>On Jan 27, 2007, at 7:42 PM, Jim Straub wrote:
>
>>anti-racist mass movements
>
>But, as Carrol Cox has told us, those are still white supremacist.
>Perhaps he can explain how.
>
>Doug
It depends on what people mean, but if they're just "including" people of color then, yeah, it's white supremacist. If race is seen as cultural difference rather than as the result of systematic and systemic racializing oppression then, yeah, it's white supremacist. If it's not clearly understood that, as the pithy expression goes, the liberation of whites is bound up with and dependent on the liberation of people of color and the liberation of male workers is bound up and dependent on the liberation of women workers, then -- yeah -- it's still white supremacist.
This has truly hit home as I've watched liberal feminists interact with radical women of color feminists online. Their anti-racism is superficial and they come off as if they're doing favors by "including" people. They don't blog on anything other than their standpoint as white, middle class women -- because they don't bother to ask questions about the world from the perspective of anyone but themselves.
"If you have come to help me, please go home. But if you have come because your liberation is somehow bound with mine, then we may work together."