Accommodation of racism on the part of national minorities flows from two things – internalized oppression or acceptance of white chauvinist views about national minorities, and a pessimistic attitude about the possibility of white people struggling against their own white chauvinism and taking up the struggle against racism in a genuine way.
For white people, white chauvinism brings a sense of superiority in relation to national minorities, and a certain ease and “security” in the “Knowledge” of that superiority. No matter how bad off they may be, or feel about themselves, they find consolation in the recognition that “at least I’m not Black”. For national minorities, the acceptance of white chauvinist ideas is self-annihilating, inculcating a sense of powerlessness and impotence. Immersed in the pervasive reality of national oppression and influenced by the lies of white chauvinism, national minorities are beset by a gnawing shame and guilt, a sense of inferiority - a pervading fear and belief that “I am what they think I am, I am inferior”. They are told from the time they are born that they are fundamentally inferior to white people in every way. The “scientists” are used to “prove” the inherent inferiority of national minorities while at the same time are barred from those circumstances that would dispel the myths. This leads national minorities to accept white chauvinist views about themselves to one degree or another. Within the communist movement, national minorities are faced every day with white chauvinist attitudes toward them on the part of white comrades. At the same time they are faced with the “whites only” and segregationist policies of our movement.
Internalized oppression leads national minorities to overestimate the strengths of white petty-bourgeois communists, while underestimating their own strengths. Acceptance of the views that national minorities are not “real” communists because they are not in a cadre organization, or that they are only capable of addressing questions of racism and mass work is an accommodation of racism on the part of national minority comrades. They are told they are incapable of playing a leading role in the theoretical struggle and develop a fear and avoidance of taking on that task. They are afraid that if they take on certain tasks they will discover that the myths really are true. They conciliate the racist paternalism of the “friend of the colored people” because they accept to some extent the view that the “friend” does in fact have a superior grasp of the science of Marxism-Leninism. National minority comrades fail to assert their leadership, put forward their views, because they don’t see their own strengths. And they are therefore not afforded the opportunity to sharpen their skills by putting their views forward for struggle. Thus internalized oppression compromises national minority comrades’ ability to struggle sharply against white chauvinism in our movement. It encourages an opportunist relationship between national minority and white comrades. The national minority comrade accommodates the racist paternalism of the white comrade, and the white comrade does not hold the national minority comrade accountable for his/her true strengths and weaknesses – so both get off the hook.
After years of witnessing the conspiracy of white chauvinism and experiencing overt racism and/or racist paternalism from white people, national minorities develop a pessimistic attitude about white people challenging white chauvinism among themselves and coming to understand the centrality of racism. Many a national minority child has been told by an older relative – “don’t ever trust a white person, they’ll stab you every time”. This saying is passed on in order to protect national minorities from becoming disillusioned about the possibility of white people challenging racism when they fail to do so. It expresses the reality of the hundreds of years of oppression national minorities have faced in this country at the hands of the ruling class, and the white populus not challenging that oppression. In particular the saying reflects clarity on the racism of the “friends of the colored people”. Within the communist movement, national minority comrades maintain their pessimism after years of seeing white comrades refuse to break with the conspiracy of white chauvinism, refuse to take up the struggle against racism as communists, refuse to change their practice.
Pessimism on the part of national minorities obviously plays into the hands of the bourgeoisie. As long as national minorities don’t expect white people to take racism seriously, they won’t struggle consistently and vigorously for them to do so. Pessimism reflects a lack of confidence in the white working class. It liquidates the fact that given the material interests of white workers in taking up the struggle against racism, they are quite capable of realizing it and struggling against the white chauvinism that holds them back from uniting with their natural allies. It also liquidates any steps forward that have been made on the part of white people in the struggle against racism. These steps forward are treated as aberrations rather than concrete signs of the real capability white people, especially white working class people, have in taking up racism consistently and as their own struggle.
