Unpack the flag.

Many liberals, celebrities included, found the Trump administration an embarrassing time to be an Americans (Newsweek, Huff Post, The New Daily). The Met Gala theme might be a sign that, with Biden in office, liberal patriotism and flag-waving is once again in vogue (Mediaite). But we should reflect on who the flag has excluded and oppressed. This is especially relevant when Black Lives Matter protestors are being beaten and arrested right outside an exclusive gala centered on this country’s greatness.

TAKE ACTION

Support protestors arrested outside the Met Gala. Cashapp $4OurLiberation, $DesMoneyGZZ, $b00gie888.
Consider: What symbols have different effects for distinct communities? Which symbols should we reclaim or modify? Which should be change or discard?

GET EDUCATED

Last week, the Met Gala returned after a one-year absence due to COVID. As always, “New York City’s party of the year” drew attention and sparked commentary as a litany of celebrities arrived to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in custom-made designer attire.

The theme of the 2021 Gala was “In America: A Lexicon of Fashion.” Timotheé Chalamet sported all-American Chuck Taylors, Billie Eilish referenced Marilyn Monroe, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez arrived wearing a dress emblazoned with “Tax the Rich.” It was Debbie Harry of new-wave band Blondie who took the assignment most literally with her “deconstructed ballgown” with the colors of the American flag (The Hollywood Reporter).

Like any symbol, the meaning of the American flag is contested. Some members of marginalized communities wish to claim it, proclaiming that they’re as American as anyone else. But the American flag is often associated with right-wing and far-right politics. In 1918, Robert Prager was wrapped in an American flag and lynched by a mob consumed by anti-German and anti-socialist hysteria (Madison Historical). “In the 1960s, there was a battle over who got to use the flag to represent their point of view in the anti-war movement, civil rights movement,” said flag researcher Ted Kaye. “The Klan used the American flag more than it used the Confederate flag” (Street Roots). After 9/11, American flags symbolized support for the War on Terror that killed a million people (Brown University). Toby Keith’s war-mongering “Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue,” with lyrics like “we’ll put a boot in your ass, it’s the American way,” spent 20 weeks on the charts (Mother Jones). Today, white supremacist militias brandish American flags as they rampage through the streets of Portland, OR (Street Roots).

But even removed from conservative or white-supremacist associations, the flag’s history is messy at best. It was the flag flown by the army that murdered hundreds of Lakota civilians at Wounded Knee, killed dozens of civilians while suppressing the 1967 uprising in Detroit, stole the northern half of Mexico (National Archives), and invaded dozens of countries (Evergreen). The third verse of the National Anthem, an ode to the flag, celebrates murdering enslaved people during the War of 1812 (The Nation).

People of color, immigrants, and those seeking to change an exploitative and oppressive system have disproportionately been repressed, not represented, by the American flag. While celebrities paraded their takes on the “Lexicon of America” at the Met Gala, the NYPD was “brutally” arresting protesters outside (The Grio). The lexicon of America might include many people, but the prison abolitionists of color being brutalized on the street were evidently not among them.

Lex Scott of Black Lives Matter Utah faced a vicious backlash after stating, "When we Black Americans see this flag we know the person flying it is not safe to be around… We know that the person flying it lives in a different American than we do” (Newsweek). “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses Black people and people of color,” said Colin Kaepernick. “There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder” (Paste Magazine). It behooves us to understand the real history of any symbol before displaying it with any sort of pride.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Black Lives Matter protestors were brutalized and arrested outside this year’s Met Gala, whose theme was “In America.”
Many communities don’t feel represented by the U.S. flag because of the actions of the American government and the flag’s association with far-right politics.
It’s important to consider the different impacts any symbol might have to various communities.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.

Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza

Nicole Cardoza 9/20/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/20/21

Divest from fossil fuels.

After fighting for almost a decade, Divest Harvard claimed victory last week when Harvard University announced it would divest completely from fossil fuels. “It took conversations and protests, meetings with administration, faculty/alumni votes, mass sit-ins and arrests, historic legal strategies, and storming football fields,” the group said. “But today, we can see proof that activism works, plain and simple” (Twitter). This announcement means that Harvard will no longer invest any part of its $42 billion endowment in fossil fuel companies (The Guardian). It’s a key victory in the efforts to demand accountability from university endowments which too often profit by funding objectionable industries.

TAKE ACTION

Follow UC Divest and sign their petition to end the University of California’s investment in fossil fuel and weapons companies.
Tell your elected officials to divest public pension funds from fossil fuels.
Consider: Does your money fund oppressive industries? This could be personal investments, college endowments, or pensions. Are there movements to demand divestment from institutions around you?

GET EDUCATED

When universities receive financial gifts, they’re often placed in their endowment, a financial vehicle whose proceeds fund the school’s operating expenses (Investopedia). The endowments of wealthy universities like Harvard are enormous: Yale has $30 billion, Stanford has $27 billion, and Princeton has $25 billion (US News). Princeton’s endowment is five times the national wealth of Haiti and twice that of Liberia (Credit Suisse). Universities naturally want their investments to be as lucrative as possible. This can mean providing capital to industries that are disproportionately harming people of color and the planet, a practice that divestment campaigns seek to end.

Emissions from fossil fuels like oil, coal, and natural gas are the primary driver of global warming (NASA), which disproportionately threatens working-class communities and communities of color (Anti-Racism Daily). These communities also bear the brunt of the industry’s refinery fires (Democracy Now), oil spills (The Conversation), and toxic pollution (Grist).

Before last week’s announcement, Harvard President Bacow publicly opposed “politicizing” the school’s investments despite facing years of protests by students, faculty, and alumni. In 2019, hundreds of Yale and Harvard students stormed a football game to demand both schools end investments in fossil fuels and Puerto Rican debt; dozens were arrested (Harvard Crimson).

Last year, they occupied a university building to demand divestment on the five-year anniversary of another campus occupation calling for the same (Harvard Crimson). The campaign didn’t politicize the university’s investment decisions. By highlighting the social harm abetted by Harvard’s investment decisions, it demonstrated those decisions were always political in the first place.

Though Harvard’s endowment is by far the largest, the struggle to stop institutional investment in particularly noxious industries doesn’t end there. University of California students, among others, are leading a fight to end investment in fossil fuel and weapons companies like BlackRock and Lockheed Martin (UC Divest).

And while Harvard will no longer profit from fossil fuels, it still invests in the private prison industry (The Crimson). It also invests in debt which the Puerto Rican government must pay back in lieu of funding basic services or infrastructure (The Intercept). Puerto Rican debt collection, private detention centers, and fossil fuel companies all profit from the extraction of resources and people from marginalized communities. They all use investments from university endowments, public and private pension funds, and city and state governments, as well (Equal Times). In 2018, the California teachers’ pension fund ended investment in private prisons (CalSTRS), though the same fund recently voted to postpone full divestment from fossil fuels for 30 years (Common Dreams).

Demanding institutional divestment dates back to the 1980s, where activists demanded money be taken out of apartheid South Africa. When our public funds, pensions, or alumni contributions support oppressive practices, we can organize together to demand a change. As the Divest Harvard campaign shows, it’s not always an easy fight, but it’s a fight that we can win. We need to demand divestment from exploitative industries.

Written by Andrew Lee (he/him)

KEY TAKEAWAYS

After a fight lasting almost a decade, Harvard University announced it would divest from fossil fuels.
Universities and other institutions often make investments in companies that profit from oppression and exploitation.
For decades, divestment movements have demanded that these institutions end investments in malignant industries.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/17/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/17/21

Advocate for a pathway to citizenship for all.

For generations, members of my family crossed the border for work. My grandfather was a “guest worker” under a program that brought workers to build railroads and pick crops during WWII (UCLA). Aunts, uncles, cousins, and my grandma left Mexico one by one. Some of my cousins were incarcerated and my aunts deported. My grandma, a domestic worker in Mexico, here picked up cans with my cousins. My parents and my little sister eventually came. And I am here too.

TAKE ACTION

Sign this urgent petition demanding key public servants include a Pathway to Citizenship for All 12 million, the first opportunity of its kind after almost 40 years.
Support Cosecha, a national movement demanding permanent protections for all undocumented people.

GET EDUCATED

The American right demonizes “illegal aliens” from “sh*thole countries” (New Yorker). Some people respond with the false notion that America is a “nation of immigrants” (NCPH) or broadly proclaim that “migration is beautiful,” a phrase adorning t-shirts and wall art (Etsy). People hate us or romanticize us. Both extremes are obstacles to our collective liberation and understanding of who we are.

There are around 12 million undocumented immigrants (Brookings), more people than the population of Greece. As essential workers, we die at higher rates from COVID-19 (The Globe Post). Each year we pay more than $120 billion in taxes. Our work contributes $17 billion for Social Security and $4 billion for Medicare each year, though we are ineligible for both programs (Center for American Progress). We have no access to disability or unemployment payments (NELP), food stamps (USDA), driver licenses (NCSL), or stimulus checks (Huffington Post). See our previous piece on those excluded from stimulus payments.

We face hate crimes and discrimination (Huffington Post), are exploited by employers who abuse us, deny us breaks, pay less than minimum wage, or withhold pay altogether (KQED). Though we face the constant threat of deportation or incarceration (Guardian), 5 to 10 people die every week trying to cross the border (Dallas News). Why is it that migrants keep coming to the U.S. despite these conditions? Though Trump’s remarks were repugnant, we only choose all of this because of conditions in our home countries, conditions often created by American governmental and corporate decisions (NYSYLC).

Central American migrants are “fleeing a hell the US helped create” by supporting right-wing death squads (Guardian), forced to make a dangerous journey where they find extortion, amputation, or death (NowThis). Vietnamese immigration started after American involvement in the Vietnam War (UMW). Mexican immigration increased after the North American Free Trade Agreement allowed American corporations to flood the market with their products, destroying the food system (NYT) and livelihoods of many working-class Mexican people (UMich). Indigenous communities in Mexico are at risk of displacement by “mega-projects” for mass tourism which “are de facto elements of a ‘migrant barrier’ which respond to the geopolitical interests of the United States” (Toward Freedom).

Wealthy countries which draw migrants contain 14% of the world population but 73% of world income. The nations of the “Global South'' from which migrants originate have 86% of the world's population and the majority of the world's resources but just 25% of its income (Walled World). The same policies which made nations like the U.S. “rich” made the countries of the Global South so poor that their citizens left to survive (YouTube). We are not illegal, we were illegalized.

As Angie Rivera, an undocumented immigrant from Colombia, writes, “There is nothing beautiful about the poverty that was created in my country while the U.S. prospers” (NYSYLC). So how can we achieve justice for those forced to leave their homes and families behind?

