Reconsider theft.

What has shaped our collective understanding about theft? Who is disproportionately criminalized for stealing? Today’s newsletter compares shoplifting to institutionalized forms of theft.

TAKE ACTION

Encourage leaders to repeal civil forfeiture laws at the state and federal level.
Oppose “tough-on-crime” legislation which penalizes ordinary people instead of those who steal with impunity.
Start conversations around the idea of shoplifting using the information in this post. Consider: what has shaped our perception of theft?

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

After a spate of videos depicting brazen shoplifting from San Francisco stores, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law reintroducing the crime of “organized retail theft.” Under the new law, prosecutors are able to felony charges not only against the shoplifters themselves but anyone claimed to have “knowingly participated” in such thefts in any capacity (Long Beach Post).

Shoplifting isn’t ideal. But shoplifting is already heavily disincentivized, with police waiting outside grocery stores in poor neighborhoods and armed security guards stationed in pharmacies. We should question why so much surveillance and violence is aimed at people stealing diapers or candy bars when the largest sources of theft in this country are barely recognized.

There’s one kind of theft that rakes in billions of dollars each year in the United States. It’s not home burglaries, carjackings, or elaborate bank heists. It goes by an innocuous-sounding, legalistic name: civil forfeiture. And it’s not committed by dastardly criminals evading the law, but by American law enforcement itself.

“Civil forfeiture allows police to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime,” say civil liberties defenders. “Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government” (ACLU).

It seems incredulous that your local police department is allowed to take your home or car and sell it for profit without even charging you with a crime. But in 2014, the total value of property lost in burglaries was less than the $4.5 billion of property seized in civil forfeitures by federal law enforcement alone (Washington Post).

Pennsylvania State Police simply take cash from drivers’ cars. In one out of three cases, the driver isn’t even charged with a crime. “Legal experts say the practice is a form of ‘highway robbery,’” one that netted the department over half a million dollars between 2017 and 2020 (Spotlight PA). Police raided one Alabama computer repair shop and seized 130 computers, mostly belonging to customers. Though no criminal charges were ever filed, the police kept the computers (AL). One Indiana man faced a maximum penalty of $10,000 after selling a small amount of drugs to a police officer. But the police also took his Land Rover worth $42,000, though he purchased it with money from a life insurance policy. He took the case to the Supreme Court and won, though the court declined to ban the practice more broadly (MSN).

Street crimes like shoplifting and robbery are also dwarfed by white-collar crimes like embezzlement, stock manipulation, and fraud. According to the FBI, the total cost of all street crime is less than 2% of the cost of white-collar crime (Psychology Today). But the white-collar crimes of the rich are treated much more leniently than the street crimes of everyday people. Paul Manafort was sentenced to four years in prison for cheating the IRS out of millions of dollars. A defendant in a New York court received the same sentence for stealing $100 in quarters (BBC).

When it comes to working-class people and people of color, the American state harshly enforces the rule of law and demands respect for private property. But when the powerful flout the law to rob the poor, stern punishment in defense of high-minded ideals is nowhere to be found.

When politicians demand crackdowns on petty crimes, we might reflect on the wild leniency shown to the most powerful people in our society and the people supposedly there to enforce its laws. The laws of this country favor the rich (Mother Jones). But when the wealthy and powerful violate the rules already tilted in their favor, their punishments are minimal.

Theft from a multinational corporation isn’t like stealing from a neighbor’s pantry. If you steal food from a CVS, their employees often can’t be charged, though businesses steal millions of dollars every year from their own employees through wage theft (Eater). A shoplifted store won’t even see its profits drop, since businesses already buy insurance against theft (Shopify). The consequences of your action would be literally negligible.

Those most marginalized by American society are often those pushed into “survival crimes” like illegal sex work, drug sales, or petty theft to survive (Statesman). Giving such people a criminal record in fact makes it more likely that they will continue to be pushed into such endeavors in the future since they will be cut out of the formal labor market. The clerks and cashiers of pharmacy chains do lose money due to theft. This is not due to shoplifting but the corporate CEOs and investors who don’t pay workers the full value of their labor. We need to denounce punitive measures against marginalized people while the privileged rob and steal with ease.

Key Takeaways

The government of California is cracking down on shoplifting with legislation against “organized retail crime.”
Crimes like theft are dwarfed by both white-collar crimes and civil forfeiture, which allows police to legally steal the possessions of innocent people.
Civil forfeiture is largely legal and white-collar criminals receive lenient punishment while those committing petty theft are overpoliced and criminalized.

Nicole Cardoza 7/26/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/26/21

Record the police.

But if you see police harming or even just detaining another person, staying to record a video could be the difference between life and death. Much police brutality happens because cops think they can get away with it: it is out of the public eye or they know that the victim and witnesses will not be believed. Though the tragic deaths on camera of people like George Floyd show that this is not a silver bullet, the knowledge that they are being filmed can dramatically change police officers’ behavior.

TAKE ACTION

Learn how to copwatch and what rights you have when stopped by the police.
Support copwatching groups like those in Berkeley, L.A., Athens County, Gainesville, San Diego, and New York City or start copwatching patrols in your own community.
Learn how the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense started by copwatching in Oakland, California.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

On the 11th of this month, the Pulitzer Board awarded a special citation alongside its prestigious awards for outstanding journalism. This citation went to Darnella Frazier, the 17-year old outside Minneapolis’s Cup Foods last year who recorded police officers murdering George Floyd. While police were attacking a stranger, she could have turned away. Instead, she took a video that sparked global resistance.

It is appalling that some demand graphic video proof before they acknowledge the existence of police brutality or that others watch and share videos like “digital souvenirs of violence” to consume without thought or responsibility (Anti-Racism Daily). Frazier was not aspiring to become a citizen-journalist the day she had a horrifyingly “traumatic, life-changing experience,” and special citations do not heal trauma or raise the dead (NPR). The goal isn’t to produce more videos of state-sanctioned murder. The goal must be to dismantle a system that enacts such atrocities.

So long as you and the police officer are in public space, and you cannot be construed as obstructing them, filming the police is entirely legal. “Taking photographs and video of things that are plainly visible is a constitutional right,” according to the ACLU. “And that includes police and other government officials carrying out their duties” (ACLU).

There are groups devoted to filming the police to prevent police brutality – also known as copwatching – all across the nation. If one doesn’t exist in your neighborhood, you can form a copwatch group of your own. These organizations, which are often not nonprofits but instead grassroots collectives, provide training and go on patrols to interrupt police violence by recording.

You also might witness a police interaction while going about your daily life. It’s recommended that you keep your distance, that you have other people with you if possible, and that you keep your camera pointed at the police officers, not the person being detained. You should upload the video as soon as possible so the police can’t delete it off your phone. In the event that the police stop you, you should never answer any questions, as is your constitutional right, and refuse to unlock your phone with them unless they come back with a warrant (The Nation).

It’s best to copwatch with other people and familiarize yourself with your basic legal rights to ensure you’re as safe as possible, ideally as part of an organization. But sometimes we come across situations in less than optimal circumstances. It’s important to reflect that something as simple as stopping and taking your phone out could be the difference between an inconvenience and an atrocity in someone else’s life.

As Portland’s Rosehip Street Medics say in their trainings, “the number one weapon of the police is fear” (Seattle Weekly). In the face of this fear, it takes courage to do something as simple as recording the actions of people who claim to be our public servants. It takes courage to stay and bear witness when a cop tells you to get lost, it takes courage to exercise your Fifth Amendment right to not answer questions, and it is always much easier to walk away. But copwatching is a simple – and legal – act that might stop brutality before it happens. Once we break through this fear, we can keep each other safe.

Key Takeaways

Filming the police, also known as copwatching, can ensure they do not brutalize the people they’ve stopped.
Copwatching is constitutionally protected and therefore legal in all 50 states.
There are copwatching organizations across the country and resources available so people can record the police in as safe a way as possible.

Nicole Cardoza 7/23/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/23/21

Rethink the space race.

Earlier this week, Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, embarked on a ten-minute ride through space (CNN). I’m sure you already heard about it – it seems like everyone can’t stop talking about it (ourselves included, guilty)! One reporter noted that the time that the media spent covering Bezos’ space flight over the past few weeks is almost as much time as they spent covering the climate crisis throughout all of 2020 (Truthout).

TAKE ACTION

Learn more about the traumatic impact of colonization.
Support efforts of Amazon employees to unionize and advocate for fair waves and safe working conditions.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

Naturally, this publicity stunt drew swift criticism, admonishing a billionaire for a frivolous ride through space while ignoring the threats we face on Earth. From the fast-spreading Delta variant to rising temperatures, rent increases and ending unemployment benefits, and fires on land and sea, it’s clear why some people are asking, at minimum, for billionaires to “read the room.” Here’s our take on TikTok >

The enthusiasm of conversations about the event has misconstrued some of the facts. Bezos has invested a significant amount into addressing issues today, including $10B to the environment and $100M to poverty (Quartz). Bezos also announced two $100 million grants to two individuals he believes are changing the world upon his return from the flight. However, this pales compared to the $10B invested into Blue Origin to date (Quartz). It also ignores the ongoing impact that a major corporation like Amazon has on our long-term wellbeing (Wired). And some of these contributions, particularly those announced upon his return from space, feel performative at best (CNN).

But if we reflect on our history, this isn’t the first time that wealthy white men have used their power to colonize new frontiers. And each time, there’s always someone that pays the cost. Throughout history, the colonization of “new” frontiers disregarded the safety and wellbeing of both those that inhabited it and those bearing the brunt of the labor. Remember that these lands were “new” to some and “Indigenous” to many others). Even the infrastructure it’s taken to colonize this nation, from the Transcontinental Railroad to modern-day highways, has only happened at the hands of low-wage and enslaved laboring working in unsafe conditions – and only after the displacement of Indigenous and lower-income communities. This is still happening today, and these same communities are still reeling from its generational impact. Read more about the generational trauma of colonization.

Ironically, Bezos was sure to “thank” Amazon employees for making it financially possible for him to travel to space and invest in Blue Origin (CNN). But many of these same employees – blue color workers that are often people of color – have waged a battle for fair wages, workplace safety, and the right to unionize (PBS). Their struggles mirror some of the same challenges that those impacted faced decades before. And their stories have received disproportionately less coverage than this space flight.

And what is this rush to space for? Bezos believes we should send all our pollution-generated industries into space to minimize its impact on Earth (Fast Company). But how does that address the environmental impact of our time here? How does that protect this planet from harm? And in its wake, what communities will be further disenfranchised as a result?

Nevertheless, some are excited about what privatized space travel means for us. This is partially because our society has had an overall positive view of space exploration. 72% of Americans consider it “essential” for the U.S. to continue to be a world leader in exploring space (Pew Research). Much of this was fostered by the space race after World War II, where the strength of our democracy was defined by its technological innovations against the communist Soviet Union (History). Also, in this time of heightened uncertainty, it might feel inspiring and escapist to watch someone leave it all behind, if only for a few minutes.

But this space race, led by private organizations, is different. This time around, it feels like a flex of individual wealth and privilege than a collective pursuit for greatness—more on this in The Conversation. The same study indicated that, in contrast, only 33% believe that “private companies will ensure that enough progress is made in space exploration, even without NASA’s involvement” (Pew Research). Historically, funding, research, and development from privatized corporations have contributed to the NASA program. However, the work of Bezos and Branson hasn’t made lasting contributions to their work – yet.

How can we as consumers respond? The answer isn’t straightforward (unless you, too, are planning to fire up your rocket engines in the weeks ahead. I advise against). We can first cultivate more awareness of who’s harmed when we push for technological innovation. We can align our purchasing habits with brands that foster what we envision for our collective futures. And we can continue to demand representation and equity for those most marginalized in our own communities. Some call space the final frontier. But if it’s the last space we have for our survival, we should be more critical of how we make this journey.