Accommodating racism takes on two forms – nationalism and assimilationism. Both rest on the assumption that white people will not move forward on this question. Nationalism is based on pessimism and the assertion that since white people will always be racist, the struggle against racism must be taken up solely by national minorities and independent of white people. Nationalism liquidates the only true source for the liberation of the oppressed national minorities – a united working class overthrow of capital replaced with the dictatorship of the multinational proletariat. Nationalism negates the material interests of the white working class to take up the struggle against racism and it liquidates class contradictions among national minority groupings, thereby obscuring the principal contradiction in this society -that between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Since nationalism advocates national minorities alone should solve the problems of national minorities, it results in accommodating racism, leaving it unchallenged because the view is that “they won’t change anyway so we’re going to do our own thing”. Nationalism leads national minority comrades within the communist movement to either leave the communist movement to “the white folks”, or take it upon themselves to always take the lead in the struggle rather than challenging white comrades to assume their responsibility for playing the leading role in the struggle against racism. So white comrades get off the hook. Thus nationalism serves to accommodate racism.
National minority comrades made a nationalist error around the Midwest Regional Conference on Local Centers when the new RSC was being elected. The national minority comrades pushed for the election of a mostly national minority RSC, ignoring the fact that some of the white comrades had honestly moved forward in the struggle against racism during the conference. The national minority comrades allowed for a situation to arise where the newly elected RSC was bound to fail. Most of the national minority comrades elected were new to the OC and had demonstrated their leadership mostly around the struggle against racism. In addition, they didn’t elect Dave who had demonstrated his leadership in an all-sided way, was familiar with the region, and had been providing leadership in the tendency for quite some time. The effect of this would have been to leave the national minorities with the primary responsibility of taking up the struggle against racism rather than the white comrades. And had the RSC failed in its all-sided tasks in providing leadership to the region, it would have served to feed white chauvinism – “see, I told you they’re incapable”. The tasks of the national minorities would have been ghettoized and the most advanced national minority comrade would not have been included. (The NSC overturned the election.)
Assimilationism is based on the view that white people won’t change. And since they won’t change, national minorities may as well adjust to it and do the best they can under the circumstances. Assimilationism says “white folks won’t change so let’s take whatever crumbs we can get by joining in the mainstream of society.” Assimilationism says rather than challenging racism forthrightly, let the “friends of the colored people” help national minorities. While the racism of the “friends” may be obvious, the assimilationist viewpoint says don’t rock the boat, don’t challenge their racism because then national minorities won’t have any “friends”. In other words, the “friends” are incapable of struggling against their white chauvinism if challenged. Thus assimilationism like nationalism serves to accommodate racism because it proposes a way to work around racism rather than challenging it forthrightly.
Accommodating racism, both from the assimilationist and nationalism standpoint, is not simply a statement on national minorities’ pessimistic attitude about white people. It also reflects an attitude national minorities have about themselves. The attitude that “white people won’t change, so don’t bother struggling with them” breeds complacency and blunts national minorities’ ability to recognize white chauvinism, particularly the more subtle manifestations. It means accepting and participating in racist paternalist relationships with white people. It means accepting the status quo and accompanying one-sided, unequal relationship with white people and resulting self-negation. The acceptance and participation in racist paternalistic relationships with white people is a reflection of national minorities’ internalized oppression – agreement with the white chauvinism underlying those relationships. Pessimism, the attitude that white people are incapable of struggling against white chauvinism, is a rationalization for accommodating racism in the form of assimilation and nationalism. But for national minorities to accommodate racism – no matter what form accommodation takes – means to negate themselves, to agree that they are inferior and deserve abuse, disrespect, and degradation.
White comrades, because of their racism, have been blinded to the assimilationist form of accommodating racism, and have overestimated the influence of nationalism among national minority comrades. Nationalism is an open expression of national minorities’ pessimistic attitude towards white people, and white comrades cannot help but see the clear message in nationalism. But white comrades have not been able to see the assimilationist side of accommodating racism because it fits in more “comfortably” and with less challenging of their “friend of the colored people” approach to the struggle against racism. In addition, white comrades have been more aware of the pessimistic attitude of national minorities and blinded to national minorities’ internalized oppression. Their not challenging the view that white people are superior and their engagement in racist relationships with national minority people blinds them to the impact of those views and relationships on national minorities. White comrades’ view that racism is a natural state of affairs undermines their ability to struggle with national minorities against their internalized oppression. While white comrades need to deepen their understanding of nationalism and pessimism, they must also develop and deepen their understanding of assimilation and internalized oppression as the latter have a more dominant influence in our movement than the former.