Discourse around immigration often starts and stops with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. This program has been transformative for the young “Dreamers” who can access it, allowing them to work “legally” and temporarily protecting them from deportation (NBC News). Although DACA narratives “occupy outsize attention in our politics” (NPR), DACA protects just 6% of immigrants, leaving 94% of us criminalized (Cambridge). The framing of some immigrants as “good” and others as “bad” hurts the movement (Washington Post).

Fortunately, there are groups across the country rejecting this false distinction. Cosecha is a national immigrant-led organization fighting for “papers, not crumbs.” They reject politics that divide immigrants into “good” people to be offered limited protections and “bad” ones to be criminalized and deported, instead of organizing to win “permanent protection, dignity, and respect” (Cosecha). Decolonial Action Lab is an undocumented essential worker collective and one of the main founders of “Papeles para Todos,” Papers for All, a group also demanding full citizenship for all undocumented people (DAL). Anything less than a pathway to citizenship for all undocumented people would be a political and historical failure.

By Luis Moreno (he/him)

Luis Moreno has native and Black ancestry, has collaborated in nonprofits and collectives, is an essential worker and a researcher for DAL. He likes to read and write poetry (Border is not just a word), is passionate about social justice, sports and nature, and has interests in forced migration, climate change, housing, unhoused and digital rights, dystopic environments and photography. He is planning how to push billionaires to donate 50% of their money and to write a poetry book.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Immigration to the United States often stems from problems created by the U.S. government or corporations.
Saying only that “migration is beautiful” erases the pain and violence associated with being forced to leave your home and denied civil rights.
Only deciding that certain “good” immigrants deserve civil and political rights is unacceptable.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/16/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/16/21

Protect organizers and activists.

Last week, CBS announced a new TV competition series called "The Activist," which pits changemakers against one another to see who can garner the most social engagement. The show, bolstered by celebrity talent, is being criticized for promoting “performative activism” and positioning social impact as a competition (Hollywood Reporter).

TAKE ACTION

Support the Allied Media Conference, an annual community-designed event that promotes collaboration and connection between media-based visionary organizing projects.
Support Budding Roses, a space to empower youth critically engaging with social justice issues.

GET EDUCATED

But I think we need to spend more time talking about why this concept is a miss. There are reality shows for almost any talent, from starting businesses to singing and dancing to knowing obscure trivia. In some ways, a show that centers on charitable initiatives and good causes may feel like a refreshing addition to the lineup.

But the role of community leaders is far more complex and controversial in mainstream society than the hidden talent next door. Activists are routinely arrested and jailed for amplifying causes that matter. (Just last month, over 800 people have been arrested so far for protesting the Line 3 pipeline in Minnesota (TruthOut).) They receive harassment and doxxing online for sharing their stories. Naysayers are quick to discard an entire movement based on the actions of one activist, placing unfair scrutiny on imperfect people trying to do good (AP). And as Andrew wrote in another newsletter, our nation has a long history of surveilling and persecuting influential leaders (Anti-Racism Daily). One primetime show isn’t going to change the conditions that place activists in danger; in fact, it might encourage them.

Also, you can argue that community leaders are already forced to compete for resources. Smaller grassroots organizations are less likely to receive funding than larger, more established ones – particularly if they’re run by people of color (NYTimes). Beyond this, many philanthropists are still hesitant to support work that treads on “sensitive ground,” like the racial equity movement of the past year (Financial Times). Mainstream media tends to sensationalize the issues at hand, but rarely offers insights on who is actively addressing them or how the readers can support their efforts. Investing time and energy into growing large social followings, driving engagement on causes, and crowdfunding for sustainability isn’t a game; it’s often the only option left when white-led institutions fail to support. “The Activist” is only reformatting the same systemic inequities for views.

Ultimately, it seems “The Activist” is focused on creating the same tenuous relationship between leaders and their communities – one often fueled by mistrust, skepticism, and scrutiny. But what we need now, more than ever, is a relationship based on trust. One that centers changemakers as voices that deserve to be heard, regardless of their Instagram following count. What would it look like if we centered the systemic issues instead of judging the people trying to change them? What if, instead, we challenged those with power and privilege to do better? And re-allocated our time spent gawking towards working to change the conditions that created the show? We can support community-rooted projects aimed at fostered collaboration between activists rather than pitting them against one another. Detroit’s Allied Media Conference brings together media activists to share ideas and build connections, while Portland’s Budding Roses provides a space for youth to learn about social justice issues together. Pushing for systemic change and building collective power isn’t a game or a competition — it’s something we do in community, and the stakes have never been higher.

The show is unlikely to change. But we can. We’re still the audience, even if we’re not watching this show on CBS. So how will we choose to support the activists in our community?

KEY TAKEAWAYS

The upcoming CBS show “The Activist” will feature activists competing against one another for social engagement.
Activists are already forced to compete for limited resources, with many facing repression and incarceration instead of public acclaim.
Instead of viewing organizing as a competition we watch, we can engage with collaborative, community-driven initiatives for justice.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/15/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/15/21

Fight environmental housing injustice.

The remains of Hurricane Ida clobbered New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania early this month, killing 43 people with record-breaking flooding, including over a dozen in New York City. (Time). This inundation was unprecedented — Mayor Bill de Blasio called it a “historic weather event” (Inquirer). Catastrophic acts of nature seem beyond human control, but the tragic deaths in New York also stem from housing inequality and environmental racism in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

TAKE ACTION

Support Make the Road NY and Dorchester Not for Sale.
Support the Right to the City Alliance affiliate closest to you.
Consider: who would be most at risk from natural disasters or housing insecurity in your community? How can you help change that? How can your community build collective resilience?

GET EDUCATED

When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, it was likewise an act of nature. But Black residents were more likely to live in low-lying areas close to the water and a majority did not have a car with which to escape (New Orleans Tribune), so low-income Black people were the majority of those trapped in the city (Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality). During the catastrophic winter storm in Texas earlier this year, the power stayed on in Austin’s affluent downtown while poor communities faced rolling blackouts for days (The Guardian).

Almost all of those killed in New York City were living out of basement apartments not up to code. These units also had increased risks of carbon monoxide poisoning and death by fire. But as housing costs balloon, there’s increased pressure on homeowners to rent out basement rooms. Tenants are also pressured to take a relatively affordable room, no matter the risks. Working-class families, often immigrants working in the service industry, live in illegally converted units since “the housing crisis… leads people to live in unsafe conditions in the first place,” according to the Citizen Housing Planning Council’s Jessica Katz (N.Y. Times). Those who perished were largely people of color working in the service industry if not the new “servant economy” of precarious gig work (The Atlantic). Those whom they served — whiter, more affluent New Yorkers — survived.

A housing crisis cuts across all dimensions of urban life. Prohibitive housing costs force people to stay with abusive partners, and domestic violence is a “leading cause of homelessness” for women and children (NNEDV). “The housing crisis puts LGBT+ people in serious danger” as well, “whether that’s forcing us to live in oppressive dysfunctional family homes, or living with strangers who don’t seem to get it” (GCN). Black women are disproportionately affected by evictions (Ms. Magazine), which force evictees to subsequently accept less regulated and more dangerous housing (Huff Post).

And there are a host of environmental problems that plague housing for working-class people of color even before a major storm hits. These include air pollution (Make the Road NY) and proximity to toxic waste sites and landfills. The correlation of communities of color with such hazards is known as environmental racism, the concentration of “disadvantaged populations in substandard housing and compromised communities, where hazardous exposures are much more likely” (NIH). Those with the least social power are more liable to live in sub-standard housing or lose housing altogether. They are the most exposed to toxins, pollutants, housing-related violence, and death (The Conversation).

As sea temperatures rise, hurricanes like Ida will only appear more frequently and intensely (ABC News). The unconscionable expiration of federal unemployment benefits will only increase the number of people living in substandard housing, in their cars, or on the streets (NPR). And the United States is one of a handful of countries that hasn’t acknowledged housing as a human right by ratifying the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (United Nations). It will take community power and collective resistance to fight for both housing and environmental justice — and make sure the tragedies of Ida are not repeated.

Groups are taking action for this purpose all across the country. Make the Road New York is organizing tenant power against environmental racism (Make the Road). In Boston, Dorchester Not for Sale (Facebook) is drawing connections between environmental justice and anti-gentrification fights (EHN), as are the 90 member organizations of the Right to the City Alliance (Right to the City). Housing inequality holds members of oppressed and marginalized communities back from the joyful, healthy, and secure lives we should all demand for ourselves and those around us. To survive disasters and crises, we need to build flourishing, equitable communities that can safely shelter us all.

Written by Andrew Lee (he/him)

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Almost all of the fatalities from Hurricane Ida in NYC were in basement apartments.
Poor communities and communities of color are at greater risk from natural disasters in part due to substandard housing.
We can make sure all the members of our communities survive natural disasters by fighting for housing and environmental justice.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/14/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/14/21

Support inclusive wildfire relief.

TAKE ACTION

Diversify your news sources by reading news specific to the western United States from Indigenous perspectives such as High Country News.
Support the Indigenous People’s Burning Network and learn about tribal burning practices.
Donate to the Unete Center for Farm Workers and Immigrant Advocacy Fire Relief Fund.

GET EDUCATED

As wildfires rage through California again this fall, the disparity in media coverage is affecting relief efforts for residents of color. Media coverage and public pressure can affect which communities are prioritized for relief, with attention often focusing on more affluent white areas. But in fact, research has shown that communities of color are disproportionately affected by environmental disasters due to socioeconomic factors, structural racism in housing practices, and citizenship status (UW News). Wildfires are no exception. As covered previously, mainstream conservation practices are rooted in colonialism and white supremacy. Consequently, they’re ill-equipped to address the particular needs of residents most at risk (Anti-Racism Daily). Undocumented farmworkers are disproportionately affected by wildfires, and Indigenous people live on land that is, on average, six times more prone to wildfires than others (UW News). However, people of color are vastly underrepresented in coverage of environmental disasters (Louisiana Weekly). While representation in the media has been under scrutiny as of late, the exclusion of these narratives could be directly affecting the distribution of aid. For these already vulnerable communities, a lack of media attention further increases their capacity to recover (UW News). Due to the lack of federal resources, on the ground community-led efforts are attempting to fill in the gap (OPB).