Key Takeaways

Earlier this week, Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, embarked on a ten-minute ride through space (CNN).
Throughout history, the colonization of “new” frontiers disregarded the safety and wellbeing of both those that inhabited it and those bearing the brunt of the labor.
As consumers, we can advocate and support the individuals and organizations that use their wealth for the future we envision.

Nicole Cardoza 7/22/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/22/21

Dismantle racial gatekeeping.

Bird-watching isn’t “about” race. A white friend group, book club, or startup probably isn’t “about” race, either. But if a social group or organization is overwhelmingly white, there’s likely to be an element of racial exclusion, even if unconscious or unintended. Bringing conversations about race into majority-white spaces isn’t a distraction because majority-white spaces are already “about” race.

TAKE ACTION

Actively dismantle racial gatekeeping in social networks, organizations, and workplaces through advocacy and tough conversations.
Understand how gatekeeping perpetuates racial inequality.
Consider: What can you do with your privilege/power to foster inclusion in the communities for the hobbies that matter most to you?

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

The last year saw widely-publicized police murders, openly white supremacist militias, and widespread protests. The rebellions of 2020 were the largest protest movement in U.S. history (NYTimes). Mass movements compel people to pick sides, even those who never held a picket sign. This means there have been heated conversations about race and racism in unexpected places.

In June 2020, birder Christian Cooper asked a woman to leash her dog in an area of Central Park with songbirds. In response, she told police “there’s an African-American man threatening my life,” all on camera (YouTube). Black birders and ornithologists often feel suspicion from white nature-goers. One graduate student recounted efforts “to appear as least threatening as possible” to each white person he encounters in the field. Now, predominantly white birding organizations are making initial steps towards diversity and renaming birds named after white supremacists. “American birders have their own racial reckoning,” read the news (Washington Post).

Racial reckoning came for the knitters as well. Knitting entrepreneur Karen Templer apologized for comparing an upcoming trip to India to “colonizing Mars” (Fringe Association). The ensuing conversation gave people of color room to address racism in the knitting community, but not everyone was ready. The backlash, said Sukrita Maho, was “usually from white people who don’t understand why we’re ‘making it about race’” (Vox).

Some will object that their groups are exclusively Caucasian by chance. “It’s not their fault that people of color don’t want to knit, bird, work, or hang out with them!”

It’s true: people of color generally aren’t itching to spend time with white people who’d rather not spend time with them. The problem is when majority-white groups function as gatekeepers, cutting off opportunities for others.

For instance, people often learn to bird through birding organizations, and city-dwellers find birds in urban parks. If you’re racially profiled at the park and get weird looks at the meetings of the birding society, your new hobby may become unworkable.

This holds for employment as well. 70% of white people’s jobs are acquired through friends or family members. Informal networks of white people “hoard and distribute advantage among their family and friends, who tend to be mostly white” (The Atlantic). The result? Black college graduate unemployment rates are more than twice that of other graduates. Similarly, white trade school students receive job leads from white instructors, ensuring fewer Black students finding steady employment in their field (Work in Progress).

Three-quarters of white people only have white friends (Washington Post). Since most jobs are acquired through word-of-mouth, all-white social networks reproduce workplace racial exclusion. Fields from firefighting to ornithology to construction are almost entirely colonized and gatekept by white social networks (American Sociological Association).

If you find yourself in such spaces, the solution is not to recruit a token “diverse” member (Health, The Root). Tokenism is just another form of racism, since white supremacy already reduces people of color to our race or ethnicity. If you suspect you’re the token in your friend circle or club, it’s time to make new friends (Madame Noire).

Instead, use your privilege to confront your peers’ racist beliefs or practices, especially when it’s uncomfortable or hard. If you think a hypothetical new member, coworker, or acquaintance of color would be tokenized, excluded, or put under suspicion, you have a responsibility to confront these attitudes now. You can put yourself in spaces where it’s you who are the minority, though only if you are able to do so with humility, self-awareness, and respect. If it makes sense, encourage your workplace to hire through open and actively anti-racist recruitment, not just word-of-mouth (Talent Beyond Boundaries, CNBC, Recruiter).

As an Asian man, I know I will receive some opportunities others will not based purely on my race. I know that other opportunities will be closed off to me for the same reason, whether leads on apartments, favorable mentions to hiring managers, or invitations to social events. I know that this may influence my life outcomes, earnings, living conditions, and health even more than explicitly racist organizations or policies. And I know these represent a key way that racial hierarchies in the United States reproduce themselves generation after generation. Believing in anti-racism is simply not enough. We need to dismantle racial gatekeeping.

Key Takeaways

Mostly white hobbies like birding and knitting have experienced “racial reckonings” in the past year.
Though discussion of racism may be new in certain spaces, racially segregated networks, organizations, workplaces, and social circles are already “about race.”
Predominantly white social and professional networks play a key role in maintaining racial inequality.

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

Stop “wokewashing.”

The CIA and Nike ads are part of a wave of campaigns lining up behind social justice initiatives. We might look at this as evidence of success. If a multinational company speaks out in defense of Black people organizing, and the U.S. foreign intelligence agency promotes diversity in career advancement, maybe it’s a sign that social justice initiatives are winning — or have already won.

Happy Wednesday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily. Corporations pledged billions to racial equity initiatives, but most of that money hasn't been seen. But there are many other ways to feign solidarity for the sake of profit. Today's newsletter unpacks the concept of "wokewashing" and how marketing campaigns may cover more insidious actions.

This daily, free, independent newsletter is fully funded by contributions from our readers. Consider making a monthly or annual donation to join in, or give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza).

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Don’t accept progressive statements from powerful institutions at face value. Look at their present and historical practices within marginalized communities.
Ask yourself: is social justice language being used to help create the conditions for social justice? Or instead, is it being used as a substitute for real change?
Look beyond the rhetoric to support sweatshop workers and oppose American abuses abroad.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

This spring, one American employer posted a recruitment ad brimming with social justice sentiments narrated over swelling string music. A Latina mother talks of hee pride in having ascended the ranks of her organization. “I am a woman of color. I am a mom. I am a cisgender millennial woman who has been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. I am intersectional, but my existence is not a box-checking exercise,” she tells us. We watch her stride the halls of her workplace with a shirt reading “Mija, you are worth it” underneath a feminist icon with a raised fist.

“I am a proud first-generation Latina,” she says, “and an officer at CIA” (YouTube).

A different ad from last year opens with plain white text on a black background. “Don’t pretend there’s not a problem in America. Don’t turn your back on racism,” it reads. “Don’t accept innocent lives being taken from us.” Plaintive piano music plays.

“Don’t think you can’t be part of the change. Let’s all be part of the change.” The video, produced by Nike, ends with its iconic swoosh (YouTube).

We should consider analyzing what’s going on beneath these inspiring words. As more and more institutions proffer social justice-inflected statements, many have been accused of “wokewashing,” or “cynically cashing in on people’s idealism and using progressive-orienting marketing campaigns to deflect questions about their own ethical records” (The Guardian). Read Nicole’s articles about the (mis)use of “woke” and pitfalls of corporate accountability statements.

We need to see if an institution’s actions match their rhetoric. Nike directs us to stand up for racial justice, even offering Colin Kaepernick a platform (Huff Post). But the company is infamous for subcontractors who pay poverty wages for work in horrifying conditions. Women making Nike sneakers in Vietnam regularly coughed up blood and fainted on the factory floor from heat and exhaustion (NY Times). An Indonesian union organizer was hospitalized after paid assailants attacked with machetes (Clean Clothes Campaign). Nike’s domestic support of racial justice is part of an effort to rehabilitate its image and increase its profits. According to one report, “the Nike brand is arguably stronger, thanks in no small part to the company being out in front in supporting Black Lives Matter” (Marketplace).

We should also doubt the CIA’s anti-oppression credentials. A decade after planning the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion to overthrow the Cuban government (History), the CIA was involved with the horrific bombing of a Cuban civilian airplane that killed all 73 passengers on board (Daily Mail). They trained paramilitary death squads from Vietnam (Counterpunch) to Afghanistan (The Intercept), including one group that blew up dozens of civilians in a Lebanon car bombing (N.Y. Times). In the modern-day, the CIA runs documented torture programs out of secret prisons (N.Y. Times). As part of the ongoing “War on Terror,” CIA agents have sexually violated prisoners, threatened to rape and murder their family members, intimidated them with power drills, and dumped freezing water on them as they were shackled to walls naked (U.S. Senate). These aren’t the actions of an intersectional feminist organization. But by portraying itself as progressive, the CIA can both facilitate recruitment of new hires as well as defuse liberal outrage and opposition to their actions, some of which are truly appalling.

Groups like Nike and the CIA wouldn’t even bother manufacturing “progressive” ads had it not been for decades of struggle from the racial and immigrant justice, feminist, and labor movements. The fact that they make the effort to pander to justice-minded people shows that organizing and advocacy and struggle works. The fact that they continue perpetrating abuses proves that we need to grow these movements even more. Wokewashed hypocrisy isn’t a reason to rest on our laurels. It’s motivation to support people-powered efforts to actually create an equitable world, a world in which liberal ads can’t distract from American sweatshops, secret prisons, and torture chambers because such things no longer exist.

Key Takeaways

In the past year, institutions like Nike and the CIA have put out pro-racial justice ads.
We need to investigate the practices and policies behind lofty rhetoric.
Nike and the CIA both use racial justice language for their own benefit while committing incredible harm to communities of color around the world.

RELATED ISSUES

6/3/2021 | Stop rainbow-washing.

3/26/2021 | Learn the definition of "woke.”

3/3/2021 | Know the difference between canceled and accountability.

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 7/20/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/20/21

Support community-based research.

Research about issues hurting marginalized communities has skyrocketed. However, this has not decreased inequality. Extractive research studies marginalized communities without involving or helping them. It runs rampant in American research institutions.

Good morning and welcome back! As society reckons with racial inequities, resources are flowing to conduct research studies to implement new policies and practices. Sometimes, these practices can do more harm than good – exploiting marginalized communities and gatekeeping access to direct support. Tiffany shares more in today's newsletter.

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is fully funded by contributions from our readers. Make a monthly or annual donation to join in, or give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza).

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Support community-based research projects such as the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project and organizations that use community-based research like the Coalition on Homelessness, Our Data Bodies, Causa Justa, and Dignity and Power Now.
Whether you’re a student, parent, employee, or neighbor, challenge academic institutions to employ community-based research.
When assessing academic “solutions” to problems in oppressed communities, consider: Were those being studied involved in research design, implementation, and analysis? Will they be empowered or further marginalized by the proposals? Were community members already articulating their problems, needs, and desires? Did problems stem from a lack of research or an imbalance of power and resources?

GET EDUCATED

By Tiffany Onyejiaka (she/her)

Researchers in the U.S. have long exploited marginalized communities. Colonial doctors experimented on enslaved Africans (JSTOR). Medical researchers used Puerto Rican women as guinea pigs for the first birth control trials, murdering some in the process (History). Some still deny racism by citing Daniel Moynihan, a sociologist, and Harvard professor, who believed the rise of single-mother households fundamentally caused Black poverty (The Atlantic).

Exploitative research extracts knowledge from oppressed communities without providing empowerment and resources. It views marginalized communities as objects to be studied and academics as the ones who establish the truth and decide the right solutions.

Many researchers do not come from or live in the communities they study. A 2011 NIH study revealed that of the principal investigators awarded R01 grant funding for research, 1.2% reported as Black, 3.4% reported as Latino, and less than 0.2% reported as Native (NIH). Only 11% of students from low-income families obtain a bachelor's degree, so very few researchers come from low-income communities (Ed Trust).

Health studies pinpointing health disparities without focus on solutions is a rising issue. “The inordinate focus on identifying rather than eliminating disparities in health sciences research comes from the top, from what research questions receive NIH [National Institutes of Health] funding and which researchers’ careers are supported,” Dr. Rhea Boyd M.D, a pediatrician and public health advocate, told Anti-Racism Daily.

