Color of Anarchism Re: Protest ISO...

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

At 9:04 PM -0500 12/31/02, Chuck0 wrote:
>>They do, but that doesn't stop them from joining the Democrats, the 
>>Republicans, or any other organization.
>
>Right. And 12% of Congress is African-American?

A bit of history first:

*****   The Capitol Hill newspaper, Roll Call, recently ran an 
article comparing the 57th Congress, the first Congress of the 
twentieth century, with the last of this century, the recently seated 
106th Congress. Roll Call noted that one of the most striking 
contrasts between these two bodies is the inclusion of African 
Americans in the 106th Congress. From the end of the Civil War to the 
beginning of the twentieth century, only twenty-two African Americans 
were elected to Congress. After Republican George Henry White of 
North Carolina left the House of Representatives in 1901, no African 
American was elected to Congress until Oscar De Priest (R-IL) in 
1928. Of the four hundred and thirty-five House members in the 
current Congress, there are thirty-seven African American members.

<http://www.uschs.org/CapitolandCongress/FeatureArticles/AAsinCongress.htm> 
*****

What about now?

The total number of Senators: 100
The total number of Representatives: 435
The total number of members of the Congressional Black Caucus in the 
108th Congress: 39

The percentage of African Americans in the 109th Congress: 7.3

US Congress today is still far from racially representative, but far 
more racially representative than the anarchist movement now.

At 9:04 PM -0500 12/31/02, Chuck0 wrote:
>>Is it only the "vanguard parties" that should exhibit concern for 
>>recruitment of minorities?  None of the institutions that I've 
>>mentioned as points of comparison -- the US military, corporations, 
>>the Bretton Woods institutions, the Democrats, the Republicans, 
>>etc. -- are what you call "vanguard parties."  It seems they are 
>>interested at the very least for their own good; and so are most 
>>left-wing political organizations -- like the Labor Party, the 
>>Green Party, etc. -- though results vary.  Why shouldn't anarchists 
>>be interested in recruitment of minorities or should they be less 
>>interested than political institutions that are not "vanguard 
>>parties"?
>
>Because anarchists do things differently. We aren't into the recruiting thing.

Not interested in attracting more blacks and other people of color to 
anarchism?

At 9:04 PM -0500 12/31/02, Chuck0 wrote:
>There is abundant proof that whenever a vanguard party puts itself 
>in front of dissent, that dissent is tamed.

What would it have meant to "tame" the 1991 LA riot?  What form would 
dissent have taken if "tamed" in the sense you mean?  You mean fewer 
individuals would have been killed, deported, arrested, etc. because 
of the riot?
-- 
Yoshie

* Calendar of Events in Columbus: 
<http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html>
* Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html>
* Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/>
* Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/>