Research demonstrates that wealthier, white areas are more likely to receive aid, though predominantly Black, Latinx, and Indigenous communities are at 50% greater risk of wildfires (UW News). Matthew Wibbenmeyer, an economist and researcher at Resources for the Future says, “certain communities are more able to rally government support” (NYTimes). With organized and widely available resources, affluent, suburban communities are receiving the brunt of wildfire relief and media attention. The communities most at risk lack basic necessities like health insurance and vehicle access. These resources would make it more feasible to recover from environmental disasters such as wildfires. For instance, federal fuel treatment projects are largely implemented in predominantly white communities whose residents were over the poverty line. These projects reduce the amount of flammable vegetation in the area, drastically reducing the start and spread of wildfires. In the absence of fuel treatment programs, government assistance advises residents to invest in prohibitively expensive air conditioning or air purifying units, placing a heavy burden on individuals to compensate for structural shortcomings.

Alternatively, within some Indigenous communities affected by wildfires, there is a practice known as tribal burning. This can often mitigate the risk of wildfires. For years, it had been banned in California. But, as new policy seeks to form relationships with Indigenous communities, research is being done to show how the cultural practice can help to not only reduce the risk of wildfire but foster new growth in the affected areas (The Nature Conservancy). It is not enough for policy to allow the practice of tribal burning though, as Beth Rose Middleton Manning, a professor of Native American studies, observes, “I think it's really important that we don't think about traditional burning as: what information can we learn from native people and then exclude people and move on with non-natives managing the land”. She hopes to see indigenous leaders at the forefront of any tribal burning practice (NPR).

Similarly, much of the organized relief work has fallen on the shoulders of local organizers and BIPOC-led relief efforts. Activists such as Dagoberto Morales identified that one of the best ways to provide wildfire relief is to double down on community building. Through his organization Unete Center for Farm Workers and Immigrant Advocacy, he believes in long-term disaster relief through empowerment (OPB, Unete). While community members have organized their own aid networks, attention to those efforts alone would go a long way to furthering their cause. As effective as on-the-ground aid efforts can be, many residents are still vastly reliant on federal aid which has been diverted due to a lack of updated policies and understanding. News and media coverage for marginalized communities most at risk from wildfires could generate help for the grassroots organizations but also change misconceptions that hinder federal aid.

Sindhu Nallapareddy is a new transplant to Philadelphia who enjoys creating spreadsheets to track her reading habits, running and caring for her beloved chihuahua. You can find her on Instagram @reddysteadygo.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Research shows that communities of color are among the most at-risk populations during the current wildfires in California.
News coverage can determine which communities receive federal aid, and BIPOC narratives are largely missing in the reporting on these wildfires.
On-the-ground relief efforts by grassroots organizations are bearing the brunt of providing relief and aid to the communities of color most affected by this environmental disaster.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/13/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/13/21

Demand universal sick leave.

The pandemic has only deepened existing fault lines of class, race, and gender oppression. The ubiquity of the coronavirus has highlighted these structural inequalities, producing disparate effects on different populations. “Essential workers” were briefly lauded as “heroes” last year. Many of these workers, essential to maintaining community health and sustenance during a pandemic, would not typically receive paid sick days themselves.

TAKE ACTION

Demand that Congress mandate paid sick leave for all workers.
Follow Paid Leave for All on Twitter.
Support campaigns for expansive paid sick leave at the municipal level, like this one from Philadelphia.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

Some people talk about the United States lagging behind other “developed countries” when it comes to offering paid sick leave, but this actually undersells the problem. 93% of all countries offer paid sick leave to all workers (P.R.I.). The U.S., both the richest and most inequitable country in the world (N.Y. Times), is part of the 7% which fails to do so. The United States also fails to mandate paid parental leave, unlike countries such as Germany, Mexico, and Niger. And U.S. workers aren’t required to receive paid vacation days. In contrast, workers in Algeria receive about a month every year. (Yahoo! News). The U.S. Family and Medical Leave Act mandates that employers provide unpaid leave for certain conditions but leaves out common diseases like the flu. This excludes millions of workers who are new hires or employees of small businesses (Department of Labor).

Since employers in the United States aren’t required to provide any paid sick leave to their employees, many do not. About 32 million workers have no sick leave whatsoever, with less lucrative jobs less likely to offer sick days (Pew). Such workers are three times more likely to forgo medical care than those who would be paid during their absence (Health Affairs).

The absence of mandatory paid sick leave means people have to choose between working while sick or missing pay and potentially putting their job at risk. 63% of Americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck, and almost half were spending beyond their means even before COVID (CNBC). For many, the choice between working while sick and losing income by calling out is no choice at all. Out of economic necessity, they are forced to risk worsening their own health and the health of coworkers or customers.

One survey found that 90% of office workers go into work while ill, with 33% reporting that they never call out sick (Robert Half). 12% of food service workers said they’ve worked while experiencing vomiting or diarrhea (CDC). Companies like Instacart and DoorDash promised COVID sick time for delivery drivers, but in practice, it was “onerous” to even apply (CNET). Since gig workers get paid by the job, some were seen wading through waste-deep sewage water (Gothamist) to deliver food as the remnants of Hurricane Ida flooded NYC (USA Today). All in all, a pre-COVID survey found that 39% of workers went to work with flu-like symptoms (N.Y. Times). And though the federal government provided paid sick leave for workers with COVID, few knew it existed (US News).

And when companies do offer paid sick leave, it’s often inadequate. Many times, workers receive just a handful of days each year (Yahoo! News). Paid Time Off (PTO) policies, which combine vacation and sick days, ensure that employees with medical conditions receive less vacation time than their colleagues (USA Today). Other companies offer inadequate sick leave but allow employees to “donate” sick days to a coworker, leading one Florida teacher to go viral for begging his coworkers for sick days to finish chemotherapy (MarketWatch).

The result? A “near-guarantee that workers will defy public health warnings and trudge into their workplaces, regardless of symptoms” (Inverse). Low-wage jobs where people of color are overrepresented are the least likely to offer paid sick leave, compounding with other racial disparities in health and healthcare (CDC).

Every worker should accrue paid time to recover from illness as a condition of employment. Unionized workers are dramatically more likely to receive paid sick leave than non-union workers. Sick leave and employer-provided health insurance, which union workers almost universally receive (Pew, EPI), are often priorities when unions fight for concessions from employers. Scores of organizations like the NAACP are calling for federal legislation to mandate sick leave for all employees (NAACP), while other focus on just sick leave policies at the state and local levels. Workers shouldn’t have to choose between a paycheck and their health.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

93% of countries mandate paid sick leave for employees. The U.S. does not.
Because of this, nine out of ten U.S. workers work while sick.
Local, state, and federal initiatives, along with workplace organizing, bring us closer to universal paid sick leave.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/10/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/10/21

Mind the use of "terrorism".

In the aftermath of the violence that occurred on Wednesday, January 6, at the U.S. Capitol, news media, politicians, and observers worldwide are labeling those who participated “domestic terrorists.” At first glance, this seems to be a fair assessment: if white nationalists are engaging in the same kind of violence as other groups, we call “terrorists” have engaged in (attacking government buildings, breaking laws, endangering citizens, damaging property, etc.) then they too, should be labeled “terrorists.” Progressive politicians like Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) have referred to the incident as a “domestic terrorist attack” to ensure the gravity of this violence is not downplayed, as it often is when perpetrators are white (Huffington Post).

It's Friday! Welcome back to the ARD. Last week, we encouraged everyone to call the events at the Capitol for what they are, and encouraged the use of terms like "terrorists" and "white supremacists". Today, Shivani joins us to share why referring to terrorism, although well-intentioned, can have a negative impact on communities of color. I'm grateful to have learned more about this over the past week. The web version of that article now includes this one for clarification. I hope it illuminates something for you, too!

And thank you all for your support. This newsletter is made possible by our subscribers. Consider making a monthly or annual subscription on Patreon. Or you can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza).

Nicole

TAKE ACTION

If you’ve been using the term “domestic terrorism” or “terrorists” to describe what happened at Capitol on January 5, 2021, consider using the terms: white violence or insurrectionists instead.
Read articles in Just Security, The Brennan Center, and Human Rights Watch to learn more about why this language is harmful to marginalized communities.
Follow communications directors in this space like Lea Kayali and human rights attorneys like Diala Shamas to learn more about the role language plays in these acts of white violence.

GET EDUCATED

By Shivani Persad (she/her)

However, by including white supremacist violence under this label, we are effectively expanding the definition of terrorism — and although the intention is good, it harms the most marginalized communities. Black and Muslim communities have been increasingly stigmatized and harmed by the counterterrorism policies resulting from such expansion. The government already has a number of laws under which they can prosecute people that are perceived threats (Time Magazine).

After Wednesday’s insurrection President-Elect Joe Biden “plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism” (Wall Street Journal). Human rights attorney Diala Shamas tweeted, “predictably, Biden falls for it. I'll say it again: history shows that legislation going after "domestic terrorism" will primarily be used to target Black organizers, Muslim communities, immigrant communities.”

Shamas and Tarek Z. Ismail argue that “expanding whom we call terrorists supposes that more law enforcement means more justice or fairness. That is ahistoric” (Washington Post). They cite the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996, implemented after the Oklahoma City bombing, as an example of a “counterterrorism” policy with negative results. This attack was carried out by two white men who were labeled “domestic terrorists.” Instead of preventing domestic terrorism, the AEDPA broadened law enforcement’s reach and allowed legal residents to be deported or jailed for minor offenses (The Atlantic).

Journalist Aarti Shahani, whose father was unjustly incarcerated and whose uncle was deported because of this law, writes, “legal residents accused of “terrorism” were deported without hearing the testimony against them, or who had offered it” (The Atlantic). This is just one example of how the U.S. government takes threats of “domestic terrorism” perpetrated by white attackers and weaponizes it against communities of color.

“The entire framework of terrorism is really problematic,” Lea Kayali, a Palestinian community organizer and digital communications professional for the ACLU, tells me. “It’s understandable that people want to describe the feeling of being terrorized [on January 6]. There’s no question that the people out there were clearly trying to terrorize as part of their mission.” But she cautions us away from the terrorism framework because the definition of terrorism is malleable and vague. “Vague language doesn’t invite good policy. When you create policy on vague definitions it invites law enforcement discretion. It actually provides ammunition to systems of policing and law enforcement” (For more on such policies’ effects on American Muslims, check out this article in Al Jazeera.)

In fact, a leak exposed that in 2017 the FBI had created a new “domestic terrorism” category called “Black identity extremism” (The Intercept). This new category was said to pose a growing threat of premeditated violence against law enforcement and resulted in numerous investigations (Foreign Policy). In 2018, the FBI admitted to using its most advanced aircraft to surveil and monitor Black Lives Matter protests in Baltimore and this year at BLM protests in Washington, D.C (Brennan Center).

Kayali notes that even outside of policy discussions, the term is a bad linguistic choice: “It serves to obfuscate the root causes of that violence.” By calling them “domestic terrorists” and not including the terms “white supremacy” or “white violence” in the description of these events, Kayali says we are effectively “navigating around the obstacles of white supremacy that are foundational to violence in this country.”