The most common manifestation of assimilationism in the OC and tendency is for national minority comrades to allow themselves to become a “friend of the colored people’s” anti-racist credential. Sometimes national minority comrades are so glad to see white people that at least appear to be anti-racist, or who have at least made minimal steps forward in the struggle against racism, that they liquidate any struggle with them. Dave and Maddie made this error in relation to Ann. She was in fact the only comrade locally who was taking up the struggle against white chauvinism in any way, shape or form. This in part led to their conciliation. Any manifestation of her white chauvinism was treated as a minor aberration in an otherwise flawless cloth. Each manifestation was treated as separate and isolated from the other. It wasn’t until much later that they unraveled her whole pattern of racist practices and white chauvinist ideology. In the meantime, Ann was using Dave and Maddie as her anti-racist credential. And her racist paternalism toward the two comrades went virtually unchecked.
Another expression of accommodation is for national minorities to allow their tasks to become ghettoized. White comrades only talk to them about racism and that’s all they talk to white comrades about. They allow themselves to become the anti-racism consultant. The national minority comrades become so consumed in being the anti-racist consultant that their other party-building tasks are neglected. Sometimes white comrades, for fear of being criticized for white chauvinism, consult national minority comrades about anything and everything. That way they can say the national minority comrade told them to do it, therefore it’s correct. This happened to Dave. Comrades called him every day to consult with him on anti-racist matters, as well as to check in with him on some of the most trivial things imaginable. For instance, one comrade called him to ask which version of the Communist Manifesto should the local center buy and from which bookstore? The result of using Dave as a consultant, and his accommodation of it, was that his time was taken away from his tasks as chair of the local center, his national auto fraction work, etc.
Sometimes national minority comrades will take up sharp struggles with the center and backward forces among white comrades, but won’t take up sharp struggles with the white comrades who are the most advanced in the struggle against white chauvinism. They work to maintain an unprincipled peace (“I don’t criticize you, you don’t criticize me”) because to demand genuine respect from the more advanced white comrades would mean that the national minority comrades would be criticized sharply for their own weaknesses. This behavior on the part of national minority comrades serves to accommodate the racism of the most advanced white comrades. The national minority comrade encourages the white comrades’ racist paternalism that prevents him/her from taking up sharp struggles with the national minority comrade.
Petty-bourgeois chauvinism on the part of national minorities serves to accommodate racism in our movement. In the Seattle Local Center, the white chauvinism of white comrades and the petty-bourgeois chauvinism of the national minority comrades merged in relation to several working class national minority comrades there. Two of the working class national minority women were rendered invisible by the white comrades, were not taken seriously, despite the fact that their spouses were participating in organized expressions of the tendency. The petty-bourgeois national minority comrades viewed the women as backward and worked to isolate them from the party-building movement in spite of their demonstrated grasp of the ideological struggle. Another working class national minority comrade had demonstrated his advanced understanding of the tasks before us but the white comrades did not recognize his leadership and in fact rendered him invisible. This comrade had demonstrated his advanced understanding of the material presented in the 18 Points Study. But the petty-bourgeois national minority comrades felt that his lack of a college education and “mispronunciation” of words indicated his dire need for a remedial reading class. The one working class national minority comrade who had been playing a leading role in the tendency was viewed as exceptional and unlike most working class people. While his theoretical and leadership skills were acknowledged by the petty-bourgeois national minority comrades, one comrade in particular would tell everyone – national minority and white – that he could not deal with his family responsibility, that he was disorganized and spontaneous, and that he was hopelessly sexist. Her petty-bourgeois chauvinism in relation to him conciliated the white chauvinist view held by white comrades in Seattle.
There are many other expressions of accommodating racism on the part of national minority comrades. Comrades should again refer to the PWOC paper for further elaboration. The point is that these tendencies feed white chauvinism, let it reign. It’s important for national minority comrades to avoid any accommodationist tendencies because this error, too, helps to maintain the status quo. National minority comrades must step forward and take up their all-sided tasks. They must be as sharp and capable in taking up a struggle around the Draft Plan as they are in taking up the struggle against racism. And they must not liquidate the fact that the struggle against white chauvinism with white comrades is the primary responsibility of white comrades. This is not to say that national minority comrades should not take up the struggle. But they should not allow themselves to have the struggle against racism as their principle task.