Yearly Whitosphere

UPDATE (2007.08.14): There's more from the inimitable R. Mildred, without question one of the most fiery, erudite, and recklessly irreverant voices in the spheres.

UPDATE (2007.08.11): Be sure to check out the righteous goods being served up by Nezua and Blackamazon on this topic. You won't find substance of this quality in the whitosphere, period, where the discussion about diversity is quite frankly intellectual mud. Let's just face it, folks: the Colorful Blogosphere hands down has better writers, sharper thinkers, smarter commenters, bigger hearts, and nobler spirits. Plus we dress better. ;-)

~ ~ ~

Shockingly, just shockingly, the blinding whiteness of the liberal blogosphere, as represented at YearlyKos, is seen as a cause for some concern and alienation to people of color who happen to be involved, and merely an annoying tangential subject to white mainstreamers who have more important things to talk about. [ Graphic by the esteemed ebogjonson.]

According to AAPPundit:

The White Citizens YearlyKouncil.

Yes, I said it. Come on folks, stop beating around the bush. Stop sugar coating it. Let's stop playing Games. Let's stop intellectualizing white blogger racism. Let's call it the way it is, The Democratic Presidential candidates just went before the Yearlykos a 21st century White Citizens YearlyKouncil. An exclusive club of middle aged whites guys, who sit around playing the "liberal card" with all but a few black and Latinos who attended the YearlyKos event.

A typical response from kingsbridge77 deploys the Standard White Misappropriation Of MLK:

Martin Luther King said:

...Do not judge people by the color of their skin.

Ask yourself: Are these whites for, or against minority rights? The answer is obvious.

In the Democratic debates, there are no blacks. There is one mixed candidate: Barack Obama. Half black, half White. I guarantee this racial composition will not discourage blacks or Hispanics from voting en mass for a Democratic candidate, because Democrats care about minorities.

Needless to say, there isn't a systematic efford to keep blacks and Hispanics from attending the Yearlykos. Steps will be taken to make the panel look more diverse. But is it a big deal? No. [emphasis mine]

Honestly I don't think I could pen a more perfectly white-ass, racially-ignorant comment than this on my best fiction-writing day. Invoking Dr. King to argue for colorblindness is, shall we say, internally inconsistent. At best it's a cynical twist on the Appeal To Melanin; at worst a dishonest abuse of venerated African American oratory. I advise white folks to reconsider such embarrassing displays.

And is it really "obvious" that white liberals are "for" "minority rights"? It sure isn't obvious to me, especially when I read comments like this one; that is, if by "minority rights" we mean the right to equal lifelong opportunities for equal healthcare, education, housing, employment, compensation, legal justice, environmental safety, media representation, and overall socio-economic status.

Here's some of how Nezua described his own experience at YearlyKos:

Of course, its not all negative. But I can't help noting and talking about these things amongst the people I'm hanging out with, because the people I'm hanging out with are brown and black, and well, Kid Oakland—who grew up in a very diverse neighborhood, and "gets it," as they say. We can't help noting how you walk down the streets here and the city seems almost entirely "of color," and then you walk into the Hyatt, and while the service people (the "help") remain reflective of that demographic, all the turistas shedding dolares are hhhhhhhwhite. No suprise, eh? YearlyKos has (temporarily) created what Stephen Colbert called D.C.: "The Chocolate City with a Marshmallow Center."

But there remains lots of good vibes amongst the crew I'm here with. And that's what I focus on, aside from noting these predictable patterns. After all, this is what we are here to talk about and adjust. Or try.

Jack Turner writes:

Jose Antonio Vargas at the Washington Post filed a story about "diversity" at the YearlyKos convention titled "A Diversity of Opinion, if Not Opinionators."

I wish there were more time for the story to get into some of the deeper stuff, but it's a good start. Jose met with several of us at the convention, and we got into a wide-ranging discussion about how uncomfortable the subject of YearlyKos's "whiteness" is to many of its white attendees, the mob popularity inherent in linking (top of the long tail, if you will) which prioritizes more "mainstream" issues over those of concern to people of color and the ways in which the "blackroots" may not have been widely represented at the conference but has grown tremendously in the past year online.

Vargas writes:

Everyone agrees it's a problem, yet no one is sure how to address it. Historically, the progressive movement has included a myriad of special-interest and single-issue groups, and the challenge has always been to find common ground. The same is true on the Internet, but with an added twist. The Internet, after all, is not a "push" medium like television, where information flows out, but a "pull" medium, where people are drawn in.

This is not quite true. "Everyone" didn't agree it was a problem. Jane Hamsher, who was among those of us interviewed, pointedly remarked that she didn't see a large problem.