So, when we’re discussing the events at the Capitol, remember that the word terrorism holds a kind of power that goes beyond the dictionary definition. The word terrorism is attached to a framework that was created to criminalize Black and brown existence. Post 9/11, the term “terrorism” is inextricably tied to the entire counterterrorism industry, which has harmed marginalized communities, and which some research suggests has not deterred violent extremism at all (Brennan Center). For many, the word “terrorism” will never serve a movement that seeks to shrink the power of this counterterrorism industry and protect Black, Brown, and Indigenous people’s rights. Instead, we should be focussing on dismantling this counterterrorism framework of harmful policies and, rather, address the root of the problem: white supremacy.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Although well-intentioned, calling the white supremacists who took part in the attack on the Capitol “domestic terrorists” is actually harmful to marginalized communities because of the counterterrorism policies that result from that kind of language.
Counterterrorism policies often hurt communities of color by expanding law enforcement’s reach, allowing them to target, surveil, investigate, and prosecute these marginalized communities more easily.
In 2017 the FBI created a new “domestic terrorism” category called “Black identity extremism.” It has admitted to surveilling Black Lives Matter protests (Brennan Center).
In the words of Palestinian community organizer Lea Kayali, “Language is essential to manifesting the world that we’re trying to build and create together, words matter.”

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/9/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/9/21

Shut 'em down.

These past few weeks mark fifty years since two historical moments in prison abolition occurred. To honor them, dozens of organizers have banded together under Jailhouse Lawyers Speak (JLS) to rally “National Shut ‘em Down Demonstrations” on August 21 and September 9 to fight for the end of the prison-industrial complex (JLS).

TAKE ACTION

Donate to Jailhouse Lawyers Speak (JLS), a national Black-led collective of imprisoned people fighting for prisoners' human rights by providing legal education, resources, and assistance to other prisoners.
Watch a video on what really happened during the Attica Prison Rebellion.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

The first date, August 21, represents the date that radical theorist and organizer George Jackson was assassinated by prison guards at San Quentin State Prison in California while attempting to lead a prison uprising. News of his death rallied organizers in prisons across the country, including those in Attica Correctional Facility in New York.

Although the Attica Prison rebellion itself was unplanned, prisoners had already been fighting to change the horrific conditions of the facilities. Prisoners were granted only one shower a week and one roll of toilet paper a month. They were also paid “slave wages,” with one prisoner noting that he made thirty cents a day doing laundry (Project NIA). A group of prisoners had banded together and wrote a list of demands — demands that weren’t ever met.

But things escalated after an altercation occurred in the yards on September 8, 1971. Because of it, two prisoners were escorted by guards to the “box,” a segregated part of Housing Block Z, where officers were known to inflict torture and brutality. Prisoners were outraged, especially because one of the prisoners wasn’t involved in the altercation. The next day, the 1,300 prisoners joined together and took control of the facilities (Project NIA). They took 39 people hostage and made demands for their release, including better living conditions, better food, religious freedom, more frequent showers, and ending mail censorship. State officials refused to comply (NV Database).

After four days, the New York state governor approved a raid to retake the facilities by force. Hundreds of state troopers, aided by the National Guard, stormed the facilities. They dropped tear gas and fired indiscriminately. In the end, 29 prisoners and ten hostages were killed. The state and federal governments worked quickly to cover their tracks, blaming and persecuting prisoners for the deaths of the hostages that they didn’t commit. A commission dedicated to investigating the truth behind the uprising stated that “with the exception of Indian massacres in the late 19th century, the State Police assault which ended the four-day prison uprising was the bloodiest one-day encounter between Americans since the Civil War” (Project NIA).

Despite these protests and the public outrage that followed, conditions in state and federal prisons are far from tolerable. And since then, incarceration rates have skyrocketed. In 1970, there were 48,498 people in federal and state prisons in the U.S (Project NIA). Today, fifty years later, there are about 1.8 million people (Vera). Because of overcrowding, poor healthcare and lack of access to hygienic materials, more than 661,000 incarcerated people and staff have been infected with coronavirus as of April 2021. At least 2,990 have died (EJI). As a result, there have been at least 106 rebellions held in prisons across the country regarding these inhumane conditions, many of which have largely gone unnoticed. In order for us to change these conditions, we must dismantle our nation’s false sense of comfort with the horrors of our criminal justice system. And that takes us listening – and supporting – the voices of those most impacted.

Key Takeaways

Today marks 50 years since the Attica Prison Rebellion, one of the bloodiest prison rebellions in our nation’s history.
Organizers across the country have planned demonstrations to rally against the brutalities of the prison-industrial complex.
Despite historical attempts to create change, state and federal prisons still place millions of people in horrific conditions.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/8/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/8/21

Unpack humanitarian intervention.

An image of a U.S. Marine cradling an Afghan baby went viral last week (Business Insider). Alongside pictures of desperate families pressed up against razor-wire fencing, it is one of the most striking visuals of a calamitous American retreat (The Guardian). Americans saw these horrifying images alongside articles analyzing the dire prospects for Afghan women (Newsweek) and LGBTQ+ people (BBC), increasing pressure on Biden to extend an August 31 evacuation deadline (MSN). The United States harmed civilians in a 20-year occupation and then abandoned them in its evacuation. To refuse civilians and their children would be a moral catastrophe, but plunging a nation into civil war with devastating civilian casualties is already the opposite of humanitarianism.

TAKE ACTION

Support Afghans for a Better Tomorrow (Twitter) in demanding that the U.S. and NATO accept their responsibility to refugees after “20 years of failed policies that have done incredible harm.”
Sign this petition against the Biden administration’s refugee caps.
Donate to Emergency Relief Afghanistan, Islamic Relief, and other organizations providing direct aid on the ground.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

In 2001, 80% of Americans supported invading Afghanistan (Gallup). In recent years, Afghanistan faded from front-page news. This May, Americans largely felt the war was no longer a “hot-button issue,” with a plurality in favor of withdrawing troops (Gallup). In July, only 46% of Americans felt the invasion and occupation wasn’t a mistake (Gallup). But pictures of soldiers with babies circulating along with a newfound concern for Afghan civil rights caused support for the withdrawal to plummet (Yahoo News). Though accepting adult refugees remains controversial (Media Matters), many clamor to adopt refugee children (Today). Admitting Afghan children, if not their parents, might suggest the war truly was a humanitarian intervention.

In reality, the American government had its own reasons for its invasion of Afghanistan twenty years ago (Common Dreams, Small Wars Journal) and the admittance of children today. This use of children to justify war is personal to me as someone adopted from Korea, a country which likewise started sending children to the U.S. after an American occupation and war. Countries that send children to the United States are often in tatters as a result of the American government’s actions. During the Korean War, American forces deforested nearly the entire peninsula with napalm (Truthout). Some women survived by having sexual relations with American occupying forces. Their mixed-race children were the first Korean American adoptees (USA Today).

This created “a paternal attitude between Korea and the US where white Americans rescued Asian orphans, while concealing the US responsibility in the Korean War” (University of Minnesota). Adoption from South Korea is one of the ways in which “the war lives on as a material fact” (The New Inquiry). White America has long used adoption to “civilize” “savage” children of color (Twitter) while obscuring its role in creating the conditions that force desperate parents to give up their children in the first place. Today, the Biden administration continues to maintain family separation policies (Phoenix New Times) that break up families who cross the U.S.-Mexico border while thousands of “unaccompanied minors” are incarcerated in Border Patrol jails (Fox 10). The United States government isn’t a selfless benefactor for Korean, Central American, or Afghan children.

The U.S. government justified its invasion of Afghanistan as retribution for 9/11 but also, paradoxically, a war to liberate Afghan women from gender oppression. But the United Nations estimated 100,000 Afghans (NBC News), the equivalent half the population of Salt Lake City, were injured, maimed, or killed, often by the American military (Democracy Now, New Yorker).

All of this begs the question: if the protection of Afghan women, children, and sexual and gender minorities was the reason for the occupation, where was this concern before? Where was it when U.S. airstrikes were levelling neighborhoods earlier this month? Did the CIA ask whether detainees were part of the LGBTQ+ community before torturing them in black sites (IBT)? Was the U.S. government concerned with the well-being of children as it extrajudicially murdered their parents (Human RIghts Watch)? There is no such thing as a humanitarian war. Governments wage war to protect their own interests. There is never anything humane about mass death. One does not have to endorse all — or any — of the actions of a foreign government to oppose bombing its citizens “back to the Stone Age” (History News Network). To claim that destroying a country is a charitable act on behalf of that country’s most marginalized members is depraved.

Children cut off from their families and cultures in the wake of war are not a political symbol but a human tragedy. The U.S. is complicit in the splintering of families, not their savior. Our government has a responsibility to resolve the harm we’ve caused.

Key Takeaways

The U.S. military committed numerous human rights abuses during a fruitless occupation of Afghanistan that plunged the country into civil war.
The “humanitarian” adoption of children has long been used to whitewash brutality.
The U.S. responsibility to Afghan people comes not from its benevolence but its role in destabilizing the country.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/7/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/7/21

Buy ethical jewelry.

Last week global jeweler Tiffany & Co. released their latest campaign featuring Jay-Z and Beyoncé. Entitled “About Love,” the campaign is the first that the famous couple has participated in together and will include original music and video documenting their relationships (NPR). Although many are excited to see Black love between two powerhouses celebrated by a major brand, others are noting the campaign’s insensitivities to the history of the diamond industry and the harm it has inflicted on African communities.

TAKE ACTION

Do your research on the ethics and sustainability of the type of diamond before you buy it. Use this guide to ask the right questions based on which type of diamond you wish to purchase.
Watch “Blood Diamonds,” a documentary outlining the impact of the diamond trade on Sierra Leone’s Kono district.
Read more about the hidden cost of the jewelry industry.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

Promotional photos for the campaign have Beyoncé wearing the famous 128.54-carat yellow Tiffany diamond, which has only been worn by four women throughout time. Beyoncé is the first Black woman to wear it, which some are noting as “iconic.” But this diamond, “discovered” in 1877 in South Africa by Charles Lewis Tiffany, symbolizes how colonialism and white supremacy transformed the nation. As Karen Attiah noted in her op-ed for the Washington Post, this blood diamond is a poor symbolic representation of love.

The diamond trade is an $81.4B industry driven by gift-giving across the world. Over half of all diamonds are sourced from a relatively small group of communities across Africa. But the human cost is horrifying. Many people, particularly children, work in dangerous conditions. Many communities with otherwise underdeveloped economies have no other choice, forced to place their children in the mines instead of school. Armed groups have leveraged the diamond trade to seize power, exploiting the people and their lands for their own gain. And the extraction of diamonds and other precious metals can wreak havoc on the environment, polluting freshwater supplies and destroying aquatic biodiversity. Experts believe over 3.7 million lives have been lost due to conflict in the diamond trade, and over 1 million people are displaced (Time).

