[Nettime-bold] UN Racism Conference: Race in context of Post Third World

["Paul D. Miller" <anansi1@mail.earthlink.net>]

Race in the 'Post Third World'
    by Makani Themba-Nixon

The UN becomes the flash point as groups vie for racism’s new
meanings.


---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
----------


Their web page is red, black, and green. Their slogan: "It's
Racism!" They call themselves the Panthers--the Russian Panthers--and
their group is among those organizations attending the UN Conference
that are pushing the boundaries around race, racism, and racial
justice work. It's a long way from the historic Bandung Conference
in 1955 where the world was officially divided into the white
North and the colored South. There, we became "people of color"
and members of the "third world" as part of an analysis grounded
in a deep sense of solidarity and based on a shared experience
of colonialism, racism, and conquest.

Stretching UN’s Big Tent

Race, though always a social construction and ever changing,
will be up for some real stretching this summer at the World
Conference Against Racism. In fact, the meeting's full title,
the World Conference Against Racism, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,
is just one indication of how big the tent will be. A significant
push for the expansion came from Europe, where groups lobbied
to ensure that ethnic cleansing and anti-Semitism made it in
the mix. Groups working on Anti-Semitism united with those from
Eastern Europe to form almost 80 percent of the region’s World
Conference preparatory meeting participants. The net effect is
the broadening of scope from that of the first two gatherings
that had a shorter name--World Conference to Combat Racism and
Racial Discrimination.

The "shift" in the conference is essentially the de-emphasis
of white supremacy and "North-South" tensions.
In many ways, the themes and politics of this year's conference
are rooted in a bit of a pendulum swing from the heady days of
Bandung. Then, solidarity and unity were paramount. Tensions
and atrocities within the "third world" were often glossed over
as vestiges of colonialism. Yet colonialism, though clearly critical
to the analysis, was stretching thin as a way of explaining the
bloody coups and "ethnic cleansings" that abided in the neo-colonial
world. As a result, racism became racisms as we tried to make
sense of its varied and complex transmutations.

In many ways, this "shift," as it's manifesting at the World
Conference, is essentially the de-emphasis of white supremacy
and "North-South" tensions and the emphasis of other issues emerging
from a broad range of "oppressions" of which race is a part.
Don't get me wrong, understanding the connections (or the "intersectionality"
if you want to use the cool, hip lingo) is essential. I'm not
trying to rock the "either race or" school here. But there is
something worth examining about a world conference against racism
that will have anti-Semitism (actually, they just mean anti-Jewish
hate, the other Semitic peoples are left out of their framework)
and Eastern European ethnic conflict on the agenda. If they were
operating from an analytical framework that they were racialized
as a result of their oppression (like say, the Russian Panthers),
it might not require a second look. That’s not their claim.

As a result of the participation of these groups and the character
of established human rights work globally, those involved in
conference preparation thus far are largely white and from developed
countries. And the effect on conference discourse and policy
has been significant.

Are You Sure You’re (Not) Black?

For example, "African descendants" face particular difficulties
within the UN preparatory framework as a result of what can only
be characterized as acute racism and even fear of blacks. At
the European regional preparatory meeting of non-governmental
organizations last year in Strasbourg, there were participants
that challenged a proposed resolution to call colonialism and
the trans-Atlantic slave trade crimes against humanity. Their
rationale: slavery and colonialism brought "benefits" to Africans
alongside the oppression, so the designation wasn't necessary.
In addition, African groups had to fight to get adequate representation
in the meeting in the first place.

Some groups of color are rejecting a racial framework for short-term
tactical advantage.
The African descendant groups also had difficulties getting statements
into the documents coming out of the Americas meeting in Santiago
last December. There, inadequate translation and lack of representation
on the drafting committee exacerbated persistent tensions between
black groups that have long felt marginalized and the powerful,
established NGOs charged with running the meeting. Those not
speaking Spanish were particularly alienated, an interesting
switch from the U.S. context, where English is a tool of domination
and Spanish is marginalized. Afro-Brazilians and francophone
participants were affected the most.

Obviously, these incidents are disturbing in any context, but
their occurrence within the framework of a world conference against
racism made them all the more alarming. In response to these
and other problems, a global meeting of "African descendants"
was held in Vienna in April. More than 100 black-led NGOs were
in attendance in order to hammer out a global African strategy
and analysis for the World Conference. In a process that is mostly
about the development and drafting of summary documents and plans
of action, such a meeting is critical to advancing the unique
issues facing Africans across the globe. Unfortunately, the response
by many conference organizers was less than encouraging. In fact,
a number of organizers expressed fear and concern that the meeting
would be "exclusionary," "divisive" and "counter productive."
The intense and public debate held mostly over the web demonstrated
the extent to which old attitudes concerning blacks, self-determination,
and fears by whites of being excluded still persist.

Although these tensions are not representative of the entire
conference community, they demonstrate what happens when there
are no clear principles of unity, common framework or even shared
vision of racial justice. Of course, part of the challenge is
that there's a mighty big tent and lots of issues competing for
the stage. Another factor is how race, not being a fixed biological
fact, is mediated as a political, cultural, and socioeconomic
construct.

The fact that a South Asian living in London is Black and a South
Asian living in Los Angeles is definitely not demonstrates how
local permutations of race and racism shape both racial consciousness
and racial conflict. Attempting to develop global frameworks
that take into account these subtleties has dogged conference
organizing from the beginning. And these challenges are not only
located among whites. There are people of color who are contesting
the use of racism as an analytical framework as well.

