- 1,763
- 439
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2011
and I think I skate nikes is trolling to make black people look bad, and the fools of NT (Ksteezy, etc.) have taken the bait and decided to join in on the black bashing....Damn, this post has exploded faster than the uprisings in BK. I haven't read through all the comments but I'm sure it looks something like this. In one camp you have those skeptical of the official narrative privileging the NYPD's account. In this camp are those who invoke the illuminati and other conspiracies to explain our current state of existence. These folks begin from the (justified) assumption that the NYPD has waged a war on black and brown peoples, only to (problematically) insist that when it comes to relations with the police, black and brown peoples can do no wrong. In the other camp are those who articulate a liberal, idealized judgment that uprisings are only tollerable if "civil rights" are being violated. In fact, by referring to the uprisings in Brooklyn as "riots" they reproduce those same claims which configured black people struggling to find food in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina as "Looters" and white people doing the same as "survivors." The defining feature of this camp is localized historical memory. These NTers struggle to situate this latest instance of police brutality within a century long battle against police injustice. These NTers also fail to note that so-called "riots" reflect the confluence of outrage against police brutality, concerns over impending displacement, job instability, among other concerns.
I, for one, never give the benefit of the doubt to the police. Whether dealing with the NYPD or the police force within the presumed centers of liberal tolerance, I am always skeptical of officers who have been sanctioned by the state to protect and serve the vital assets of capitalism. I don't give them the benefit of the doubt when dealing with black and brown people. The assasination of Amadou Diallo and sodimization of Abener Louima are merely the most glaring instances of the everyday forms of oppression people of color face. It's not that I doubt that the police screamed "freeze" at Kimani Gray. I'm also not swayed by conspiratorial notions of the police planting the revolver on Gray after they shot him 7 times. I question the sequence of events, the description of the scene, and the presentation of an obstinate Kimani Gray that pervade the NYPD's account while saying nothing about just who were those two plainclothes police officers.
At the same time, I would not come out to protest this latest instance of police aggression. And now we're talking about political strategy. I think my fellow brothers and sisters and those of us on the Left suffer from unchecked skepticism. As a result we lend our energy to questionable figures. That Kimani claims blood, has numerous run-in's with the law, and was a 16-year old carrying a revolver should have signaled that he was one of our lost boys. This is not to say that he is less human or that he doesn't deserve to be mourned. But to present him as yet another example of police brutality makes very little strategic sense. The uprisings quickly get presented as another example of black people without moral convictions and unable to distinguish between right and wrong. The commentary in this post reflects that.
We now know that Rosa Parks' decision not to move to the back of that Montgommery bus was not an expression of individual choice. It was a deliberate strategy launched by the NAACP, E.D Nixon, among an extensive network of black organizers. Nixon originally selected a young Claudette Colvin, but because she was pregnant, Nixon rolled with Parks. Nixon was prescient enough to anticipate the conservative reaction had Colvin been the test case. The problem of racial segregation would have been colonized by tangential judgments about the moral profligacy of Colvin.
Similarly we must think strategically about who we elevate as our martyrs.