The Kimberley Process, established in 2003, was created to remove blood diamonds from the global supply chain. But many experts believe it’s intentionally filled with loopholes, contributing little to the issues at hand. Although it focuses on batches of diamonds from conflict zones, it fails to certify diamonds based on other ethical notes, like pay equity, working conditions, and whether mining displaces people from their homes (The Guardian). Furthermore, it only focuses on sourcing rough diamonds, so anything already polished or cut isn’t certified in this process (HRW). In 2018, the Human Rights Watch published a report of the torture and abuse the people on the Marange diamond fields of eastern Zimbabwe are still experiencing, despite the efforts noted above (HRW).

Today, Tiffany emphasizes that it sells conflict-free diamonds (Tiffany website), joining other retailers who have attempted to make their sourcing more transparent over the past few years. The jeweler Pandora announced in May 2021 that they will only use lab-grown diamonds in their products moving forward (CNBC). But as consumers become increasingly socially conscious and passionate about tracking the origins of their foods and goods, it’s unlikely that the diamond industry will get away with lackluster standards.

Celebrity endorsements of luxury goods, including diamonds, are nothing new. You’d be hard-pressed to find a famous figure that hasn’t participated in a similar campaign before. But it seems that fans expected more from Beyoncé’s brand, which has centered the celebration of Blackness in music, philanthropy, fashion, and partnerships over the past few years. Her 2020 movie “Black Is King,” a visual companion to the 2019 album “The Lion King: The Gift,” honors African culture, and was met with both praise and criticism (NPR). Critics of the Tiffany campaign note that of all celebrities, Beyoncé should have been more sensitive to the atrocities African people have experienced because of the diamond trade.

As consumers, we can do our part to demand change – both in this industry and others ripe with similar forms of exploitation and abuse. Use the guides above to make more conscious purchasing decisions, and call for accountability from the brands and influencers that you support.

Key Takeaways

Beyoncé and Jay-Z are featured in global jeweler Tiffany & Co.'s latest campaign.
The campaign centers a diamond sourced in 1877, likely through means of exploitation and abuse rampant in the diamond trade industry.
The global diamond trade industry has caused immense suffering in communities across Africa. Despite new standards, these atrocities still continue.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/6/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/6/21

Rally to raise the minimum wage.

The minimum wage has stayed the same, while the cost of living has increased significantly. Advocates for a minimum wage of $15 an hour have been lobbying lawmakers for several years now. The federal minimum wage has not increased since 2009 when it was raised to $7.25. Since 2009, the cost of living in the United States has increased by 20%, and the cost of essentials like housing and healthcare have grown at higher rates (CNN). Currently, the median living wage in the United States is $67,690 (Insider). For reference, if the minimum wage were to be increased to $15 an hour, the annual wage would add up to $30,000. Employers are also permitted to pay subminimum wages to employees who have disabilities (DOL).

TAKE ACTION

Join the Fight for $15 in your state. If you make less than $15/hour, you can sign the petition and learn more about going on strike on the organization's website.
Read about the racial inequities of Labor Day, and how Black, Latino, Asian and other workers of color workers of color have historically been left out of the movement.

GET EDUCATED

By Nia Norris (she/her)

On January 26th, Democrats in the House of Representatives introduced a bill to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour nationwide by 2025. They attempted to pass the same legislation in 2019, but the Republican-controlled Senate blocked it. (CNBC). Advocates of this bill cited a report from the Economic Policy Institute and the University of California Berkeley, which found that an increased minimum wage would not only lower government spending on public assistance but would also increase tax revenue (Politico). Currently, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour has been bundled into the new coronavirus relief package (NY Times).

Workers with disabilities have it harder, often working for programs called “sheltered workshops” that pay workers who have disabilities a subminimum wage, many earning only $3.34 an hour (NPR). The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights released a report recommending that the subminimum wage be abolished entirely (USCCR). There have also been multiple federal bills attempting to abolish the subminimum wage for workers who have disabilities, but all have failed to pass. At a state level, Vermont, Alaska, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, and Oregon have abolished the subminimum wage (NPR).

People of color disproportionately earn poverty wages as compared to white people. Black workers are 1.5 times as likely to make poverty wages as white workers, and Hispanic workers are 2.2 times as likely (EPI). Increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour would increase the wages of 38.1%of Black people as compared to 23.2%of white people. Black and Hispanic workers are also significantly more likely to experience minimum wage violations (Equitable Growth). Black Americans are also overrepresented in the tipped employee workforce, where the federal minimum wage has remained stagnant at $2.13 an hour for over 25 years (Georgetown Poverty). A study has shown that consumers discriminate against people of color while eating out, tipping them at a lower rate (Wiley Online Library).

Raising the minimum wage is also key to increasing housing affordability. The National Low Income Housing Coalition published a report in 2020 called Out of Reach, documenting the gap between wages and housing. On average, a full-time worker needs to earn an hourly rate of $23.96 to afford the cost of a modest two-bedroom rental. In 11 states, this rate is more than $25 an hour (NIHC).

As a result, there are racial disparities in renting and ownership. In the U.S., 73.3% of White, non-Hispanic people own homes, but only 42.1% of Black people do (USA Facts). Black people who do own their homes also pay more for their mortgages. Black borrowers have an average mortgage rate of 4.62%compared to a mortgage rate of 4.3%for white borrowers (BankRate).

Since Black people have the highest rate of disability, the subminimum wage also has a disproportionate impact (National Disability Institute). Large employers, such as Goodwill Industries, use the subminimum wage to pay workers with disabilities significantly less. The Raise the Wage Act in Congress would also raise the minimum wage for workers who have disabilities (Vox).

Raising the minimum wage would reduce poverty among Americans, particularly people of color and workers who have disabilities. It would increase accessibility to housing and other necessities. It would also prohibit employers from paying substandard wages to people with disabilities and combat racism toward Black employees that rely on tips. The fight for equity must begin with combating economic racism in the United States.

Key Takeaways

The minimum wage has not increased with the cost of living. The federal minimum wage has remained stagnant at $7.25 an hour since 2009, while the cost of living has risen by 20%.
Black workers are overrepresented in the tipped employee workforce, which has a federal minimum wage of only $2.13 an hour. Tipped employees are more likely to live in poverty, and there have been studies indicating racial discrimination in tipping practices by consumers.
Employers of disabled workers, such as sheltered workshops, are not required to pay a minimum wage at all, and Black people experience disability at a higher rate than white people.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/3/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/3/21

Celebrate diversity in punk music.

When you think of punk music, what bands come to mind? You may think the Ramones, the Sex Pistols, or even Green Day. All of those bands are white, and the stereotypical image of a punk is white, too. Those are some of the main bands folks can associate with punk, but they aren’t the pioneers, or even the ones who invented the genre. In fact, like a lot of today’s musical genres, punk has its roots in Black music.

TAKE ACTION

Support the Black Rock Coalition, which champions the free musical expression of Black people.
Read about the Sista Grrrl Riots and how Black Women carved out their own space after being left out of the Riot Grrrl punk movement.
Follow Mad Collective on Instagram, which uplifts marginalized voices in punk.

GET EDUCATED

By Krystal McRae (she/her)

Punk emerged in the 1970’s in NYC, and was the opposite of the colorful and psychedelic mainstream rock at the time (Pitchfork). Punk cut meandering guitar solos for short, aggressive, and often political songs, and fostered an ethos that anyone could start a band and play music if you had something to say. Although bands and audiences were largely white at the time, influential Black artists helped build the punk scene from the beginning, and used the genre to challenge the status quo.

Black punks were unapologetic, and in your face, and they had EVERY RIGHT to be. Like Death for example, out of Detroit, who were punk before punk had a name. They turned down signing with Clive Davis because they didn’t want to change their name. In their hometown, they were doing something different. While everyone was listening to Earth, Wind and Fire, Death took a more “aggressive” approach to rock and roll (The New York Times).

Punk, and rock belonged to Black people just as much as it belonged to anyone else. Yet, somewhere down the line, things got diluted. Even in the Riot Grrrl era of the early early 90’s, when feminist bands led by women took hold and used the punk scene as a place to expose, and fight patriarchy, Black women were often excluded. And maybe it was an “oversight,” but these things kept happening. It was as if the contributions of Black women were forgotten. This isn’t just a problem in punk music. Many music genres and cultural spaces from disco to rock are predominantly associated with white people despite the crucial role of Black musicians.

We can take rock music back to Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Chuck Berry, and most definitely Willie Mae “Big Mama” Thornton, who recorded the original “Hound Dog.” However, the song didn’t receive the recognition it deserved until Elvis Presley came along, and re-recorded it for white audiences (Diversity, Inc). Each of what Tharpe, Berry, and Thornton did laid the foundation for rock and roll as we know today, and honestly laid the perfect foundation of what punk today is...this unapologetic attitude of being yourself, and existing the way you are.

Luckily, Black women like Tamar-kali Brown, Simi Stone, Honeychild Coleman and Maya Glick changed the narrative and started the Sista Grrrl Riots in NYC in the 90’s. This was the place for Black women, and other Black punks to be themselves, be free, and to see the representation they were missing (Vice).

Black people have always existed in this genre. It’s just that everyone else has to catch up. And even a few decades later, this conversation is still alive and well. I have gone to many shows here in NYC over the past 10-12 years, including many punk shows. And maybe this isn’t shocking, but often I am the only Black girl in the crowd, or one of the few people of color in general. While I feel welcome in the scene, there needs to be more done to fully embrace Black, Indigenous and other people of color, and to let them know there is a space for them, and to fully include them in this genre they created. Diversity in music scenes shouldn’t just be a box that's “checked off,” it’s a necessity.

Now I am thankful for the work of organizations like Black Rock Coalition, who “represent a united front of musically and politically progressive Black artists and supporters” (BRC), and the Mad Collective, which is a POC punk collective focused on uplifting unheard voices in punk (Instagram). And, of course, the Sista Grrrl Riots, who put Black women at the forefront, instead of the shadows.

This is part of decolonizing the scene, and making it more inclusive and safer for all artists and listeners. And that’s something we should all be working towards in all the spaces we’re in, whether it’s a house show or a neighborhood. The issues with the lack of inclusion in music aren’t just in the Punk scene, but part of a broader issue. The question remains, will folks listen to the solutions and actually implement them?

Krystal McRae (she/her) is a writer from NYC. When she’s not checking out/writing about local music, she is yelling about diversity in the music scene on her site “Scenes From the Underground.”