More than three-quarters of the (UN) accredited groups are from
the U.S., and many are, at this point, white led.
Part of the reason why some groups of color are rejecting a racial
framework is because the short-term tactical advantage of distancing
the work from such an analysis appears to outweigh the long-term
benefits of "racial solidarity" and alliance building. One example
of this tactical distinction is found in the effort by some groups
to insist on the inclusion of "xenophobia" on the conference
agenda as a way to name and distinguish the oppression of people
of color by whites who are not black. At the heart of the distinction
is the assertion that the term racism "leaves them out" because
racism only happens between blacks and whites. In addition, that
since these groups constitute cultural and not racial categories,
the term xenophobia more aptly describes their status as "legal"
(though darker) whites. In other words, if you get to check "white"
on your census form then race does not apply.

This is an important phenomenon because it represents a real
turn from the Bandung style solidarity framework: the politics
of distinguishing between xenophobia and racism are essentially
about the rejection of traditional "third world" solidarity based
on shared racial status as "non whites." It is the charting of
new middle ground between a racial justice analysis on one hand,
and racial solidarity with whites on the other--much like the
"colored" category imposed under apartheid South Africa only,
here, it is voluntarily embraced.

Yet there are others who see racializing their analysis and their
work as an important part of how they advance their issue. Perhaps
in the case of Africans, there really is no choice. Black and
race are synonymous, so trying to come up with some other framework
probably wouldn't fly. But for other groups who easily could
have rejected the race frame, why did they choose to embrace
it? The answer lies in their militancy, their long-term view,
and their sense of place in a global movement against racism
and other forms of oppression.

Race and Revolution

For the Russian Panthers, race is a lens through which they make
sense of their status in Israel. Says organization leader Merav
Frolova (through translation), "The purpose of our activity is
not in hooligan actions or quarrels. We see that 'Black panthers'
in America as well as in Israel became catalyst[s] of culture
revolution that started the process of including subculture of
ethnic minority to magisterial society culture". 
(http://www.ispr.org/engl.html)

The Russian Panthers have been leveraging European and international
forums of the world conference preparatory process to raise public
awareness of hate crimes and institutional racism against Russian
immigrants. Although their local organizing focus is young people
in secondary school, they characterize their fight as part of
a global anti-racist movement addressing state violence, hate,
and gender oppression. For these Panthers, a racial justice analysis
offers a framework that enables them to place their struggle
into a larger historical context that recognizes race as a social
construct.

The liberation movement among India's Dalits to end caste oppression
has long embraced the analysis that their struggle is not an
issue of religious tolerance, it is about racial justice. The
Dalits also launched their own Panther movement in the 1970s
inspired by the Black Panthers in the United States. In fact,
the National Campaign for Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR) often draws
direct parallels between their struggle and the struggle of African
Americans in the U.S.

"The word caste is derived from Latin word 'castus’ meaning purity
of blood/breed," writes the NCDHR. "Racism as an ideology is
also based on this sole concept of purity of blood/breed. In
the strict sense, caste is not race, but the roots of the caste
system as it is practised can be seen in the ideology of racism."

With this analysis in tow, Dalits organizing around the World
Conference directly pursued inclusion in the conference as victims
of racism not "related intolerance." In this case, it is a tactical
decision that is paying off. In spite of tough opposition by
the Indian government, the Dalits' straightforward racial solidarity
has won them many allies and increasing visibility worldwide.

Beyond Bandung

Clearly, much has transpired over the 40-plus years since that
watershed meeting in Bandung. This World Conference will likely
boast few world leaders and even fewer participants from developing
countries. Currently, more than three-quarters of the groups
applying for accreditation are from the U.S. and many of the
organizations going from the U.S. and Europe are, at this point,
due to financial issues and other considerations, white-led.

All of these issues underscore the paradox of a conference saddled
with both a broad "intolerance" agenda and the expectation that
it should be a vehicle for racial justice work that matters.
It's highly likely that it won't be both. And given the race
politics thus far, it’s unlikely to accomplish the latter--that
is, not without a serious fight.

Understanding that a United Nations meeting has its limitations,
both political and otherwise, the conference organizing thus
far still provides some insight into the state of racial justice
work worldwide. Hopefully, these struggles will contribute to
an emerging, post-third world dialectic of sorts where in the
final analysis, we will retain the best of the "old"--a strong
sense of solidarity and analysis informed by our understanding
of white privilege and racial oppression, history and culture,
politics and economics; while we continue to incorporate the
new--a better understanding of the intersection of various oppressions,
a vital analysis of globalization and emerging technologies as
well as a sophisticated understanding of inter-ethnic oppression
and its contexts. The World Conference, with all its flaws and
tensions, exposes the need for such integrated analyses that
help people see these important connections. It is also a rich
opportunity to collectively take stock of where we are and what
we need and connect that analysis to what we dream when we imagine
ourselves free.

Related Link: ARC Transnational Racial Justice Initiative





---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
----------


Makani Themba-Nixon works with the NGO forum of the World Conference
Against Racism.


---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
----------




============================================================================

Port:status>OPEN
wildstyle access: www.djspooky.com

Paul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid

Subliminal Kid Inc.

Office Mailing Address:

Music and Art Management
245 w14th st #2RC NY NY
10011


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold