For those of us who maintain some constant
involvement in the many, many conflicts that face Blacks in the 21st
Century, individually and in the collective, what one fights for
and who one is fighting for, seems to always be a point of contention
for some people. While some understand the complexities of black
struggle – that racism manifests itself on many levels and thus has
to be fought on many levels – others see the “struggle” on the one
level that they deal with, and think that fight is the only battle
black people are facing. Thus, if you’re not in that particular fight,
you’re not fighting at all.
This unsophisticated approach to black
advocacy has added another layer of conflict to the already contentious
inter-generational conflicts that sometimes consume black struggle.
Trying to address “black struggle” these days is more the myopic
focus of the civil rights or the pro-black radical movements of four
generations ago. “Black struggle” in the post-Civil Rights Era has
been as hard to fight as it has been to find, given the shift in
overt to covert racism and the politics of race-neutrality that allow
passive-aggressive attitudes to find cover in this new social construct.
Black people know that things are happening
to them that they can’t explain, and systems are compromising them
in ways that they never imagined (until they get caught up in the
system). Just like during “separate but equal,” Blacks always knew
that equal was never equal, but separate was definitely separate.
Today, there is no legal “separate” (but there is a separate), and
equal is still not equal, but the real problem is that the black
community, in the collective, haven’t figured out how to fight “colorblindness,” which
is the new Jim Crow. Blacks are conflicted as to where the struggle
is, and who is on the frontline, and they constantly ask each other, “What
are you doing to help the struggle?” It’s hard to fight when most
don’t know where the fights are, and which fronts to fight on. And
those who are fighting, see “the frontline” based on where they are.
The redefinition of “black struggle,” and
the stratification of “frontlines” that require Blacks to battle
on many fronts, has come about as there has been a redefinition of
the “black community’s” collective interests that has come with the
stratification of black income and wealth. Class and wage separation
within the race is something that Blacks don’t talk about as much
as they should, but there is much evidence to conclude that the burgeoning
black “underclass” has issues that are separate and distinct from
the shrinking black middle class, and the thinning black middle-upper
class. While each share some common issues on the racial front like
racial profiling, the issues of the poor are not the issues of the
middle class. For instance, the employment issues facing poor Blacks
are different from the promotion issues facing Blacks with jobs.
Police and fire academies are graduating fewer and fewer black cadets.
Both groups are facing massive discrimination,
but not on the same front. The crime issues that both the poor and
middle class face from shared geography impact each differently – the
poor, out of desperation, the middle class, out of victimization.
Then when they leave the community, they’re accused of giving up
on the community. The remediation issues facing poor Blacks make
it impossible to let go of the public school system, while the black
middle class is having problems finding quality schools that would
allow their children to be able to compete for college admission,
which has become highly discriminatory on another front. The access
to capital issues facing both poor and middle class Blacks, discriminate
differently – one on housing, the other on business loans. We can
go on and on, but the point is that the struggle is on many fronts,
the battle on many levels.
The biggest problem is we expect all
of us to fight on all fronts, but that is not even a feasibility,
given that we all bring something different to the table: experiences,
knowledge, energy and ideas. If we’re all fighting on the same front,
it means only one thing is being done at one time and the other fronts
are being left unaddressed. Until we acknowledge that the struggle
has been redefined, respect what others bring to the table and that
the fight is on many fronts, we’ll be fighting about where the frontline
is and who is fighting for a particular struggle. The argument should
be about, why aren’t more people fighting in the struggle, period.
That’s where we are now – not enough in the struggle to cover all
fronts. That’s the bigger problem, and should be the focus of our
solution.
Anthony Asadullah Samad is a national
columnist, managing director of the Urban Issues Forum and author
of 50 Years After Brown: The State of Black Equality In America (Kabili
Press, 2005). He can be reached at www.AnthonySamad.com.