Key Takeaways

Black people laid the foundation for not just rock, but much of the music genres we know today.
Punk is a sub-genre that is about being against the status quo, being unapologetic, and being yourself.
If we are to decolonize music, we have to include Black people in punk, and not forget their accomplishments.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/2/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/2/21

Protect abortion rights.

After the Supreme Court failed to block the legislation, Texas passed a law that essentially bans abortions after six weeks, which is in clear violation of Roe v. Wade. Known as Abortion providers in the state emphasized that the law, known as Senate Bill 8, will cause “at least 85%” of abortion patients to be unable to seek care. As a result, it’s likely that most abortion clinics will be forced to close (NYTimes). There has not been such a coordinated attack on abortion rights since the Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide in 1973 (Pew Trust).

TAKE ACTION

Donate to organizations protecting abortion rights in your state. Here is a way to support several in Texas.
Get educated on the current abortion restriction laws that may be introduced or passed recently in your state.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

These abortion laws affect everyone who seeks to get an abortion in Texas, and the precedent this law sets threatens the rights of people in other states, too. But in Texas and across the country, people of color are less likely to have access to abortions already. Burdened by the lack of abortion clinics, costs, and lack of representation of doctors, abortion access has already been inequitably distributed. Much of this is intentional, the result of laws limiting access to reproductive care since enslavement.

Before the Civil War, abortion and contraceptives were legal in the U.S. These were administered by midwives, which, at the time, were majority Black and Indigenous women. Their work was increasingly considered a threat to white male doctors who dominated many other fields of care. They found the notion of white babies being delivered by non-white midwives both threatening to their careers and distasteful in the lens of white supremacy (ACLU).

What followed was an intentional smear campaign that devalued the work of midwives, referring to their practice as “barbaric” and “uncivilized.” In addition, the white, male-led field started to lobby the government to place restrictions on the services they offered – including abortions – so they could monopolize what’s left. These rules, of course, limited abortions to those deemed Medical organizations, like the American Medical Association (AMA), barred women and Black people from membership from ensuring that they weren’t seen as qualified practitioners (ACLU). (this is despite the fact that the reproductive science we know today was often the result of inhumane scientific research carried out on their bodies). The disparities of perception on who deserves to carry and birth children also contributed to harmful legislation passed against non-white women during this time, particularly related to immigration.

The most damning part of the bill is that it places individuals, not the government, responsible for enforcing the rules. If you, an everyday citizen, think someone in Texas is trying to obtain an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, you can sue the prospective provider. If you win, you might even be compensated.

This is dangerous for a couple of reasons. From a legal perspective, it makes it very difficult to challenge this law in the courts. According to the NYTimes, “when a state passes an unconstitutional law, the typical way to challenge it is to seek an injunction against the state officer in charge of enforcing the law” (NYTimes). But because in this case, the people are the “state officers,” there’s no legal precedent for filing an injunction against them. Even if you could, it’s difficult to file an injunction against people that “could” sue an abortion provider before they already had. For example, I live in Texas, and although I’m technically granted this power, there’s no way I’d ever exercise it. It’s not easy to drag people like me into court, lumped in with all other citizens.

From a moral perspective, this draconian law places individuals as the prosecutors against people that can carry children. It’s absurd that individuals should have that much entitlement to any child-carrying person’s body – period. But it’s somehow more sinister than that. Private party enforcement has been used throughout history in various legislation but has a persistent presence in laws that disproportionately impact communities of color. Our policing system, for example, is rooted in the capture and torture of enslaved Black and Indigenous people and was supported by everyday white volunteers granted autonomy to enforce slavery laws (The Conversation). Redlining and other real estate tactics used to keep Black people out of adequate housing were enforced by private contracts for decades until deemed unconstitutional in Shelley v. Kraemer in 1948 (Anti-Racism Daily).

We already know that the abortion restriction laws disproportionately impact communities of color. According to the CDC, Black people in America are over three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white people (Refinery 29). The rise in anti-abortion sentiment is part of a broader culture war accelerated during the Trump administration. Laws like this one in Texas are being passed alongside laws that limit the rights of transgender youth, ban curriculum related to the racial inequities of our society, and make voting more difficult for marginalized communities (Pew Trust). This is a coordinated effort against the freedoms that everyone in our nation deserves. Take a moment today to support abortion rights groups in your area.

Key Takeaways

After the Supreme Court failed to block the legislation, Texas passed a law that essentially bans abortions after six weeks, which is in clear violation of Roe v. Wade.
The law is designed to be enforced by private citizens, who makes them responsible for reporting abortions and adds to a history of citizens acting as vigilantes.
Abortion access is influenced by racism and white supremacy.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 9/1/21 Nicole Cardoza 9/1/21

Repeal habitual offender statutes.

A petition to free Tameka Drummer has reached almost 300,000 signatures (Change). The Mississippi mother is serving a life sentence. Her crime? Possession of marijuana, stemming from a 2008 incident where her car was searched by police after she was pulled over for a missing license plate. Today, recreational cannabis is legal in nineteen states and the District of Columbia. Medical marijuana is legal in 37 states (Insider). “Tameka has been in prison since she was 34 years old.” She is now 46. “Her youngest child was 4 when she was arrested. In April, her child turned 16.” Unless this petition is successful, Drummer will live out her life in prison because of one time she had marijuana due to two prior convictions on her record and Mississippi’s harsh habitual offender laws (Filter Mag).

TAKE ACTION

Sign the petition to free Tameka Drummer, who was sentenced to life for marijuana possession under Mississippi habitual offender statutes.
Donate to FAMM, an organization working to reform habitual offender statutes in Mississippi.

GET EDUCATED

By Nia Norris (she/her)

Habitual offender laws, often known as “three strikes” laws, appeared in more than half of states during the 1990s. Under these laws, people convicted of two serious crimes face penalties ranging from a quarter century of incarceration to life in prison upon conviction of a third offense, no matter how minor (Equal Justice Initiative). In 2010, a Texas man named Larry Dayries was sentenced to 70 years in prison for stealing a sandwich under Texas’s habitual offender statute. The Whole Foods security guard who reported him posted on Facebook after Dayries’ sentencing: “Don’t mess with Whole Foods… 70 years is what you get when you fuck with us” (Texas Observer).

A group of current and former prosecutors gave another example of how habitual offender laws can work: “An 18-year old high school senior pushes a classmate down to steal his Michael Jordan $150 sneakers -- Strike One; he gets out of jail and shoplifts a jacket from the Bon Marche, pushing aside the clerk as he runs out of the store -- Strike Two; he gets out of jail, straightens out, and nine years later gets in a fight in a bar and intentionally hits someone, breaking his nose -- criminal behavior, to be sure, but hardly the crime of the century, yet it is Strike Three. He is sent to prison for the rest of his life" (ACLU).

Currently in Mississippi, more than half of the incarcerated women who are serving life sentences were convicted for drugs or another nonviolent crime. There are currently over 2,600 individuals serving life sentences under Mississippis’s habitual offender laws (Clarion Ledger). 75 percent of individuals who are sentenced under these laws are Black, although only 38 percent of the population of Mississippi is Black (The Appeal).

Drummer is not the only individual in Mississippi who is serving a life sentence for possession of marijuana, either. In May, the Mississippi Court of Appeals upheld Allen Russell’s 2019 life sentence for possession. The judge explicitly stated that Russell was not being sentenced for the possession, but for habitual offender (Associated Press).

Nationwide, the ACLU has found about a dozen state-level life sentences for marijuana possession, the majority of whom are Black (ACLU), though primarily white men and retailers profit from the legal cannabis industry. Acreage Holdings, one of the most successful cannabis companies, reported revenue of $12.9 million in the first quarter of 2019 (USA Today), while 54 individuals were sentenced by federal judges to life sentences for marijuana between 1996 and 2014 (Prison Insight).

Some state laws are finally changing. California had a similar reputation for excessively harsh sentences through habitual offender legislation and their “three strikes” law, but in 2012 passed Proposition 36 which changed the law to apply the “three strikes” law only in cases where the only in cases where the crime was “serious and violent” (Ballotpedia). Since Proposition 36, over 1000 incarcerated individuals in California have been released from prison. It is also important to note that the recidivism rate of individuals who were “propped out” under California law is significant lower than the state or national average (NAACP).

Missouri also changed their habitual offenders statute and allowed individuals sentenced to more than 30 years in prison to apply for parole after serving 20. Last year, Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Bernette Johnson said that Louisiana's habitual offender law was “largely designed to re-enslave African Americans.” Under a new law, 3,000 incarcerated people in Louisiana might receive parole (The Advocate).

Habitual offender statutes contribute to mass incarceration and must be revised. Allowing white-owned cannabis companies to reap record profits while individuals are still serving life sentences for cannabis is institutional racism that must be addressed.

Key Takeaways

Habitual offender statutes have contributed to the mass incarceration of Black Americans in the United States since their passage during the 1990s.
Mississippi has some of the toughest habitual offender statutes in the United States and has upheld these even recently.
White-owned cannabis companies are raking in millions of dollars while Black Americans continue to serve life sentences for marijuana possession.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 8/31/21 Nicole Cardoza 8/31/21

End anti-Asian stereotypes in media.

Marvel’s Shang-Chi and the Legend of Ten Rings opens this week, the first Marvel film to feature a predominantly Asian cast. When screenwriters scripted the movie, based on a 1970s comic book character, they went so far as to write a “physical list” of racist parts of the story “we were looking to destroy” (Inverse). This highlights the long history of anti-Asian stereotypes in American pop culture — depictions that carry through to the present day.

TAKE ACTION

Support PALMS, AYPAL, the Chinese Progressive Alliance, or a local Asian American group organizing for justice.
Support the Foundation for Asian American Independent Media and other Asian media initiatives.
Consider: How are people from your racial, ethnic, or cultural background portrayed in popular media? What about people from other communities? Do these depictions influence how you think about people from other backgrounds or yourself? How might they determine people’s safety, well-being, and access to resources and decision-making power? How can we modify, add to, support, or reject these depictions?

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

Marvel’s Shang-Chi and the Legend of Ten Rings opens this week, the first Marvel film to feature a predominantly Asian cast. When screenwriters scripted the movie, based on a 1970s comic book character, they went so far as to write a “physical list” of racist parts of the story “we were looking to destroy” (Inverse). This highlights the long history of anti-Asian stereotypes in American pop culture — depictions that carry through to the present day.

In the original comics, Shang-Chi’s father is Fu Manchu, an evil magician plotting to take over the West. According to a description written by the creator in a 1913 novel, Fu Manchu possesses “all the cruel cunning of an entire Eastern race, accumulated in one giant intellect, with all the resources of science past and present … Imagine that awful being, and you have a picture of Dr. Fu Manchu, the yellow peril incarnate in one man” (Inverse).