Aminata Kouyate, a medical student at UCSF, stated, “My professor calls it the Health Disparities Industrial Complex. People are really out here making whole careers reporting on us dying but doing nothing to change that” (Twitter).

Community members are rarely involved in the design or execution of research projects. Many do not see study results because most academic research gets published in journals with subscriptions costing hundreds to thousands of dollars (Vox).

“When researchers do not share the findings with the community who provided the data or samples, they disable the community from making important interventions and from benefitting more generally from the evidence that results from their contributions,” Boyd explained.

Some research focuses on identifying issues that marginalized communities have discussed for years. When the biggest benefit to said communities would be sharing resources and skillsets to find and implement solutions.

In 2019, tech billionaire Marc Benioff donated $30 million to research houselessness (CNN). Houselessness isn’t exactly a new problem. Unhoused communities and advocates have expressed for years that escalating housing prices drive much of the crisis in the Bay Area (48 Hills, Teen Vogue). In 2019, SF had an estimated 8,035 unhoused people and 38,651 empty home units - when the median monthly income for a one-bedroom was $3,690.(CBS Bay Area, SF, SF). That multi-million dollar gift could have housed every SF unhoused person for one year. Engaging with community organizations would have likely shown that the best help would have been to provide a direct housing benefit to the folks sleeping on the streets and in their cars.

San Francisco’s Coalition on Homelessness produced a report called “Stop the Revolving Door” which offers recommendations on how to address houselnessness. This report was produced using a methodology called Community-Based Participatory Action Research, which means community members – in this case, unhoused people in San Francisco – were involved in every step of the process from designing the survey to working as researchers. They created the most comprehensive report on houselessness ever conducted in the city (Coalition on Homelessness). While working on community-based research, the Coalition organizes alongside unhoused people on community priorities like housing subsidies and limiting police power to actively help fight against houselessness (Coalition on Homelessness).

Why do so many respected institutions still do predatory research? It has rewards. Academics and students build resumes and advance careers. Universities get grants. Charitable foundations can celebrate their “impact.” Rich donors get recognized as generous philanthropists. Everyone wins - except the folks from disadvantaged communities that remain afflicted.

Research can only help uplift disempowered people if researchers include community members as active subjects and engage them from a place of genuine respect and concern. Community-based research has to become the standard.

“Rather than a one-way process where researchers take data and stories out of the community to serve their own career interests, researchers should partner with communities to ask and answer questions that are of interest and benefit to communities members - remembering to return with the findings so the community can also start to elaborate their own solutions or implement their own interventions, based on the findings,” Boyd added.

Researchers should aim to genuinely want to improve lives, not simply get publications. Academia must grow humility along with its body of work.

Key Takeaways

A lot of research on high-risk communities is extractive instead of actively helping or uplifting these communities.
Many members of disadvantaged communities are not included in the research design, do not have access to research publications, and often do not get benefits from their participation.
Most researchers do not come from or have strong ties to the marginalized communities they study.
Community-based research models engage community members the most and help to empower their communities instead.

2/28/2021 | Learn from public syllabi.

8/17/2020 | Fight for equity in remote learning.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/19/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/19/21

Confront the weaponization of white women tears.

There’s a trend on Tiktok where women – mainly white women – record themselves crying, then changing their expression to a smirk, showing how quickly they can fake their tears. More on this trend in Nylon. These videos are being condemned for demonstrating a very real and dangerous history of white women using their emotions to vilify Black people and other people of color.

Happy Monday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily! Over the past year, my social media algorithms have ultimately attuned themselves to all things racial equity. So I shouldn't have been surprised when two videos mentioned below appeared in my feed back-to-back. It made me remember how much of our history has been shaped by the weaponization of white women tears, and how we need to not just acknowledge it, but dismantle it.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Read “White Tears/Brown Scars: How White Feminism Betrays Women of Color” by Ruby Hamad.
Support #JusticeForEmmettTill and sign the petition to bring closure to the Emmett Till murder case.
Read our recommendations for recirculating videos of racial violence on social media.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

There’s a trend on Tiktok where women – mainly white women – record themselves crying, then changing their expression to a smirk, showing how quickly they can fake their tears. More on this trend in Nylon. These videos are being condemned for demonstrating a very real and dangerous history of white women using their emotions to vilify Black people and other people of color.

Consider another video also trending on Tiktok. This one is real: a woman is caught on camera physically attacking a Black Muslim woman in a store, only to break down crying, accusing the victim of attacking her. In the minutes that follow, the woman cries and screams, “get away from me,” while running towards the Black woman, who continues to back away (Complex).

This is just one of many recent examples of this practice, though. Amy Cooper called the police on a Black man who simply asked her to leash her dog, stating that he was “threatening her life” (NYTimes). A Starbucks employee called the cops on two Black men for “trespassing” while waiting for a friend (NBC News). Frustrated that the police didn’t come sooner, a white woman expressed she was scared by Black men barbecuing in the park (Newsweek).

But this practice is responsible for some of the most well-known injustices in our history. The Tulsa Race Massacre was sparked after Dick Rowland, an African American shoe shiner, accidentally stepped on the toe of Sarah Page, a white elevator, causing her to scream (OK History). And Emmett Till was just 14-years-old when he was brutally lynched in August 1955. Till was attacked because 21-year-old Carolyn Bryant, a white woman, accused him of making advances on her when he entered her family’s store to buy 2-cent bubble gum. The two men responsible – her husband and his half-brother – were acquitted (PBS). But in 2007, Bryant Donham (since remarried) confessed that she fabricated that part of her testimony (Vanity Fair). Despite this, Bryant Donham, who is still alive today, has not been charged with her complicity in the murder. Emmett Till’s birthday is July 25. He would be turning 80 years old. Learn more about the official foundation’s efforts to demand justice.

How did we get here? According to Wendy Brown in her book States of Injury, this stems from a practice that progressive moments have often centered the perspective of “wounded identities” (Princeton). Even though there are many wounded identities worth listening to in our society, the marginalization that white women experience – the “damsel in distress” narrative – is prioritized in our white supremacist culture. It’s also often weaponized by white men to justify racial discrimination (consider our article on pools from last week) (NYTimes). Some white women may use it unconsciously, familiar with the privilege of having their emotions come before another’s. But, as in the examples noted above, it’s often used intentionally to minimize accountability, deflect blame, or worse, inflict harm in scenarios where they know their whiteness grants them superiority. Ironically, it’s often used by the same people that will denounce acts of racism, unable – or perhaps unwilling – to see how power and privilege play in these situations. Ruby Hamad’s book, “White Tears/Brown Scars: How White Feminism Betrays Women of Color,” is a comprehensive resource to dive further.

Today, this violence is codified in the racial bias of algorithms and content moderators on social media platforms today. White women tears trended last month on Tiktok as the platform was banning content with terms “pro-Black”, “Black Lives Matter”, “Black success” and “Black people” (NME). Videos of violent encounters go viral across social media, but rarely do posts outlining the importance of acknowledging white fragility or dismantling white feminism. Although trending videos drive awareness, they continue to reiterate who is centered in the broader narrative around racism and systemic oppression. And in the process, they trigger those most impacted by this harm.

Remember that for every video that trends, there are dozens more of these scenarios happening offline - perhaps in your workplace, park, or local coffee shop. It shouldn’t take a victim to record the violent incident for them to be believed. Consider: how can you prioritize the needs of those experiencing harm? How can you be an active bystander for someone experiencing this type of attack? And how can you use your power and privilege to change this narrative? The TikTok trend may have started innocuously, but this practice is guilty of harming too many people of color. And until we dismantle it, our work to create a more equitable future will continue to get washed away.

Key Takeaways

A trend on Tiktok encouraging users to post videos of themselves fake crying has reignited conversations on how white women tears have been weaponized against communities of color.
Some of the significant historical injustices against Black people that we know of have been started by weaponized white women tears.
When white women weaponize their emotions to cause harm against people of color, they perpetuate the same systemic oppression they often claim to oppose.

RELATED ISSUES

5/21/2021 | Understand whiteness.

4/6/2021 | Unpack white feminism.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/16/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/16/21

Honor Nelson Mandela.

In November 2009, the South African government and U.N. General Assembly declared July 18th Nelson Mandela International Day. This celebration recognizes the former president’s remarkable commitment to human rights, conflict resolution, and reconciliation in the face of unimaginable racist oppression. The annual celebration is a global call to action (SAGOV).

Good morning and happy Friday! This Sunday is Nelson Mandela Day. Take time to reflect on his commitment to revolution, service and community, and learn how he transformed South Africa (which is currently grappling with its worst unrest in decades).

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Donate to the Nelson Mandela Foundation.
Read Nelson Mandela’s memoir, Long Walk to Freedom.
Celebrate Nelson Mandela International Day every July 18th by giving back to your community. Here are some suggestions.

GET EDUCATED

By Kholiswa Mendes-Pepani (she/her)

Rolihlahla Mandela was born on July 18th, 1918 on the eastern coast of South Africa. Under different circumstances, Rolihlahla Mandela, son of a chief, would have been groomed to steward the land of his people. But under colonial rule, he watched his family, country, and identity be stripped of dignity and self-ownership for the benefit of white supremacist ideals (Long Walk To Freedom). From his first day of school, Mandela was given an English name and taught to regard his African heritage as inferior to British culture and education. Baptized into white supremacy as Nelson, Mandela strode forth bound by a mercilessly oppressive state and answering to someone else’s name (Long Walk To Freedom).

When the white National Party institutionalized the system of segregation known as apartheid in 1948, Black South Africans had already been living under oppression for centuries. Apartheid segregated geographic living spaces, required people of color to carry an identification pass, banned interracial marriages and friendships, allowed the government to declare stringent states of emergency, and increased penalties for protesting against apartheid or supporting the repeal of the law (Nations Online, SUNY).

Black opposition groups grew in response. As a human rights lawyer and a senior member of the African National Congress (ANC), Mr. Mandela led mass noncompliance movements against the racist laws, including co-founding the armed resistance group known as uMkhonto we Sizwe after the ANC was banned in 1960 (Nobel Prize). Members of resistance groups were tracked down, arrested, tortured, and charged with treason, the punishment for which was hanging or life imprisonment. During one of these raids, Nelson Mandela was captured and put on trial. He was convicted of sabotage and treason and sentenced to life in prison (Nations Online).

During his 27-year incarceration, Mr. Mandela became a symbol for the anti-apartheid movement. As tensions within the country grew increasingly violent and bloody, the white government consistently attempted to use Mr. Mandela to suppress the resistance. He refused to compromise his political position to obtain his freedom (Nobel Prize).

As Black liberation movements defeated colonial oppression across Africa, international support for the anti-apartheid movement took the shape of boycotts, sanctions, and mass protests against the government of South Africa. In the U.S., Martin Luther King had encouraged action against the regime before his murder, and through the 80s, student activists across the country pressured Congress to sanction apartheid South Africa (Michigan U). Against the backdrop of the Cold War, progress was slow. Western countries feared that Black liberation movements with communist ideals would work against American interests. In 1986, President Reagan denounced “calculated terror by elements of the African National Congress… creating the conditions for racial war” and in 1988, the U.S. put the ANC and Nelson Mandela on a terrorist watchlist where they remained until 2008. Congress would only sanction the apartheid state in 1986 after decades of pressure (TIME).

With a declining economy, fierce internal dissent, and international pressure, the apartheid government began to fall. When Mr. Mandela was released from prison in 1990, he was tasked with negotiating equality. The outlook for peace and stability within South Africa was grim as pain and loathing from years of oppression threatened to swallow the nation in violence (NPR). Mr. Mandela’s push for peace and reconciliation allowed South Africa to usher in the first democratic elections in 1994, where he was elected the nation's first Black president.

Together with Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mr. Mandela set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to recompense the human rights violations that took place during the struggle (Truth and Reconciliation Commission). Mr. Mandela understood how white supremacy divides human nature with hate, suspicion, and domination. He chose unity and peace in their place.

Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela exemplifies the best of human potential. For this reason, we should all celebrate Nelson Mandela Day. In South Africa, the holiday is celebrated with community service. This uplifts the African spirit of Ubuntu, a philosophical principle that translates to mean, “I am because we are.” Ubuntu recognizes the interconnectedness of humanity and reminds us that we are only as strong as our weakest link. This year, make every day, Nelson Mandela Day as a reminder that the ultimate step toward change is empathy and service in a world sharply divided by difference (United Nations).

Kholiswa Mendes Pepani is a Freelance Writer and Book Seller from Johannesburg, South Africa. She is currently based in Portland, Maine where she lives with her husband and their pup. She is passionate about social justice and works with Tender Table, an organization bringing together food, storytelling, and a reclamation of narratives within the BIPOC community. Check out her published work on Hobart.

Key Takeaways

Nelson Mandela International Day is a global call to action stressing the importance of individual empathy, community, and service to make wide-scale change.
Nelson Mandela gave his life to the service of humanity—as a human rights lawyer, political prisoner, peacemaker, and the first democratically-elected president of a free South Africa.
Nelson Mandela Day recognizes the former president’s remarkable commitment to human rights, conflict resolution, and reconciliation.

6/25/2020 | Capitalize B in Black and I in Indigenous.

2/26/2021 | Honor the legacy of Malcolm X.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/15/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/15/21

Build language justice.

These days, more than one in four Major League Baseball players hail from outside the United States. Bilingual interpreters facilitate communication between Spanish, Mandarin, Vietnamese, or Korean-speaking players and English-speaking teammates, coaches, and reporters. It’s not that athletes living in the United States and operating in largely English-only environments don’t speak English at all. For example, Ohtani gave a two-minute speech to the Baseball Writers’ Association of America exclusively in English in 2019 (MSN). Interpreters nonetheless help professional athletes to navigate the intricacies of sports terminology and slang as well as public appearances recorded for posterity (Sports Illustrated).

Happy Thursday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily! Language barriers only exacerbate the racial inequities many communities face in the U.S. The recent news around baseball legend Shohei Ohtani only emphasizes how far we need to go to embrace the multilingual population of the U.S.

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is fully funded by contributions from our readers. Make a monthly or annual donation to join in.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Defend the use of languages other than English in any context.
Sign up to be a volunteer language translator if you speak a language other than English.
Use this toolkit to build language justice in your community.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

On Monday, ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith questioned whether baseball’s “box office appeal” was harmed by the fact that star player Shohei Ohtani — a “once-in-a-century” player “better than Babe Ruth” (Sports Illustrated) — uses a translator for English-language interviews. Ohtani, who currently plays for the Los Angeles Angels, is Japanese and speaks Japanese as his first language. “The fact that you got a foreign player that doesn’t speak English, believe it or not, I think contributes to harming the game to some degree,” Smith said. “It needs to be someone like Bryce Harper, Mike Trout, those guys. And unfortunately at this point in time, that’s not the case.”

These remarks suggest that the most talented player of his generation may be a liability to his sport purely because English isn’t his first language, causing a firestorm of criticism. That night, Smith offered a written apology describing his comments as “insensitive and regrettable” (USA Today).

This issue is larger than one athlete and one commentator. Discrimination based on language is pervasive in American society, and language justice is a crucial component of racial justice.

Alongside the legacy of British imperialism, contemporary American power ensures that U.S. movies, soldiers, tourists, and corporations now circle the globe. Accordingly, is English the now most commonly studied foreign language in the world (Babbel, Washington Post).

This overreach and wealth hoarding forced others to learn English.It also discouraged English-speaking Americans from any pressures to pick up a second language. Three out of four Americans only speak English (YouGov). Though the United States has no official language, immigrants are pressured to adopt fluent, unaccented American English as a token of assimilation and belonging. A Philly cheesesteak shop proudly displayed a sign reading “This is AMERICA. Speak English when ordering” sign for a decade (Billy Penn). Department store shoppers (NBC), pedestrians (KIRO 7), and high school students (NBC) have all been accosted for having the audacity to speak Spanish in public. People attacked for speaking a second language may very well speak conversational or fluent English with English-speaking friends, coworkers, managers, and neighbors. They may speak English when talking to family members inside their own homes. But when confronted for speaking a non-English language in public, their bilingualism is a liability.

Though Smith’s comment was thoughtlessly worded, his underlying point may have actually been correct. There are almost certainly baseball fans less enthused with the sport now that its leading player’s primary language is different than their own.

The cruel irony is that for privileged white families, bilingualism is only ever an asset. As the well-off compete to ensure their children’s place in selective universities, many have latched on to multilingualism as a way to make sure their kids get ahead. To convince admissions officers that their children are competitive aspiring “global citizens,” parents now apply for private Mandarin immersion programs for toddlers of 18 months (LePort). A Chinese person speaking Mandarin and accented English is a failure of assimilation. A white child speaking English and shoddy Mandarin is a prodigy.

The elite appetite for bilingualism even pushes English learners (ELs) out of multilingual schools designed for their benefit. “Left unchecked, demand from privileged, English-dominant families can push ELs and their families out of multilingual schools,” read one report, “and convert two-way dual-immersion programs into one-way programs that exclusively serve English-speaking children” (The Atlantic).

This issue further exacerbates inequities Even in progressive spaces, language is often an afterthought. Many organizations make all of their decisions in English. Though a flier might be translated into another language, there is often no real plan to incorporate non-English speakers into the organizational structure.

The alternative to English-only ignorance and linguistic tokenization is language justice. Trained interpreters should translate between languages so that all can participate in collective spaces. Translation should not be a one-way street; spaces should be truly multilingual. Organizations and workplaces need to recognize that translation is a highly technical skill: materials should not be translated by any bilingual speaker at hand or, even worse, by translation software (NESFP). Ensuring that everyone is able to communicate with their language or dialect is a way to “disrupt privilege and colonization” and “challenging English dominance” (Move to End Violence). To refuse to prioritize language justice, on the other hand, perpetuates all of those things.

We need to build language justice.

Key Takeaways

Non-English speakers are attacked for publicly speaking another language. Some are bi- or multilingual.
When white Americans become bilingual, it can boost their academic and career profiles. When others are bilingual, it’s seen as a liability.
Language justice means creating spaces where we can all speak in the language we’re most comfortable with.

RELATED ISSUES

Respect AAVE.

An analysis on the origins of AAVE and its role in education and pop culture. Read >

Learn the key terminology.

A helpful overview of phrases often heard when discussing race. Read >

Respect the relationship between name and identity.

Unpacking the "Anglicization" of names and erasure from minimizing names from diverse cultures. Read >

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/14/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/14/21

Support anti-racism curriculum in schools.

We previously discussed how conservatives are rallying against “critical race theory” to prohibit educators from teaching about American systemic racism. Although critical race theory, an academic theory often only seen in law schools, isn’t being taught directly in most schools in the country, parents, administrators and legislators are using the term to hinder conversations on racism, systemic oppression, even socio-emotional learning and restorative justice (The74).

We asked educators to check in and let us know how they’re doing. Here’s some of the ways bans on critical race theory are affecting our communities.

Good morning and welcome back! Yesterday we received a ton of feedback from our educator readers on how critical race theory discourse is affecting them. Today, we're unpacking the issue further and highlighting their perspectives. Thank you all for sharing!

Every time we cover this issue, I can't help but reflecting on my own educational journey. History isn't something we just learn, but experience. And as a child, I only learned of the racism that's embedded in this nation as it was inflicted upon me each day. I wonder how I would have felt if I had the words and history to contextualize the pain and isolation I experienced. I think, at minimum, our children deserve the same. But, more urgently, they deserve to live in a world that's committed to minimizing that harm for generations to come.

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is fully funded by contributions from our readers. Make a monthly or annual donation to join in.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Encourage educators in your community to sign the #TeachtheTruth pledge at the Zinn Education Project. As part, they’ll receive diverse and culturally-responsive resources for their classrooms.
Use this map to learn more about the legislation pending or passed in your state.
Attend school and district board meetings to advocate for diverse and truthful curriculum.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her) and Andrew Lee (he/him)

When we released our last newsletter on the topic, Idaho and Tennessee had already banned instruction that acknowledged white privilege. Now, twenty-six states have introduced or passed legislation in an attempt to limit discourse on racism and sexism (Newsweek).

The effects of these retrograde policies are already playing out. A white Florida teacher was fired for putting a Black Lives Matter flag in her classroom. A Tennessee instructor was terminated after showing a video of a poem about white privilege. A Missouri school district’s sole Black administrator resigned after receiving threats so severe she hired private security guards. Educators, especially Black educators, are being pushed out of schools. Experts warn of a “brain drain” in an already understaffed field (Yahoo). In response, activists and educators are preparing to fight this legislation in court (Axios).

We asked educators to check in and let us know how they’re doing. Here’s some of the ways bans on critical race theory are affecting our communities:

1. 42% of our respondents stated that the discourse related to critical race theory is impacting what they can teach in the classroom.

“I am a D&I analyst (newly created position for an online school). I'm not even done with my first year and have gotten push back on sharing articles on AAPI discrimination, having pronouns utilized in signatures, and speaking on how the rhetoric of Trump has increased discrimination against minorities. Just recently a school in the area was dealing with parent pushback on CRT, which has in turned made parents and staff in my own district/school question our approach or stance on CRT/DEI. They often conflate the two and threaten to pull their children from our school if the material is covered.”

"I am not a teacher, but I work as a support staff member for all schools in my District. Our District had a new goal which included anti-racist language, but it caused such a backlash with the white community, that they were forced to remove the language "white advantage". Our state (FL) has also proposed a rule to ban CRT."

"It is unreal to watch how quickly groups of parents in my district mobilized to monitor and brigade any teacher whose lessons explicitly mention terms such as 'equity, inclusion, white supremacy, systemic racism,' and anything else they deem out of the teacher’s jurisdiction as an educator. In a district that already struggles to practice what it preaches regarding equity, this does nothing but stifle the important conversations that need to happen because central office now feels the need to play it 'safe' to avoid drawing unwanted attention."

2. Others mentioned that the mere *perception* of pushback from parents and administrators is affecting the classroom.

“I teach 4th grade. We have a very outdated curriculum, however, my district has been doing work training teachers on cultural proficiency for a few years. My principal is supportive on teaching based around current events and social justice (I teach 4th grade). However, this is not a mandate and many teachers feel uncomfortable doing this as they are afraid of the backlash they may get from families and they feel there is no curriculum.”

"I teach an entire senior elective centered on CRT. So far, I haven't heard anything directed at my school or my class, but I did drive by a group of people protesting CRT two towns away last week. I am worried."

“Hard to say if this is true or false just yet, but I believe the impact is strong around the FEAR of what teachers/district leaders might get in "trouble" for, which leads to a scaling back of these important topics. Funding by private organizations will also impact what resources/partnerships schools have access to.”

3. This discourse is causing specific lessons and curriculum to be banned from the classroom.

“I teach African American History. I have to remove The 1619 Project from my curriculum due to a new state law [...] I don't know how to teach any class on history without discussing the role of race. Racism is embedded in US history and it can't be removed.”

"I am concerned that I won't be able to teach persuasive writing specifically focused on elected officials, which is something I had hoped to do this year. I'm in Texas, and the bill that was passed during our regular session states that you can't give credit or extra credit for political activism, including writing to elected officials."

4. However, many educators note that their schools and communities are more intent on diversifying their curriculum. These educators, though, were mainly at charter or private schools.

"I work in a Charter School with a principal, superintendent and board that is very supportive of making sure our students get an education that recognizes their identities. We are able to rewrite our curriculum to focus on anti-bias and anti-racism as we teach Social Studies and ELA. The only impact from the CRT is that we are trying to do better about what our students are learning."

