Rev-elution offers independent, local, Black journalism and reflections on faith in public space. Support Rev-elution by contributing at: Cash app, $CMizzou, or Venmo, $Carl-Kenney-1
commentary -I challenged Antonio Jones, chairperson of the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black
People, to prove his leadership is making a difference. He offered a list of
behind closed-doors meetings with corporate bigwigs.
My question reflected growing
frustration with the state of Black leadership. I’m dismayed by the slow-motion
movement toward embracing the goals of women, LGBTQIA inclusion and affirming
the concerns of Durham’s Latinx community. My desire for more than the
traditional rhetoric of a Black middle-class agenda is troubling my soul.
In fairness, these issues transcend questions
related to Jones or other men and women appointed to lead Black organizations.
The models for community organizing are massively outdated and reflect
assumptions involving what it takes to move the needle. Changing times require
more than a protest movement and the election of Black politicians to secure a
Black agenda.
The suppositions regarding the
agenda have changed. The perception of a Black agenda is clouded by a myriad of
thoughts regarding what’s best for Black people. The legacy of the Durham Committee
on the Affairs of Black people is the ability to rapidly mobilize Black people
to confront an enemy. There was clarity involving what that meant. The
influence of white supremacy was correlated to laws limiting the progress of
all Black people.
Today, there are diverged opinions
regarding the enemy in the way of progress. Black people are divided. Locally,
this shows up in views regarding police funding. White progressives have
strategically and effectively manipulated the division to persuade Black people
to consider other ways to combat white supremacy. Their pitch – the problem isn’t
Black versus white. It’s capitalism versus socialism. It’s the Black elite
versus working class Black people. It’s homophobic Black people versus the
force of an inclusive agenda.
Within this context, the Durham Committee
on the Affairs of Black People is named the enemy of economically challenged
Black people. The organization is labeled a relic of the past.
The organization is blamed for the
dismantling of a Black power base. What is missing in this critique is
something more consequential. The narrative surrounding the Durham Committee on
the Affairs of Black People, and other Black led organizations, exposes the
impact of white supremacy in minimizing Black mobilization.
The founders of the Durham Committee
on the Affairs of Black People were business owners. The leaders of Black
movements across the country were religious leaders supported financially by
their congregants. They could freely speak because they weren’t forced to capitulate
to the interests and demands of their employers. They were free to challenge
the systems created to regulate the movement of Black people. All of that
changed when congregations shifted their theological and political positions.
It changed when former business owners, supported by Black consumers, became
employees at Duke and other white controlled businesses. It changed when urban
removal dismantled more than 100 businesses in Durham’s Hayti business district.
It also matters that white funding
channels dried up when white led organizations took on the business of fixing
Black people’s problems. Most nonprofits doing work addressing Black
disparities are managed by white people. The executive directors are white. The
board members are white. Their program models are based on research with little
or no input from Black people.
The impact of generational wealth
feeds into the funding disparity of organizations like the Durham Committee on
the Affairs of Black People. White funders feed organizations like Durham’s
People Alliance with enough to hire staffing to manage their political agenda. Organizations
like the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People raise just enough to address
the needs of their political action committee, and that amount pales in comparison
to the People Alliance’s war chest.
This is the corollary of white
people investing in Black folks’ business. The leaders of Black led
organizations consistently walk on eggshells out of fear that saying too much
will result in their termination. Black leaders incessantly endure the fear of
being blackballed for being a “firebrand” within a community that wants it all
to go away.
Black leaders aren’t protected by
Black self-determination. They’re forced to assimilate in a world that measures
achievement by the standards of white normality.
In this sense, the nature of Durham’s
political system uncovers the impact of white supremacy and institutionalized
racism. There are double standards limiting how Black people speak versus the
freedom of white people to share opinions. The economic disparities related to
the funding of nonprofits, who does Black focused work and political action
committees engaged in getting Black people elected, is why groups like the
Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People seem to do less.
The municipal election is rapidly approaching.
The Political Action Committee of the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black
People is endorsing candidates for mayor and three ward seats. They will do so
after pondering the concerns of a cross-section of Black people. They will also
consider the interests of Durham’s Latinx community.
During their recent annual dinner,
Jones made a strong statement regarding LGBTQIA inclusion. His comments were
met with a standing ovation. The narrative regarding the Durham Committee on
the Affairs of Black People lingers in places managed by some white liberals.
Upon deeper evaluation, don’t
believe the hype.
No comments:
Post a Comment