Yellow peril refers to the long-held white American fear that “Asians, in particular the Chinese, would invade their lands and disrupt Western values, such as democracy, Christianity, and technological innovation” (BGSU). The fear of the yellow peril presented by Asian people was borne out of labor competition between white and Chinese workers, eugenicist fears about “race-mixing,” and supposed “moral degeneracy” (Association for Asian Studies).

When such depictions are criticized, we’re often told that they were mere “products of their time.” This is always a bad-faith retort for two reasons. First is that Asian people, including Asian people in America, are not some sort of recent invention. We had been here for generations when the first Fu Manchu book was published, and it was as hateful in the early twentieth century as it is today. 1913 also saw the passage of the California Alien Land Law to ban Asian people in California from owning or leasing land (Immigration History). Anti-Asian beliefs fuel anti-Asian practices.

The second reason why the “product of their time” rebuttal falls short is that such stereotypes don’t suddenly disappear. Stereotypical depictions of Asian sex workers led some to make jokes mocking the deaths of six women in the Atlanta shootings (Variety). A 2013 General Motors ad called China “land of Fu Manchu” where people say “ching ching, chop suey” (SCMP). The myth of the yellow peril continues to this day. Today, nine out of ten Americans view China as “a threat” (Pew Research) though China is, in fact, the United States’ largest trading partner (Forbes). The American right crows about “kung flu” and the “China virus.” One in four Americans has seen someone blame Asian people for Covid-19 (USA Today). Eight out of ten Asian-Americans report that violence against us is increasing (Pew Research).

The fact is that Asian stereotypes — along with risks to Asian people — persist in the United States. In the words of Shang-Chi actor Simu Liu, “As a progressive Asian American man, I’ve always wanted to shatter barriers and expectations of what Asian men are and be very aware of the boxes that we’re put into — martial artists, sidekicks, exotic, or Orientalist… But I grew up watching Jet Li and Jackie Chan, and I remember the immense amount of pride that I felt watching them kick ass. I think Shang-Chi can absolutely be that for Asian Americans. It means that kids growing up today will have what we never did — the ability to watch the screen and to really feel seen” (Swift Headline).

Asian artists are dismantling stereotypes while Asian communities are organizing and standing in solidarity with other communities of color, as well. Groups around the country are organizing for health, disability, economic, and language justice.

The Black Power movement inspired student activists to coin the phrase and political category “Asian-American.” This wasn’t merely a demographic self-identifier, but a way to join diverse Asian immigrant movements together in a political struggle against white supremacy (Time).

A picture of Richard Aoki man holding a sign reading “Yellow Peril Supports Black Power” has been resonating with a new generation of activists (Huffington Post). It’s not a picture with an uncomplicated legacy, especially since Aoki — the only Asian American person in Party leadership — was revealed to be an FBI informant (NBC News). But building on a history of struggle, inter-racial solidarity, and deconstructing negative stereotypes and the violence they facilitate are all steps in creating a world where all of our communities have safety, power, and dignity.

Key Takeaways

The original Shang-Chi character was the son of Fu Manchu, one example of the idea of the yellow peril.
The yellow peril myth described Asian people as immoral foreign invaders.
Permutations of the yellow peril myth and other anti-Asian stereotypes persist to this day. Artists and organizations are working to build safety and community in the place of stereotypes and fear.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 8/30/21 Nicole Cardoza 8/30/21

Support unfairly targeted activists.

Last Friday, Shamar Betts received four years in federal prison for “inciting a riot” after George Floyd’s murder. He owes $1.5 million in restitution (News-Gazette). Black Lives Matter protests drew “aggressive federal prosecutions for crimes not usually in the purview of U.S. attorney’s offices.” Prosecutors demanded harsh sentences in an apparent effort to suppress anti-racist protestors who Attorney General Barr characterized as “domestic terrorists” (The Intercept).

TAKE ACTION

Support the Civil Liberties Defense Center’s crucial work defending activists from unjust prosecutions.
Sign this petition to support the release of still-incarcerated Ferguson protestor Joshua Williams.
Consider: who decides which types of protest and organizations are legitimate? How can we contribute to the movement for racial justice in the way we think is appropriate and effective without turning in those who might disagree? How might powerful institutions benefit from dividing “good” and “bad” protesters?

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

While charges began under Trump, “the Justice Department under Biden has continued many of these civil disorder and arson prosecutions.” “We’re not seeing a big change in the Biden administration with regard to the prosecutions of Black Lives Matter activists as compared with the previous administration,” said Lauren Regan of the Civil Liberties Defense Center. In the wake of January 6th, Democrats introduced a bill creating “domestic terrorism offices” in the FBI, Justice Department, and Homeland Security. Activists fear that they would eventually be used to target racial justice movements (The Intercept).

Biden promised to sign the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, but his administration sought harsh punishments for those arrested protesting the man’s death (NYTimes). How can the government reconcile with movements it represses?

Our piece on COINTELPRO explored how counterinsurgency efforts during the civil rights movement surveilled, imprisoned, and assassinated activists ranging from Muhammad Ali to Dr. Kin. Through COINTELPRO, the FBI worked with Chicago police to assassinate a sleeping Fred Hampton, chairman of the Illinois chapter Black Panther Party (Huff Post). Had he not been executed at the age of 21, today would be his 73rd birthday. According to the ACLU’s Nusrat Choudhury, “The FBI appears to be engaged in a modern-day version of COINTELPRO” (FAIR).

One side of counterinsurgency is repressing parts of a social movement through disruption and draconian punishments. The other side of counterinsurgency is fostering those parts of a movement easiest to contain. Both serve to divert movements of the most directly affected seeking change of an unjust system.

“Counterinsurgency theory places a heavy emphasis on shaping the social environment,” writes policing scholar Kristian Williams. “Police-led partnerships [sometimes use] progressive nonprofits to channel and control political opposition.” After protests against the murder of Oscar Grant, nonprofits collaborating with the police took the lead in pushing protestors off the street at marches and denouncing not the violence of police but unruly protester behavior (Interface). And while they were setting up Hampton’s assassination, the FBI fostered relationships with “cooperative” Black moderates “as a counterinsurgency measure against the militant Negro community” (FBI, pg. 35).

Last year, “the media played a crucial role pushing narratives about ‘outside agitators.’ From MSNBC host Joy Reid to progressive representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, these mysterious agitators were all of a sudden showing up everywhere that confrontational protests occurred” (Teen Vogue). Some held up Dr. King’s legacy to protect “peaceful protests” from “outside agitators,” though King himself wrote, “Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial ‘outside agitator’ idea” (University of Texas).

Political elites wish “to be able to present which protest is good or bad” to neutralize protests, said Lilith Sinclair, an Afro-Indigenous nonbinary organizer (OPB). That doesn’t mean we always agree with what everyone at a protest might say or do. It doesn’t mean everyone in the fight for justice is virtuous, that we should all set fire to fast food restaurants, or must applaud when it happens. It doesn’t mean police infiltration isn't a risk or that social movements can’t have good-faith debates about what is and is not appropriate. But when the police and government feel threatened by a movement for change, sowing division is a key tactic. We shouldn’t do that work for them.

If you want to stand in solidarity with racial justice movements, interrogate your instincts about policing which forms of protest are appropriate. If someone breaks a Target window after a police murder, ask yourself if you identify more with the store manager or with a young person of color who believes that this is the only way a racist system will hear them. The most boisterous protests of last year did not, unlike the police, murder anyone in cold blood or lock anyone in cages for decades. If we come together, despite our differences, we can resist counterinsurgency.

Key Takeaways

The Trump and Biden administrations have sought exceptionally harsh punishments against Black Lives Matter protesters.
Some protesters and organizations have taken to denouncing “bad” protesters, not police repression, as the chief problem facing the movement.
Supporting “good protesters” while persecuting “bad protesters” is a counterinsurgency strategy the government uses to disrupt social movements while maintaining its legitimacy and power.

RELATED ISSUES

7/6/2020 | Abolish qualified immunity.

6/30/2020 | Boycott as a form of protest.

6/22/2020 | Talk about our right to protest.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 8/27/21 Nicole Cardoza 8/27/21

March for voting rights.

Since the last election, states across the country have passed or attempted to pass harmful legislation limiting the people’s right to vote. In Texas, for example, Republicans aim to create stricter rules on mail ballots and prohibit 24-hour and drive-thru voting (AP News). In Georgia, absentee ballots have been significantly limited, mobile voting sites are essentially banned, and offering food or water to voters waiting in line now risks misdemeanor charges (N.Y. Times ). Consequently, civil rights activists have organized a mass mobilization in the spirit of the 1963 March on Washington, a historical event that transformed political engagement.

TAKE ACTION

Join an upcoming march near you using the map on the March On For Voting Rights website.
Urge your senators to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Donate one dollar a day to Give Us The Ballot (organizers of March On For Voting Rights) and fight voter suppression.
Follow us on Instagram to watch the march unfold in DC in real-time on Saturday.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her) and Tiffany Onyejiaka (she/her)

The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom officially began on August 28, 1963 (History). Over 200,000 demonstrators, predominantly Black Americans, descended on the nation’s capital to protest and pressure the Kennedy Administration into creating stronger civil rights protections and legacies during this era of legal segregation (Stanford). It’s important to stress the economic aspect of the demands of this march. Racial oppression and economic oppression have been symbiotic for decades, and many civil rights leaders have fought for equity for Black Americans on both fronts.

Dr. Martin Luther King ended this march with his world-famous “I Have a Dream” speech. However, many other notable civil rights activists also shared powerful words and visions with the crowd. These include Roy Wilkins of the NAACP, Whitney Young of the National Urban League, John Lewis of Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, and others (National Park Service). Despite the male dominance of the speakers, women such as Dorothy Height of the National Council of Negro Women played essential roles in the organization and execution of this momentous march (National Park Service).

This march did lead to some direct successes for the civil rights causes. President Kennedy and Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson met with civil rights leaders such as King shortly after the march (Stanford). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 reflect many of the demands discussed during the many speeches of the march.

However, this march did not end many of the afflictions affecting the ability of Black Americans to have equity in political or economic opportunities. Over 50 years later, many of the topics are echoed by 21st-century activists demanding freedom and economic justice for Black people today.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was reversed in the June 2013 ruling of Shelby County v. Holder. Since then, 24 states have implemented new restrictions on voting that make it especially difficult for marginalized communities to exercise their right to vote (Vox). Activists fought for HR 4, known as the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, to be re-introduced in Congress as an antidote for these manipulative practices. The bill would require jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination in voting to get clearance from the Justice Department before changing voting rules (CBS News). The bill passed in the House on Tuesday this week – but will need full support of Democrats and 10 Republicans to pass in the Senate. As of now, no Republicans in the House support it.