"I am a 5th grade teacher in a Catholic school. I teach 4th and 5th grade Social Studies. I try to teach history as honestly as I can---I wouldn't call it "critical race theory" because that is way too complicated for elementary students. But I am pretty much allowed to teach what I want and have received no pushback so far for teaching students that the Founding Fathers were racist, indigenous genocide, etc. It probably helps that my school is majority Mexican; I think white parents would react differently."

What can we expect as the school year unfolds? It's unclear – nearly half of respondents that haven't run into an issue mentioned that it might be too soon to tell. But it's clear that this coordinated attack will have lasting implications for students in the years ahead.

This recap highlights a sample of 90 survey respondents from the U.S. 55% represent K-8 educators, and 45% represent 9-12th grade educators. All responses are anonymous.

Key Takeaways

Discourse around critical race theory is making it difficult for educators to teach content related to racism and systemic oppression in their classrooms.
Twenty-six states have introduced or passed legislation in an attempt to limit discourse on racism and sexism (Newsweek).
In our survey with educators, we found that 42% are being impacted by these conversations today.

Learn about critical race theory and the conservative efforts to mislabel it.

Repeal the Trump Equity Gag Order.

The Trump administration kickstarted the latest attack on racial discourse. Read more about those efforts and their implications.

Stop white centering.

The harm of centering whiteness and white privilege in curriculum.

Support the 1619 Project.

Analyzing the lack of truthfulness in history books and the importance of resources like the 1619 Project.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/13/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/13/21

Decolonize the parks.

In his article “Return the National Parks to the Tribes” David Treuer reminds us that national parks are the result of Indigenous dispossession. Everglades National Park is Seminole land. Olympic National Park was created by a violation of a treaty with the Quinault tribe. The first white people to ever see what is now Yosemite National Park were members of a California militia, intent on slaughtering and driving Miwok people off the land and into reservations. “Native people need permanent, unencumbered access to our homelands,” wrote Treuer, an Ojibwe author and historian. “All 85 million acres of national-park sites should be turned over to a consortium of federally recognized tribes in the United States" (The Atlantic).

Happy Tuesday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily. There are over 85 million acres of land designated to the National Parks System across the U.S. But the conservation of this land came at a cost to the Indigenous communities that were displaced as a result. In today's newsletter, Andrew reflects on what should be done to account for this harm.

Are you a K-12 educator in the U.S.? We'd love to hear how conversations re: critical race theory are affecting your classroom. If you have a moment, please complete this survey (and yes, you can share this with your educator friends)!

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is fully funded by contributions from our readers. Make a monthly or annual donation to join in.

TAKE ACTION

Use the Native Land app to identify the Indigenous communities native to the national park nearest you.
Understand the violent history behind the American park system.
Oppose colonialism in the name of conservation.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

There are around 7 million Native Americans in the U.S. today. Native Americans have the lowest average educational attainment and the highest poverty rate of any racial or ethnic group (NCRC). This follows an institutionalized practice of genocide dating back to the Declaration of Independence, which cites the Crown’s support of “merciless Indian savages” as a reason for independence. In 1824, all Native Americans were declared wards of the state under the Bureau of Indian Affairs, a part of the Department of War (Indian Country Today). In 1851, the governor of California called for a “war of extermination… until the Indian race becomes extinct.” And in 1864, the Colorado Third Cavalry murdered unarmed, sleeping Cheyenne and Arapaho men, women, and children and mutilated their bodies – carrying out explicit orders to “kill and destroy, as enemies of the country, wherever they may be found, all such hostile Indians” (University of Nebraska). In 1973, federal agents laid siege to an American Indian Movement occupation of Wounded Knee in protest of racial discrimination and conditions at Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (History).

In the present day, Standing Rock Sioux tribe members were instrumental in opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline, a massive oil infrastructure project currently paused for an environmental review (MSN). Protestors convened to physically prevent pipeline construction and were met with pepper spray and attack dogs from the pipeline guards (Democracy Now). Police threw a grenade that nearly took off a woman’s arm (NBC). Indigenous women and Two-Spirit people are currently spearheading resistance to the Line 3 tar sands pipeline in Minnesota (MSP Mag). Some tribal nations and Native American organizations are already leading the fight for sovereignty and against extractive industries. Giving the land of the National Parks back would undo part of the harm of settler-colonialism and be beneficial to all of us. Nobody would have to figure out individual land titles since their territory is already directly owned by the Federal government.

To give back the National Parks would also put an end to some of the racism baked into American conservation from the beginning. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Madison Grant was inventing the concept of a wilderness park as we now know it. He made sure the last California redwoods weren’t logged. He advocated for the creation of Denali, Olympic, and Glacier National Parks. He was also a raving white supremacist whose 1916 The Passing of the Great Race warned of the “racial abyss” awaiting America thanks to Black people, Irish, Syrians, Italians, “Slovaks,” and “Polish Jews” (Mother Jones). His Bronx River Parkway project was specially planned to displace Black and immigrant communities. And “his model of uninhabited national parks” of course required “forced removals of indigenous populations.”

There is precedent for settler-colonial states executing mass transfers of land they have stolen. In Australia, over half the Northern Territory has been returned to Aboriginal peoples, including Uluru, previously known as Ayers Rock (The Atlantic). In the U.S., there was already a proposal to make the South Unit of Badlands National Park the country’s first Tribal National Park, administered directly by the Oglala Sioux tribe (NY Times).

It’s time to decolonize this nation’s parks.

Key Takeaways

The U.S. park system was created through indigenous dispossession and inspired by an active white supremacist.
Some advocate that all national park sites are turned over to Indigenous communities.
There is precedent for mass land transfers back to indigenous people, as in Australia’s Northern Territory.

11/26/2020 | Support the land back movement.

1/25/2021 | Unpack "This Land is Your Land".

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/12/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/12/21

Confront rising temperatures.

Happy Monday and welcome back! You may be living in a city that experienced some significantly high temps last week. But who's responsible for the rising temperatures, and who's most affected? Today, Andrew unpacks the issue for today's newsletter.

For more perspectives on the environment and the future of this planet, I highly recommend reading our Earth Week series where we interviewed leading youth environmental justice activists on their work. It's available in full in our archives.

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is fully funded by contributions from our readers. Make a monthly or annual donation to join in.

TAKE ACTION

Understand environmental racism and the disproportionate impacts of climate change on oppressed communities in the U.S. and abroad.

Recognize how the U.S. military and major corporations fuel global warming.

Support grassroots efforts by people of color to end environmental racism and climate change. If you have capacity, support an organization on an ongoing basis.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

Swathes of North America have been embroiled in a blistering, record-setting heat wave. The Lake Mead reservoir, which provides water to 25 million, is at the lowest level ever since its construction in the 1930s (CNN). In Vancouver, British Columbia, shellfish are being baked to death in their shells (Business Insider). Dozens of people died in Oregon alone when temperatures reached 116 degrees (Newsweek). After temperatures broke 121 Fahrenheit, a rapidly-moving wildfire consumed the entire town of Lytton (CNN). A group of scientists reported that heat so “far outside the range of past observed temperatures” is “virtually impossible without the influence of human-caused climate change” (CNN). That means this summer’s extremes aren’t a fluke but rather part of a near-apocalyptic pattern.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the average global temperature will rise by two to four degrees Celsius by century’s end, though a rise of just 1.5 degrees would “near the upper limit of what’s tolerable” (KQED). Overshooting that mark means daily flooding along the East Coast (Press Herald), a billion people fleeing droughts and starvation (Reuters), and frequent heat waves severe enough to cook the organs inside your body (The Conversation). These aren’t worst-case scenarios, they’re projections of what happens should current trends continue.

Given the disasters already in motion and predictions of regular organ-cooking temperatures across large swathes of the inhabited world, it’s understandable to think we’re all doomed. When global ecosystems are at a crisis point, we’re all in this together, right?

But in a deeply unequal world, a global crisis has wildly uneven effects. A rising tide may lift all boats, but those closest to shore drown first. There are some for whom climate catastrophe is a cause for hand-wringing concern about their hypothetical grandchildren’s living standards. There are others for whom the crisis arrived years ago.

Neighborhoods of color affected by redlining, historic bank and government-sponsored housing discrimination, are five degrees hotter than non-redlined neighborhoods since they have dramatically less tree cover. In Portland, OR, they’re a shocking 13 degrees warmer (NPR). Communities of color are where state and business elites dump toxic chemicals, coal-fired power plants, and chemical factories across the country. “The climate emergency will have a disproportionate impact on Black and Brown communities” (Guardian) since “the lack of equitable investment in low-income communities leaves people even more at risk for climate change impacts” (NRDC). When Lytton burned, those hardest-hit were the 1,000 members of Indigenous Nlaka’pamux community (CNN). And the climate refugees are already here: a devastating drought is one of the factors pushing the Central American migrants whom the Biden administration keeps incarcerating at the U.S.-Mexico border (ABC).

Droughts and rising sea levels already threaten modern-day U.S. colonies like the U.S. Virgin Islands (Caribbean Journal), “purchased” from Denmark in the early 20th century, and Guam, “acquired” in the Spanish-American War, where 34% of coral reefs died between 2013 and 2017. “One of the first steps is self-determination,” said the vice-chair of Guam’s Climate Change Resiliency Commission. “We’re a colony, and that’s part of dialogue” (Pacific Daily News).

While the poorest communities and nations bear the brunt of the ongoing climatological disaster, those with the most economic power and military might are those creating and profiting from it. Liberal environmentalists claim that the solution to climate change is changing personal consumer choices, like driving less or buying “green.”

But promoting recycling doesn’t change the fact that one of the largest polluters in the world is the U.S. military, which uses 270,000 barrels of oil a day and emits more greenhouse gases than most countries (Yahoo). Multinational corporations are responsible for 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions. “Walmart... generated more emissions abroad than the whole of Germany’s foreign-owned retail sector. Coca-Cola’s emissions around the world were equivalent to the whole of the foreign-owned food and drink industry hosted by China” (Ecologist).

Some say that humans are killing the planet, that we are all at risk and all of us are to blame. This is untrue. Upper management and investors in multinational corporations and American government elites are destroying the planet, and the very people they have long preyed upon are the first to be displaced, starve, roast, drown, and die.

To preserve a habitable world for all of us and our descendants may require a fundamental shift in how we produce things and structure social and international relations. In the short term, a blanket approach to environmentalism will not suffice. Even major philanthropic foundations are starting to recognize that environmental racism and climate change affect poor nations and communities of color first (AP). Supporting the leadership of these communities in opposing the destructive systems that threaten life as we know it is a human imperative.

Key Takeaways

Climate change and environmental degradation disproportionately impact marginalized communities of color in the U.S. and around the world.

Those heating the planet are powerful institutions like major corporations and the U.S. military.

These communities should lead the way in fighting for environmental justice.

4/23/2021 | Daphne Frias and Disability Justice

4/25/2021 | Jana Jandal Alrifai on Intersectional Change

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

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

Make swimming more inclusive

Last week, the International Swimming Federation (FINA) banned swimming caps for Black hair from the Tokyo Olympics because they don’t follow “the natural form of the head”. Soul Cap, a company that makes swimming caps designed to fit over thick, curly hair and hairstyles common in the Black community, said that the international governing body for swimming rejected an application for their caps to be certified for use at competitions (Washington Post). After a week of criticism from athletes, partners, and the general public, the organization announced Wednesday that it would revisit this decision (NPR).

Happy Friday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily! There’s been a series of discriminatory policies affecting Black athletes participating in the Tokyo Olympics. These policies reflect institutionalized racism that’s been codified throughout history. Today’s newsletter looks at the history of access to swimming pools and how it shapes participation in the sport today.

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is made possible by your support. Make a monthly donation to support our team.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Watch the documentary “Passage at St. Augustine: The 1964 Black Lives Matter Movement That Transformed America” to learn more about wade-ins during the Civil Rights Movement.
Donate to Tank Proof, a nonprofit organization making swim classes accessible to historically excluded youth.
Consider: How does the local beach, pool, or other recreational space in your community prioritize diversity and inclusion?

