  All of Indian Country condemns this  betrayal of principal, yet Smith continues to advance the absurd claim that this racist campaign is act of sovereignty.  Shannon Prince correctly points out by this logic the United States was justified by its sovereignty in removing the Native people from their homelands,  sovereign people must act morally.  

Who then is a Cherokee?  People who are descended from the ancient Cherokee people. People who cherish Cherokee culture and care about the Cherokee people's honor.  The Freedman are descended from the Cherokee people, and the claim that the Dawes List is a list of Cherokee while the Freedman List  is a list of African slaves ignores that Cherokee adopted many African runaway, that Cherokee have intermarried with former slaves, that the Dawes and Freedman designation was a product of the racist U.S. government during the era of Jim Crow.  The Freedman Cherokee have given themselves to the Cherokee culture for well over a century and in this struggle they are showing their devotion to the Cherokee people's honor.   

Shannon Prince continues his powerful lament:

As Cherokee people, we have to decide the right way to handle history, the honorable way to exercise sovereignty, and the correct way to bring forth justice and healing. We have to celebrate the beauty in our culture, soothe our wounds of oppression as well as the oppression we dealt out to others, and practice gadugi with all members of the community. We have a long road ahead of us, and recognizing the citizenship of the freedmen is the first step. 

For the Bush administration and its functionary Micheal Chertoff Homeland Security Trumps the sacred lands and rights of America's indigenous people.  Here is an interview between Indian Country Times and Chertoff who seems to think that maintaining the integrity of Indian rights to their sites is an "ideological" objection.

Indian Country Times : Did you realize that you would anger some Indians when you waived the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other laws earlier this year in an effort to speed the building of a border fence between the U.S. and Mexico? 

Chertoff: I understood that waiving the laws would generate some controversy. The difficulty is this: Congress has mandated that we put into place tools to protect the border - and to really get a lot of it done this year. Each of these laws, we knew, could be fertile grounds for litigation [as we moved forward with the border protection process]. 

It's not that we want to disregard the interests of Native Americans or environmentalists. We're perfectly open to engaging with them. And we do engage with them if there's a practical concern, like disturbing a sacred location. ... But we need to be able to do it in a sufficient, informal way, as opposed to getting involved in years of courtroom litigation. ... 

ICT: A lot of individual Indians, especially those living on the Texas border with Mexico, have raised complaints and lawsuits as a result of the border fence issue. How concerned are you about these actions from Indian individuals? 

Chertoff: I don't think it's something that's unique to Indian landowners. There have been some landowners who have expressed concern ... and sometimes it's not practical - it's based on an ideological view. They just believe that the border ought to be open. ... 

But it's not only my view, it's also Congress' view that we have got to get control of the border. We can't make issues of national security optional for individual landowners. ... We've got to have a national policy and protect the whole country. ... 

 One of the acts of Congress in that summer in 1776 was to declare the 13 English speaking colonies independent of Great Britain.  The other was to order the removal of Native Peoples who lived in New York,  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  Virginia and South Carolina "as a precaution."  

This was the beginning of a preemptive war that lasted over ten years.  This war has been forgotten, and become the hidden side of America's great liberating revolution. It meant that about half the men in arms serving the new United States were deployed against the indigenous people of this land.  This decision of Congress meant that the former colonists became a new colonizer.  This was a declaration of war which meant that 15,000 young Native Americans would die fighting to keep their peoples independence in their ancient homeland.  The United States that emerged from that war for independence was a race based republic which would continue to war against Native peoples, a war that has never ended.

So this is why many American Indians do not celebrate this day.  Not because they have a chip on their shoulders, or they are living in the past.  Rather the consequences of July 4, 1776 has been a disaster for their people's independence.   

And then again,  many Native people do have a celebration on this day.  As an occupied people many Indians in the West were forbidden to have dances and practice their rituals.  But the occupying power (that is the United States) decided that in order to "Americanize" these "unamericans" they would let them have a celebration of July 4th!,  So these people continue to this day to have a big celebration on July 4th in which they celebrate rituals and dances that were ancient when Columbus set off on his voyage looking to get rich.