But even if this law does pass, we need to do more work to ensure that all of us have the right to vote. This has never been a one-time fix but a consistent and persistent march for justice – literally and figuratively.

Key Takeaways

Saturday, August 28 marks the anniversary of the The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, when 200,000+ demonstrators descended on the nation’s capital to protest and pressure the Kennedy Administration into creating stronger civil rights protections and legacies during this era of legal segregation.
In its honor, activists have organized a series of marches to protest the slew of state legislation implemented since the last election to limit individual's right to vote.
Throughout time, legislation limiting access to voting has made it especially difficult for marginalized communities to cast a ballot.

11/25/2020 | Question your understanding of "authentic" food.

7/22/2020 | Don't Americanize other cultures.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 8/26/21 Nicole Cardoza 8/26/21

Embrace the diversity of Indian food.

As the pandemic surges, diners and celebrities have drummed up support for BIPOC and immigrant restaurateurs. However, to revolutionize the industry we need more than one-off campaigns. Alongside policy to secure humane working conditions for workers, we need to reexamine our approach to “ethnic food”.

TAKE ACTION

Reflect: What are your expectations regarding Indian food and Indian restaurants?

Support restaurants that challenge your perceptions of the limits of Indian cuisine.
Advocate for the people who labor to put food on your plate, including but not limited to farmers, service workers, and BIPOC and immigrant restaurateurs.

GET EDUCATED

By Aarohi Narain (she/her)

As we wrote in a previous newsletter, it’s crucial to ask: which restaurants do we deem worthy of our dollars and why? And since seeking “authenticity” often disadvantages restaurateurs from immigrant backgrounds, what’s at stake when we appreciate the complex journey of the food on our plate?

Arriving in the United States as a privileged international student, I realized that I carried my own warped ideas about “authenticity” in the context of Indian food. Naive and self-righteous, the fare I encountered at Midwestern Indian restaurants struck me as simulacra– diluted, distorted imitations that bore little resemblance to the flavors and textures of my upbringing in New Delhi. But in coming to this conclusion, I had ignored the larger legacies of which I am a part.

Through a combination of the historical forces of Partition and the contemporary pressures on many immigrants to assimilate, diverse South Asians created the food most diners readily associate with Indian cuisine.

As Krishnendu Ray, Professor of Food Studies, writes in The Ethnic Restaurateur, more than half of nominally Indian restaurants just in New York City are operated by people from Bangladesh. Similarly, it has been estimated that 85-90 percent of Indian restaurants in Britain are run by Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Nepalese and more (South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies). Zooming in further, around 8 out of 10 curry house chefs in Britain hail specifically from the northeastern Bangladeshi region of Sylhet (The Guardian).

Sylhet is an unmatched, albeit underexplored, emblem of the Indian subcontinent’s violent and precarious intimacies. It’s also crucial to the story of how Indian food circulates.

A quick turn to history: in 1947 the Partition of India, the largest ever mass migration, ended almost two centuries of British rule. Britain not only extracted $45 trillion from India (Al Jazeera), but also knowingly fomented communal tensions through deploying the policy of divide and rule during its yoke. Eventually, the demand emerged for two separate nations to be carved out along religious lines: Muslim-majority Pakistan and Hindu-majority secular India (Vox).

A British lawyer who had never been to India drew the new borders. Sylhet, a district that was Bengali-speaking and skewed Muslim in the otherwise Hindu-majority province of Assam, became the subject of a referendum (BBC). Residents opted to join East Pakistan (Scroll). Then following Bangladesh’s Liberation War in 1971, Sylhet joined independent Bangladesh.

It was enterprising migrants primarily from Sylhet who disrupted the otherwise bland culinary order of Britain as its colonies collapsed. At curry houses, they invented the genre of nominally Indian cooking– spice-scaled post-pub curries to enliven the timid British palate– that continues to shape dominant perceptions of Indian food across the globe. Chicken tikka masala, the orange-hued poster child of Indian food once praised as a “true British national dish”, likely sprung from these kitchens (The Guardian).

Early waves of Indian restaurants in the United States espoused the curry house logic: menus typically featured the likes of chicken tikka masala and Anglicized stews, and later incorporated dishes drawn from Mughlai cooking like braises, kebabs, and grilled breads (The Juggernaut). This blended style became so central to the American awareness of Indian food that when many Bangladeshi immigrants arrived in the 1970s, they opened nominally Indian restaurants to cater to consumer interest. Instead of presenting food that reflected their heritage, they served versions of Indian food they assumed were already familiar and more approachable to most diners (The New York Times).

It’s only in the past decade or so that a small crop of restaurants has begun resisting the generalizing label of “Indian”. And because within India culinary styles are as deeply regional as they are molded by caste and class, chefs in the diaspora are creating more regionally specific offerings– expansive buffets unfurling as gastronomic maps of an imagined South Asia are giving way to Gujarati home cooking, Bengali street food, and Malabari coastal cuisine alike (NBC).

Still, most mainstream restaurants stick to the old formula: about 90% of Indian restaurants in New York City alone have not meaningfully moved away from it (The Juggernaut). Even as the diasporas mature, the “authentic” that Yelp reviewers demand remains static. Meanwhile, the people behind the food– with their interconnected yet distinct identities– swing wildly between invisibility and hypervisibility, becoming targets of hate crimes and racialized surveillance.

Perhaps, fifty years from now, there will be a course correction for Anglicized and Americanized iterations of Indian food– as we are seeing now for American Chinese food– that will view the culinary improvisations of those early Indian restaurants with more empathy. Instead of relying on fragile nation-states as the units of our analysis, perhaps convergence will become the norm when it comes to understanding what shapes cuisine.

Imagine a cartography of karak chai, spread out across migrant communities in the Gulf. A ghost story centered on dhal puri– split pea flatbread with chutneys sold as street food in the Caribbean– a dish first created by Bhojpuri-speaking indentured laborers that have somehow vanished from where it arose. A tender map tracing the journey between what restaurateurs might choose to savor at home– in moments of celebration– and what they serve to survive.

In the meantime, quitting chicken tikka masala is not the solution. It’s seeing how, as bell hooks writes, “ethnicity” is treated as spice: seasoning that livens up the dull dish of mainstream white culture under capitalism. It’s supporting immigrant restaurateurs even when they present something unfamiliar or a particular food you cherish but prepared differently from what you’re used to. It’s appreciating the complex journeys– the history, politics, and personal investments– of what’s on your plate.

Key Takeaways

The food that many diners reflexively associate with Indian cuisine was actually created by diverse South Asians.
A vast number of Indian restaurants in the United States and beyond are run by migrants who trace their ancestry to Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and others.
Partition spurred the largest forced migration in human history– an estimated 20 million Hindus, Sikhs, and Muslims were displaced (UNHCR).

11/23/2020 | Fight food insecurity.

7/22/2020 | Don't Americanize other cultures.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 8/25/21 Nicole Cardoza 8/25/21

Demand accessible legal representation.

Public defenders represent criminal defendants unable to hire a lawyer for themselves. They only exist because Clarence Gideon petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court from a prison cell. He had been forced to represent himself in court since his home state of Florida only provided free legal counsel for those facing the death penalty (C-Span). The Supreme Court agreed that this infringed on Gideon’s Sixth Amendment rights, ruling that “lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries” (Department of Justice) and creating a system offers legal representation to all those accused of a crime, regardless of their ability to pay (Georgia State University).

TAKE ACTION

Support the Legal Services Staff Association to demand fair working conditions at Legal Services NYC.
Follow and donate to Gideon’s Promise, a public defender organization that provides mentorship and training.
Donate to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s resignation became effective Tuesday (Statesman). Cuomo left office in disgrace after a damning report found Cuomo sexually harassed and created a hostile work environment for female employees. A number of district attorney offices in the state have already requested information, raising the possibility of criminal charges as well (ABC News).

We don’t know if charges will be filed, let alone the outcome of a potential trial. But we do know Cuomo would be able to afford world-class legal representation in court. Already a multimillionaire (Yahoo Finance), his $50,000 annual state pension is higher than the median per capita income of the state he governed (U.S. Census Bureau). Sadly, despite the promise of legal representation for all facing criminal charges, the resources afforded the accused vary widely depending on their wealth.

However, there remains a deep gulf between those forced to rely on a public defender and those who can afford a private lawyer. Even the Department of Justice declared that “the promise of Gideon remains unfulfilled… Many defenders struggle under excessive caseloads and lack adequate funding and independence, making it impossible for them to meet their legal and ethical obligations to represent their clients effectively” (Department of Justice). Because of a lack of public defenders, those accused can wait over a year in jail until an attorney is even appointed to them. Some defendants are unable to communicate with their defenders, who can only devote minimal time to each of their cases. In Washington State, this ends up being an hour for each defendant (Fordham) . Shuranda Williams, who saw her public defender only one time in a year while awaiting a trial in which she may be imprisoned for life, said, “At least if I got out, I could work and afford a decent lawyer” (Marshall Project). Governor Cuomo himself settled in a class-action lawsuit that alleged that New York “failed to provide adequate legal defense for the poor” (N.Y. Times). Over-policed and over-prosecuted populations like Black Americans “bear the brunt of our public defender systems’ underfunding and overwork.” This problem is pervasive since four out of five people accused of a felony are forced to rely on a public defender (The Guardian).

Overworked public defenders are correlated with increased conviction rates, longer sentences, and higher rates of wrongful convictions (Brennan Center). While private attorneys take as many cases as they please, public defenders are regularly tasked with hundreds of cases each year (Marshall Project). The average public defender is paid just $47,500 out of law school — $2,500 less than Gov. Cuomo’s pension (Fordham).

Being able to afford a private attorney is a deviation from the norm: dependence on an overworked, under-resourced public defense system. Those with wealth provide themselves a significantly higher level of legal protection than almost everyone else, especially those from exploited and marginalized communities. The declaration that all are entitled to legal representation in American courts was a significant decision, but if representation remains inadequate, that right becomes fiction.

Key Takeaways

The Supreme Court ruled that those who can’t afford a lawyer must get a public defender to represent them in a criminal case.
In reality, public defense is so under-resourced that in some cases, lawyers can only spend an hour on average looking at cases.
One people with felony charges who can afford a private attorney get significantly more protection than the four of five who can’t.

RELATED ISSUES

10/16/2020 | Abolish the grand jury.

5/27/2021 | Advocate for our right to trial.

ARCHIVES

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Related Issues

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

RELATED ISSUES

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

RELATED ISSUES

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

RELATED ISSUES