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

This continues a series of discriminatory policies facing Black female Olympic athletes as the 2020 Games approach, drawing broader calls of racism (Salon). But this example, in particular, touches on a long and troubling history of banning Black people from participating in aquatic activities.

Before World War I, municipal pools acted as public bathhouses, frequented by people from all backgrounds, social classes, and races (although men and women were required to swim on different days). But after the war, the rise of recreational spaces in the U.S. shifted the concept of pools from utility to leisure. Swimming became more of a luxury than a necessity. Rules changed so men and women could swim together, drawing families and creating a new social activity for mingling. By 1933, Americans were spending as much time in pools as at the movie theatres (NPR).

But as swimming as a leisure activity grew, so did racial discrimination against Black people at pools. White people worried about having Black men swimming with white women. Some fears drew on racial tropes that Black men were sexually violent. Others were concerned that co-mingling would encourage interracial relationships. White elites also perceived Black, Asian and Latino people – even working-class white people – as dirty and prone to carry communicable diseases (National Geographic). As a result, many pools had “whites-only” days, pools were often sequestered in white neighborhoods, and individuals and local governments alike would reinforce who “belonged” in public swimming spaces (NPR).

And it wasn’t just pools – similar discriminatory practices affected how Black people and other people of color could access any public recreational spaces, including movie theatres, dance halls, amusement parks, and beaches.

These public spaces became the center of demonstrations for racial equity. Organized protests, referred to as “wade-ins,” were held at beaches and pools, where Black people and allies would get in the water where they were not allowed (History). In one highly publicized incident in 1964, Black and white protestors jumped into the Monson Motor Lodge pool in St. Augustine, FL. The manager, infuriated, dumped acid into the pool while the protestors were swimming (St. Augustine). Photos from the incident accelerated the civil rights movement, and pushed President Johnson to get the Civil Rights Act passed. View photos from the protest, and read a reflection on how the St. Augustine local paper covered the Civil Rights Movement.

In theory, the passing of the act should have ended racially segregated public spaces. Instead, many public pools closed. Others charged high fees, only allowed people that lived close by, and implemented “referral-only” policies to keep the space exclusive (National Geographic). This also sparked the rise of the backyard pool trend, as wealthy white people instead decided to have a pool space all to themselves. Public pools, already a costly investment for initial installation and upkeep, received less funding overall as a result. Many shut down (National Geographic).

This discrimination has lasting implications. According to a 2017 report from the USA Swimming Foundation, 64% of African American children had no or low swimming ability, compared to 40% of white children (Swimming World Magazine). More importantly, the study indicates that if a parent does not know how to swim, there is only a 13% chance that their child will learn how to swim. Unsurprisingly, not learning how to swim greatly increases one’s risk of drowning. According to the YMCA, swim lessons for children ages 1-4 reduce the risk of drowning by 88% (YMCA). The CDC reported that, between 1999 and 2010, Black children drowned in swimming pools at a rate of up to 10 times higher than their white peers (CDC). It will take conscious effort to undo the harm of the past and make aquatics feel more accessible to all.

Key Takeaways

The International Swimming Federation is reconsidering a decision to ban swimming caps for Black hair from the Tokyo Olympics.
Black people have long been banned from aquatic spaces through explicit policies, referral and fee-based exclusion, and even the closure of public in favor of private pools.
As a result, Black people have much lower rates of swimming ability than white people, leading to a dramatically higher risk of death by drowning.

9/22/2020 | Learn about sundown towns.

5/12/2021 | Reverse racist land grabs.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/8/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/8/21

Learn about the “one-drop rule”.

Coming from a biracial family, I think it’s really important to understand mixed-race people’s experiences. As the National Museum of African American History and Culture puts it, “creating one’s racial identity is a fluid and nonlinear process that varies for every person and group” (NMAAHC). But the Museum’s website correctly adds, “In a racialized society like the United States, everyone is assigned a racial identity whether they are aware of it or not.” We should question The Atlantic’s claim that mixed-race people will cause the categories of whiteness and non-whiteness to become less significant over time.

Happy Thursday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily. Our collective perception of race evolves over time. But racism won't evolve itself into extinction. That's going to take persistent action, not passively waiting for change. Today, Andrew reflects on the history of the "one-drop rule" and how mixed-race identities aren't the benchmark for change.

Two new things!

Our next Anti-Racism at Work email goes out this Monday! Subscribe to get a recap on how companies responded to Juneteenth and employees' hesitations to share their social justice efforts at work. Click this link (no need to enter your email again).
Our latest podcast with Lamar Shambley at Teens of Color Abroad highlights the role travel plays to bring us closer. Listen on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is made possible by your support. Make a monthly donation to support our team.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Understand white supremacy as an evolving but ongoing system of oppression.
Reject arguments that whiteness and racism will naturally fade over time.
Take action alongside communities of color to dismantle racism in all forms.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

Earlier this month, The Atlantic published “The Myth of a Majority-Minority America,” which critiqued the idea that most Americans will soon be people of color. According to the article, America will only become a majority-minority country if we count mixed-race individuals as exclusively non-white. This binary thinking draws on the legacy of the Jim Crow-era “one-drop rule,” say the authors, and is a repetition of historic fears about non-Anglo European immigration which, of course, proved to be unfounded.

“Speculating about whether America will have a white majority by the mid-21st century makes little sense, because the social meanings of white and nonwhite are rapidly shifting,” they write. “The sharp distinction between these categories will apply to many fewer Americans” (The Atlantic).

According to the one-drop rule, people were Black if they had any Black ancestry. This meant people whose ancestors were mostly white were still enslaved and, later, subject to Jim Crow discrimination. The legacy of the one-drop rule is why some people are Black despite being light-skinned enough to pass as white (PBS). Acknowledging that people with mixed ancestry can still be identified as white or as people of color doesn’t endorse this way of thinking, but rather acknowledges its continuing effect on contemporary views of race.

White Americans resisted Irish and Italian mass immigration on both racial and religious grounds. Irish and Italian people were at first thought of as non-white, racially inferior peoples. Mobs burned Catholic churches and immigrant neighborhoods because Catholics were thought to practice cannibalism and other barbarities (History). Sicilians were thought to be inherently criminal because of racial defects (NY Times). Of course, both Irish and Italian Americans are now easily identified as white people. What changed wasn’t their physical characteristics but their position within the construct of whiteness.

But this didn’t mean that the distinction between white and non-white was erased in the early twentieth century. On the contrary, the price of admission to whiteness was for Irish and Italian immigrant communities to join in the oppression of their Black neighbors. As Protestant mobs attacked Irish neighborhoods, Irish immigrants took part in attacking Black neighborhoods (Irish Times).

The borders of racial categories are malleable, contested, and change over time. But believing that demographic changes will inevitably cause the racial hierarchy to fade away ignores centuries of evidence to the contrary. It veers dangerously close to endorsing the view that all we need to do to combat racism is wait.

We need to understand the history and present of American racism to fight its devastating effects on communities of color. This doesn’t mean racism is inevitable or will persist forever, but we need to take action to interrogate anti-Blackness, xenophobia, and anti-Indigeneity and the beliefs, institutions, and practices that enable them instead of waiting for racism to disappear.

Key Takeaways

Some experts believe increasing numbers of mixed-race Americans will cause racial distinctions to fade away.
This ignores the fact that racial categories are evolving social constructs while racism is an enduring social structure.
Demographic changes won’t end racism, only concerted individual and collective action to increase the power of dispossessed people and communities of color.

2/25/2021 | Reject racial fetishization.

12/8/2020 | Learn how to apologize.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

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

Unpack the history of Indigenous boarding schools.

Residential schools were administered by various Christian denominations and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. They were designed to force Indigenous children into assimilation by making them abandon their languages and cultures. Their hair was cut, their clothing was exchanged for uniforms, and they were banned from speaking their languages. These children were cut off from their families and often experienced physical and sexual abuse (The Atlantic). Many children disappeared entirely from these schools. The new discovery of unmarked graves offers a grim explanation.

Good morning and welcome back! The recent news on the atrocities that occurred at several Indigenous boarding schools isn't new, and reflects a long history of intentional erasure of those native to what's now referred to as the U.S. and Canada. As you read more about it in today's newsletter, consider: how else are schools used to erase or censor the diversity of our youth?

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is made possible by your support. Make a monthly donation to support our team.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Directly donate to survivors of residential boarding schools by donating to the National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition.
Sign this petition for a national day of mourning in Canada for the lost children of residential schools.

GET EDUCATED

By Nia Norris (she/her)

In recent weeks, the bodies of some 1,200 Indigenous children have been discovered in mass graves at residential schools in Canada (Star Democrat). The US announced that they would be executing a similar effort to search former boarding schools for bodies in light of the discovery (NYT).

The first boarding school for Indigenous children in the United States was established in 1860 and schools remained open until 1978. By the 1880s, there were 60 schools for 6200 students including day schools and boarding schools. In 1879, Col. Richard Henry Pratt established an off-reservation boarding school in Carlisle, Pennsylvania under the premise that full assimilation would best be completed away from the reservation. His motto was “Kill the Indian, Save the Man,” and the schools sought to achieve that purpose by stripping Indigenous heritage entirely and replacing it with white culture. The schools also forced conversion to Christianity, and when parents resisted placement in the schools, rations were often denied to Indigenous communities (Native Partnership).

Canada established a similar network of schools with the mission to “kill the Indian in the child.” In the 1880s, the Canadian government began establishing residential schools and the 1920 Indian Act made it illegal for Indigenous children to attend any schools but these. Similar to the U.S., children were forced to cut their hair, wear uniforms, and were often identified by number. The children were physically and often sexually abused and suffered poor health. In 1907, it was reported that 24% of previously healthy children were dying in these schools. It is also important to note that this does not include children who died after being sent home due to illness. Anywhere from 47% to 75% of children died soon after returning home (Indigenous Foundations).

While Indigenous schools are often talked of as a thing of the past, they are a recent part of history. It wasn’t until the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act in the U.S. that Indigenous parents were granted the right to deny placement of their children in these schools (Native Partnership). In Canada, the last residential school did not close until 1996 (Indigenous Foundations).

In a previous issue, we covered inequities in the child welfare system (ARD). The boarding schools might be closed, but Indigenous children in Canada account for nearly half of the 30,000 children and youth that are in foster care in Canada (Imprint News). British Columbia did not end its controversial practice of “birth alerts,” which flagged at-risk mothers and disproportionately targeted Indigenous children, until 2019 (CBC).

On June 11, 2008 the Canadian government formally apologized for its involvement in the residential boarding school practice and in 2005, the Canadian government reached a settlement to compensate boarding school survivors as well as fund the Aboriginal Healing Foundation and form the Truth and Reconciliation Commision (Indigenous Foundations). In lieu of the recent discovery of children’s remains in Canada, Justin Trudeau made a public statement that Canadians are “horrified and ashamed” (PBS).

Although the U.S. interior secretary Deb Haaland has directed the government to take action in response to Canada’s discovery and investigate the boarding schools in the U.S. (The Guardian), the U.S. has not yet provided any form of reparations to boarding school survivors, nor issued a public apology. Although President Obama signed off on the Native American Apology Resolution in 2009, tribal citizens have stated that the quiet apology is a watered-down apology with no real public action (Indian Law). The Catholic Church also has not apologized for the genocide of Indigenous children (Washington Post).

The U.S. government and complicit churches must formally apologize for the systematic abuse of Indigenous children through boarding schools and offer reparations to survivors.

Key Takeaways

Boarding schools were established in the U.S. and Canada to assimilate Indigenous children. These schools stripped children of their language, clothes, and customs.
The schools perpetrated systematic abuse of Indigenous children for a hundred years. Many children were lost and recently their remains have been recovered in unmarked graves at former sites of residential schools.
Although Canada has publicly apologized for the abuse perpetuated by these schools and provided some compensation to survivors, the U.S. and the Catholic Church have not formally apologized or provided any form of reparations.

12/17/2020 | Respect Hawaii’s sacred land.

11/24/2020 | Stop violence against Native women.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/6/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/6/21

Understand the asylum process.

Last Tuesday, the Department of Homeland Security announced that they would start considering migrants whose cases were terminated by the Trump administration. The Justice Department also reversed an immigration ruling that barred individuals from seeking asylum due to domestic violence or gang violence (NYT). Expanding protections to individuals who are fleeing domestic violence or gang violence will offer protection to women, the majority of whom seek asylum due to interpersonal violence, gender-based abuse, and organized crime (NY Times).

Happy Tuesday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily. There's intense pressure on the new administration to address the ongoing migrant crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border. Today, Nia shares more on the difficult journey many asylum seekers from Mexico face.

Thank you for your support! This daily, free, independent newsletter is made possible by your support. Consider making a donation to support our work. You can start a monthly subscription on Patreon or our website, or give one-time using our website, PayPal, or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza).

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Donate to RAICES, a nonprofit that provides pro-bono legal support to immigrants.
Tell the Biden administration to end Title 42 expulsions, which allows the U.S. to turn migrants away under the public health rule. Border agents have turned away migrants nearly 850,000 times since the beginning of the pandemic.
If you have room, consider hosting a refugee family so they have a place to stay while their case is decided.

GET EDUCATED

By Nia Norris (she/her)

Asylum is a protection granted to individuals who are foreign nationals who meet the definition of a “refugee,” someone not safe in their home country “on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion” (American Immigration Council). Under the Trump administration, many asylum seekers who were crossing the U.S.-Mexico border were sent to Mexico to await hearings for their cases.

In 2019, the Trump-era DHS introduced the Migrant Protection Protocols, which required asylum seekers to return to Mexico to await immigration hearings in the United States (DHS). There were about 70,000 migrants enrolled in this program, which was also known as Remain in Mexico. The majority of migrants who were affected by this policy were from Central America. Migrants waiting at the border often live in inhumane conditions and are often victims of violence, kidnapping, and rape (The Guardian). Many have reported missing court hearings because it was too dangerous to attend, or because of extreme situations such as being kidnapped. Those who missed their court hearings were ordered to be deported and lost their chance to get asylum (Buzzfeed).

DHS suspended the Migrant Protection Protocols on Biden’s first day in office. This allowed many of the migrants already waiting for case decisions to cross the border in February (The Guardian). However, the Biden administration only allowed unaccompanied minors to stay in the U.S. as new asylum applicants. This resulted in a new type of family separation where families remained in Mexico as they sent their children across the border alone (Politico).

Regardless of administration, applying for asylum is not as simple as walking up to the border. Asylum seekers must somehow get into the U.S. to claim asylum, which may involve crossing multiple countries and a militarized border, and prove that they meet the criteria of being a refugee. The majority of cases are denied (NYT). By February of 2020, most asylum seekers who were granted relief waited more than 930 days, and are incarcerated in detention centers while their case is processed. Individuals who wait in detention are five times less likely to secure legal counsel for their cases (American Immigration Counsel). Asylum seekers who find a way to bypass detention still aren’t authorized to work in the United States, making it impossible to earn a legal source of income (NOLO). Children who cross the border alone are imprisoned by Customs and Border Protection. In early May, U.S. officials held over 22,500 refugee children in custody (BBC).

With the new provisions, some migrant camps in Mexico are finally starting to empty (Reuters). Whether these migrants will be granted asylum is yet to be seen since most cases are denied. Salvadoran, Guatemalan, and Honduran people have their asylum cases approved at rates much lower than the average of 35% (Seattle Times). That means two out of three people who tell immigration authorities their life would be in danger in their home country because of a social group or identity they belong to are forced to return to those very conditions.

We must advocate for individuals who are fleeing violence and offer a safer path to survival. Some of the new protections that are granted by the Biden administration are a step forward, but we need to continue to offer protections to individuals who are fleeing dangerous conditions. Amnesty International argues that “the people are not the problem. Rather, the causes that drive families and individuals to cross borders and the short-sighted and unrealistic ways that politicians respond to them are the problem” (Amnesty International).

Key Takeaways

The Justice Department recently reversed the Trump Administration policy barring individuals from applying for asylum due to domestic violence or gang violence.
The process of applying for asylum is much harder than the media and lawmakers make it out to be, and the majority of applications for asylum are not approved.
Guatemalan, Honduran, and Salvadoran asylum applicants are less likely to have their applications approved than asylum seekers from other countries.

12/9/2020 | Amplify mental health resources for immigrants.

10/5/2020 | Protect undocumented Americans.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 7/2/21 Nicole Cardoza 7/2/21

Rethink the Founding Fathers.

Interpreting the Founding Fathers’ wishes is a staple of American political discourse. Constitutional originalism is more of a conservative thing, but really, Founding Father mindreading cuts across the ideological spectrum. The Founding Fathers would have hated partisanship (History) or Trump (Foreign Policy) or gun control (History) or not having gun control (HuffPost). Obama informed us, helpfully, that the Founding Fathers didn’t want presidents to serve three year terms (ABC). The Atlantic told us the Founders would have been especially disgusted by Trump’s pardon of the former owner of the San Francisco 49ers (The Atlantic).

Happy Friday and welcome back. The Founding Fathers are often used as justification for maintaining the status quo in political discourse. But why are our Founding Fathers held in such high regard, and how does memorializing their legacies affect our efforts towards racial justice? Andrew shares more in today's newsletter. If you're celebrating the Fourth of July this holiday weekend in the U.S., add some time to reflect on the resources in today's take action section – it's stocked with lots of good reading from diverse perspectives.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Read how the wealthiest members of the “colonial ruling class” led the American Revolution and authored the Constitution.
Learn how the Declaration of Independence was motivated by slavery and attacks on Indigenous communities.
Learn from perspectives on Independence day from Black, Indigenous, and immigrants in the U.S.
Read about leaders critical to the Revolutionary War often left from history books.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

This spring, House Democrats voted to make Washington, D.C. the 51st state and give its 700,000 residents Congressional representation (CNN). South Dakota Senator Mike Rounds objected, tweeting “The Founding Fathers never intended for Washington D.C. to be a state” (Twitter). Many quickly objected that they never intended for Senator Rounds’ home state of South Dakota to exist, either (MSN).

If Washington and Madison and Jefferson et al. time warped into the contemporary U.S., they'd be shocked by many things. Maybe the particulars of gun control or presidential pardons, but definitely by the idea of women and Black people having voting rights. They would be shocked at the abolition of slavery. They would be shocked at the 50th state being a Polynesian archipelago. They would be shocked at highways and laundromats and TikTok. The list goes on.

So why do we keep appealing to the framers’ intentions? Two big ideas keep dragging us back to 1787. The first is that many believe the Constitution is an enlightened document, despite the fact that its authors weren’t exactly saint-like. By this way of thinking, George Washington was a historic hero and genius who helped invent democracy and freedom. But he didn’t extend these beliefs to the enslaved men, women, and children he owned as property and whose labor made him the richest man in Colonial America (Mount Vernon). In order to keep the ideals of Washington and Jefferson eternal, we’re asked to disregard the crimes against humanity that they executed in their pursuit of the nation (Smithsonian).

Our nation is also quick to protect our Constitution to maintain superiority over other nations. But no cartoon villain portrait of America’s enemies can whitewash the horror of a continental Indigenous genocide (The Nation) or the barbarity of a forced-labor empire of cotton, tobacco, and rice plantations sprawled across the South (The Advocate). When Nazi jurists looked for a precedent for the kind of racial laws that led to the Holocaust, they found the American Jim Crow system a shining example (History). Today, “there are now more people under ‘correctional supervision’ in America — more than six million — than were in the Gulag Archipelago under Stalin at its height” (New Yorker). Enslavement, genocide, the elimination of 100,000 Japanese civilians, a modern prison system that dwarfs any other in human history: all constitutional in their time.

We should know by now that racism is systematic, not just individual acts of hatred (NPR). The system of government and power created by a slave-owning or slavery-adjacent colonial elite never served the enslaved Africans they owned or the Indigenous people they murdered (Howard Zinn). If we are looking to uncover systemic racism, we need to take a hard look at the systems that make up this very country.

Perhaps D.C. statehood is unconstitutional. Maybe it’s not, and D.C. should get the 51st star on the flag and Congressional representatives of its own. In either case, the modern-day American colonies of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and the U.S. Virgin Islands won’t be so lucky (The Guardian). D.C. residents might get to vote for their senator, but prisoners and felons won’t (MSN). Those killed by American chemical weapons in Fallujah won’t, either (The Guardian). A great deal of human suffering, exploitation, and death falls squarely within what the American constitution allows.

Don’t ask what the Founder Fathers intended. Ask what the oppressed communities on whose backs the Founders’ vision was constructed need. If there is anything to celebrate on Independence Day, it’s those whose resistance, courage, and care actually brought us closer to a world with liberty and justice for all.

Key Takeaways

Many Americans make appeals to the real intention of the Constitution.
The American Revolution wasn’t fought to create justice for all those living in the colonies because the Founders advocated for slavery and genocide.
A great deal of atrocities were entirely constitutional when committed, including those committed today.
Independence Day doesn’t celebrate the freedom of all.

7/3/2020 | Share these words by Frederick Douglass.

6/24/2020 | Fight voter suppression.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 6/30/21 Nicole Cardoza 6/30/21

Understand the TikTok strike.

Over the past month, many Black social media creators organized a strike to stop creating and posting dance choreography on the social media app TikTok. The social media app is built around reposting and remixing content from other creators, and a popular feature is learning and recording dances to trending songs. When Black female rapper Megan Thee Stallion released her new song, “Thot Shit,” on June 11, many Black creators agreed not to create choreography.

Good morning and happy Wednesday! Don't overlook the Black creator TikTok strike – it may read as petty social media drama on the surface, but this organized response is a larger declaration for respect and representation in the growing creator economy. Learn more in today's newsletter! And follow us on TikTok if you haven't already.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Learn more about the Black TikToker Strike by following the hashtag #BlackTikTokStrike.
Support marginalized creators on social media: use more engagement tools on posts you see from creators you enjoy. Like, comment, share, and save the images and videos that they post.
Understand how strikes work and the best way to support them.
Consider: What do you know about the origins of your favorite digital trends? I.e your favorite gif, TikTok dance, or meme?

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

Get a 1-min breakdown of the issue on the ARD TikTok >

This is because of a growing conversation around compensation and equity for Black people on TikTok. Black creators often are behind the TikTok trends that go viral, but rarely gain recognition; white TikTok users are oftentimes miscredited as creators and gain sponsorships and media recognition (Teen Vogue). Black creators have also been vocal algorithmic censorship of content related to Black Lives Matter last summer, which further increased racial disparities of who’s celebrated on the platform (Time).

But this isn’t a TikTok-specific issue. Much of popular culture today leans heavily on language, dance, and other cultural cues taken directly from the Black community – particularly the Black LGBTQ+ community. From dances to hairstyles, phrases, and music, dominant culture often adopts Black culture and makes it mainstream. And white people, who benefit from more power and privilege in our society, are more likely to gain recognition for echoing these cultural acts – even if they had no hand in creating them. Learn more in a previous newsletter.

Moreover, the Black community still has to fight for their cultural markers to be accepted within culture at the same time as those with power and privilege enjoy them. Consider recent initiatives to allow natural hairstyles in schools (Chalkbeat), or the fight to normalize AAVE as a valid vernacular (Black Youth Project). With this context, it’s clear how a strike on short dance choreography reflects a broader stance on the cultural appropriation of Black culture throughout history.

It’s also important to recognize the role of withholding labor in the history of Black movements. Black people have gone on strike by withholding labor to extract fair compensation since before the Civil War. Consider the Great Railroad Strike of 1877, where over 100,000 railroad workers halted trains and stopped working for over two months in pursuit of better wages and conditions. There’s also the Memphis Sanitation Strike of 1968, where 1,300 Black workers walked off the job, demanding that the city recognize their union, increase wages, and end inhumane conditions. As garbage stacked up across the city streets, the workers never relented, attracting the support of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who visited to show support and delivered his famous “Mountaintop” speech. Learn more in a previous newsletter. And just last year, when players from major league sports stopped playing for 48 hours after the shooting of Jacob Bake, the world took note – and fundamentally shifted how sports leagues respond to social issues (Vox). Their efforts – alongside other labor strikes led by other people of color – didn’t just raise awareness of critical issues, but carved a path for more equitable practices in labor unions altogether (Teen Vogue).

You can argue that TikTok influencers aren’t exactly the same type of wage workers who took part in past strikes. But let’s not overlook the influence of the “creator economy” and those that lead it. As digital communities flourish, nearly 50M people around the world consider themselves creators and receive some type of compensation from their work (Forbes). Creators offer a ton of value by creating content and community that might be inaccessible otherwise, particularly those from marginalized communities that offer an alternative to what’s mainstream. But being a creator is a difficult job with little infrastructure or safety (Teen Vogue). It’s powerful to see creators withholding their labor without that type of support behind them, and advocate for more equitable practices for this burgeoning labor market.

Perhaps this strike will encourage everyone that enjoys content online to reflect and consider: how do we value the creators of the content we consume? What labor may we take for granted – both online and off? And how can the strikes of the past transform our future?

Key Takeaways

Black creators on TikTok are on strike to take a stance against cultural appropriation and lack of credit for the choreography they introduce to the platform

Strikes throughout history have been a powerful way to shape perceptions about labor and value
Popular culture is rooted in Black cultural markers, but rarely celebrates or protects those that create it

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

7/16/2020 | Respect AAVE.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 6/30/21 Nicole Cardoza 6/30/21

Unpack the term “Hispanic”.

The idea that there is a single category of Hispanic or Latinx people spanning every Spanish-speaking country is not the result of an organic organization between Spanish-speaking Latin Americans but rather a project of U.S. activists, government officials and media executives from the 1970’s through the 1990’s. According to G. Cristina Mora, the conscious ambiguity concerning the definition of the “Hispanic” was a fundamental part of its institutionalization.

Welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily! Today, Jumko joins us to share more about the history of the phrase Hispanic and how, similar to the term Latinx, broad generalizations of diverse cultures and origins fail to truly reflect us all.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

The term “Hispanic” was created in order to redirect funds to larger initiatives encompassing communities of the Latin American diaspora.
This term, however, does nothing to refer to the diversity of experiences within these communities and impedes us from having explicit conversations about racism and race.
Instead of using “Hispanic”, refer to the specific ethnicity, nationality or race you want to talk about, so as to avoid generalizations that don’t apply to “Hispanic” people as a whole.

GET EDUCATED

By Jumko Ogata-Aguilar (she/ella)

During the 2020 presidential elections, news outlets were full of predictions, analyses, and examinations of how the Latino/Hispanic sector would vote (NBC News). Many supported Donald Trump in the polls (New York Times), sparking many conversations and questions concerning the fact that a minority was apparently voting against their best interest. However, this information is hardly surprising when we consider the ambiguous nature of the term. “Hispanic” can easily refer to a person from Spain, Chile, The Philippines, or Equatorial Guinea. So where exactly did this term come from? Who exactly does it refer to?

“Activists thus described Hispanics as a disadvantaged and underrepresented minority group that stretched from coast to coast, a wide framing that best allowed them to procure grants from public and private institutions,” said Mora. “Media executives, in turn, framed Hispanics as an up-and-coming national consumer market to increase advertising revenue. Last, government officials, particularly those in the Census Bureau, framed Hispanics as a group displaying certain educational, income, and fertility patterns significantly different from those of blacks and whites” (University of Chicago).

The three main diasporas that were most visible at the time due to their political presence were Mexican, Puerto Rican and Cuban. According to Mora, the concept of Hispanic was an attempt to unify what were, in fact, wildly different priorities. “Immigration reform, for example, became an important Mexican American policy goal but was of little interest to Puerto Ricans, who were citizens by birth, and to Cuban Americans, who gained citizenship through their refugee status. Puerto Ricans in New York focused on issues of Puerto Rican independence, but this cause fell on deaf ears in Mexican American and Cuban American communities. And while there were certainly some issues that these groups shared, such as bilingual education and discrimination, many of the joint, pan-ethnic mobilization efforts addressing these topics were either highly local or short-lived.”

Populations within each Latin American country are also not homogenous. After they obtained independence from Spain, the white ruling elites crafted discourses whose purpose was to assimilate the Indigenous and Black populations into whiteness, creating racist discourses that are still prevalent to this day (Latin American Perspectives). Some Latin American governments promoted the idea that “We are all “Mestizo,” or mixed-race, to erase erasing anti-Indigenous and anti-Black practices (Critical Sociology). Overuse of Hispanic, Latinx, and Mestizo can make conversations around racist violence within these communities much more difficult due to their basic premise: “We are all Hispanic/Mestizos.”

Now, if we focus particularly on the three diasporas previously mentioned, we can see how even the homogenization of these populations according to their nationality impedes us from understanding the diversity of experiences the “Hispanic” label encompasses.

We can now understand “Hispanic” Republican politicians that seemingly legislate against the interest of the community at large. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz are both white men of Cuban ancestry whose political posture rests on the fact that their families supposedly fled their country of origin because of the Cuban revolution. They legislate in favor of white, rich conservatives such as themselves (whether “Hispanic” or not).

The terms “Hispanic” and “Latinx” have become racialized categories in the US. Therefore many conversations in the public eye equate being “Hispanic” or “Latinx” to being someone who is non-white. This has not only allowed white women to indulge in self-exotization due to the way they are perceived in the U.S. vs. their countries of origin (ie. Shakira, Sofía Vergara, Kali Uchis) but has also created controversial conversations on the internet, such as the description of Anya Taylor-Joy as a woman of color (Tribune).

In order to adopt an anti-racist stance when referring to Latin American people, these labels must be understood in their historical context and left aside for more specific terms that refer to the community that we want to refer to explicitly. Hispanic and Latinx are not a race, ethnicity, or nationality. There is an immense spectrum of realities within the “Hispanic” term, therefore, we must explicitly name the communities we want to recognize lest they be made invisible by these homogenizing narratives once more.

Key Takeaways

Some outsiders think about immigrant communities as political tokens or only consider them in relation to the food, music, or other products they produce.
Corporations might support immigrants or other oppressed communities rhetorically while harming them in practice.
Solidarity must be a constant practice.

10/5/2020 | Protect undocumented Americans.

8/10/2020 | Respect the relationship between name and identity.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Nicole Cardoza 6/29/21 Nicole Cardoza 6/29/21

Support immigrant vendors.

The rapidly gentrifying Silicon Valley city of San José, California, is home to one of the largest flea markets in the country (Yahoo). Since 1960, generations of largely immigrant vendors have set up stalls on its 30 acres. The flea market and the 700 vendors who depend on it are threatened today by the construction of a “transit village” around a new light-rail station.

Happy Tuesday, and welcome back. In today's issue, we're highlighting an issue in San Jose, CA, that's not specifically unique to just this community. Learn more about the role of gentrification and corporate developments in fostering inequities, and what you can do to help.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Take action today by telling San José city council members to vote no on flea market redevelopment. Sample script: “I’m calling/emailing to oppose the Berryessa redevelopment. There’s no excuse to displace hundreds of vendors. We are watching and demand you do the right thing today.”
Contact the San José Flea Market and say you support the vendors by calling (408) 453 1110 and emailing hope@sjfm.com and pat@sjfm.com. Sample script: “I’m calling/emailing in support of the Flea Market Vendors Association. We demand each vendor receive adequate compensation and a permanent spot. What has been offered is not nearly enough. Do the right thing!”
Follow the Vendor Association and sign their petition for a community benefits agreement from the city.
Support immigrants in your community beyond the headlines.

GET EDUCATED

By Andrew Lee (he/him)

Though the new train station is a public investment, it’s explicitly “meant to serve a new Google campus with up to 25,000 employees” (SF Chronicle). Community activists already opposed the development, which they fear will raise housing costs enough to displace tens of thousands of people. In the words of one resident, “A San José Google campus will erase my existence” (Silicon Valley De-Bug).

In May, Google announced they’re “rallying support for immigrant rights” (Google). Google Doodles have celebrated Chicana theorist Gloria Anzaldúa, union leader Cesar Chavez, and Tejana music icon Selena Quintanilla (Google). And the cafeterias at Google’s current headquarters offer employees a urbane selection of global foods from chicken enchiladas to charred pork belly with shaved jicama salad (Business Insider). But this public infrastructure development created specifically for the company’s benefit may directly displace hundreds of immigrant vendors. Moreover, its new campus could economically displace thousands more.

And while it’s largely first- and second-generation immigrants working as San José flea market vendors, the flea market itself is owned by the white Bumb family. Though the Bumbs have made “millions” from the flea market (Metro Active), they refuse to negotiate in good faith with vendors seeking to preserve their livelihoods.

“I’m a second-generation vendor. I was raised in the flea market. My dad has been selling there for years,” community leader Kaled Escobedo told Anti-Racism Daily. Fresh off a hunger strike against the destruction of the flea market, she shared that her family’s blanket stand helped her pay her way through college. “That’s the only source of income my dad gets,” she said.

The city and Bumb family plan to shrink the flea market to 5 acres, offering only $4,000 to each vendor as compensation. This amount covers less than two months of rent for a one-bedroom San José apartment at market price (Zumper). The vendor association is demanding that San José city council vote against the redevelopment plan today, Tuesday, June 29, and that the Bumb family agree to reasonable demands that include fair compensation and vendor security. They are asking for wide support to achieve both of these goals. Ultimately, said Escobedo, “We want to be in charge of the market.” She envisions a future where the market is controlled by the immigrant families who make it work. Spaces like the San José Flea Market provide a space for communities to only make a living.

As someone born outside the U.S. and married to a first-generation immigrant, I’m interested in what we understand as “supporting immigrants” now that we have a new administration. The Trump administration’s baldly racist, nativist immigration policies sparked wide and justified opposition. Hundreds of cities rallied against “zero-tolerance” immigration policies in June 2018 alone (CNN). Liberal Americans developed what was, for some, a new-found respect for immigrants, one seemingly absent when then-Senator Obama declared, “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked” (AP). Some tried to oppose Trump by calling America “a nation of immigrants,” an objectively false and harmful idea (Colorlines). Do we only fight for immigrants when Republicans are in power and invent excuses for Democratic administrations continuing the same inhumane policies (NPR)? Do those born in the U.S. actually support real-life immigrants in their communities or view them as political tokens and providers of interesting culture to consume and discard at will?

The answer is important because immigrant communities remain under threat, not only by deportation but police brutality, economic exploitation, and gentrification, as well (Urban Institute, The Atlantic). To support oppressed and marginalized communities means showing up even if there’s no immediate reward. It means showing up in the years where there’s no election. It means showing up though you may never set foot in a certain market or low-income neighborhood in your life. It means supporting immigrant businesses and workers of color even when they aren’t selling anything you might wish to consume. That’s what it means to be in solidarity, and it’s what is necessary for us to build communities where all of us can thrive.

Key Takeaways

Some outsiders think about immigrant communities as political tokens or only consider them in relation to the food, music, or other products they produce.
Corporations might support immigrants or other oppressed communities rhetorically while harming them in practice.
Solidarity must be a constant practice.

10/5/2020 | Protect undocumented Americans.

8/10/2020 | Respect the relationship between name and identity.

ARCHIVES

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

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

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

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

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

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED

Key Takeaways

RELATED ISSUES

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

TAKE ACTION

GET EDUCATED