Ah yes, Jane Hamsher of legendary adroitness on matters of race. Needless to say, beneficiaries of every system of privilege in the world believe in the meritocracy of that system. It follows that the reason why the mainstream liberal blogosphere is overwhelmingly white is that people of color are all poor and illiterate (ignoring the blogroll on my sidebar, which represents a mere fraction of quality bloggers of color). Plus, in the minds of many white liberals, whites are simply better writers; people of color lack the skills to compete for attention against such fine crafters of thought and language as Hamsher and Atrios. And in a way, they're right: white liberals want to hear about white issues; they don't want to hear about racism unless it's a political weapon against conservatives.

So here's where I hand the ball to ebogjonson and simply raise my arms and walk along behind the play as he carries it into the endzone:

The comment reproduced below came in response to my post earlier today on Barry Bonds, Crooks & Liars, white liberals and their blindspots. I used a picture of Firedoglake founder Jane Hamsher to illustrate the post, and made reference in both the entry and the image to the infamous "Blackface Joe" incident. A few hours go by and I get this, from someone identifying themselves as Scarecrow, a name I associate with a Firedoglake frontpager:

I'm afraid you don't know Jane Hamsher -- a friend of mine. I don't argue with the offensiveness of the blackface image, nor does Jane, who on several occasions has (1) apologized and (2) said it was a mistake, which is why she pulled it very soon after it went up. But the image -- the metaphor -- was about Joe Lieberman pretending to be someone he wasn't -- a loyal friend of Afro-Amer- voters at a time he was demonizing Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and sending race-baiting signals to Republicans in Connecticut because these two men had endorsed Lamont. That was the point of the post, however badly it misused the image.

[ Note from Kai: Clearly the FDL crew still hasn't figured out why Blackface Joe presented a Crossed Metaphor, nor why people of color continue to be offended by their Flippant Defense.]

Jane's comment about the faux controversy was not a defense of the image -- again she admits that was wrong -- but a comment on how it was used by Lieberman's campaign as a distraction in his fight against Lamont, who had nothing to do with the image.

And Jane happens to be a white woman, but so what? CNN asked her to go on CNN to talk about Yearly Kos, the convention she had just attended; she didn't go on presuming to represent people of color but rather to talk about other issues.

I hope you get to meet Jane someday, but in the meantime, an open mind on who she is and what she thinks would be helpful.

First of all, Scarecrow, let me just say that (assuming this is you!) I've always enjoyed your FDL posts. Your comment above aside, I've found your additions to most conversations to be sterling, so it is with a heavy heart that I find myself forced to call bullshit on you in this particular instance.

I also have to say that while I'm genuinely touched that you felt the need to come all the way over to defend Jane Hamsher (a.k.a., the founder of the site through which you share your words and insight with so many thousands of people), it did kind of freak me out when you wrote: "I hope you get to meet Jane someday, but in the meantime, an open mind on who she is and what she thinks would be helpful." I mean, helpful to what? I live in LA, and whenever someone tells me it'd be "helpful" for me to "keep an open mind," I start looking for the Scientology/Landmark Forum materials. It's basically like you're telling me Jane's not going to be able to eat my brain unless I let go of retained negative emotions about Blackface Joe. (Engram, anyone? Racket?). My brain is important to me, Scarecrow, but that's just me...

Regarding your specific comment, I find it telling that you have not a word to say concerning the bulk of the post to which you're purportedly responding, i.e., the annoying thing that went up and down on Crooks & Liars today. It's all about you and your bud, I guess. The funny thing about this is that I reached for Jane pretty much on a lark. The offending Mark Groubert item was still in my Feedburner this a.m. (despite having been taken off of C&L), and there, floating just a few posts above it on my screen, was Jane of Blackface Joe fame, smiling down from the heavens on all the good progressive boys and girls. It was just too rich a coincidence, so I wove her into the post about how Mark Groubert had similarly spoiled himself for me with his endumbening Barry Bonds commentary.

The context of the image I snagged was Jane's CNN discussion of a Mitt Romney interview, so your comment about Yearly Kos somewhat mystified me. That is, until I found this:

Things I'm Already Tired Of

"Why wasn't more attention paid to issue X at Yearly Kos..."

"Why was Yearly Kos all white males..."

The diversity issue is a real one, but I think a lot of critics have really overstated the case. First of all women were very well represented, both in the audience and on panels. I'm not going to guess at the precise proportions, but the gender balance seemed to be actually pretty good. Second, often the discussion of the issue neglects that fact that the great orange Satan himself is probably not best described as a "white male." His existence doesn't negate or minimize the importance of the general issue, but it should at least be acknowledged. Third, there's a tendency to talk about it as if the relative lack of diversity is a reason to fault a specific individual or group, rather than seeing it within the broader context of diversity issues.

...ah, I see Jane was here first. [atrios]

[ Note from Kai: Of course Atrios sardonically calls Kos "great orange Satan himself" as a way of playing up the victimhood of someone after whom the entire event is named; just as sexists always call feminists "man-haters" and such; bearers of privilege always dramatize attacks against their privilege as violent personal vendettas.]

Which led me to this post by your friend Jane Hamsher:

YearlyKos and the Myth of the White Male

I just want to comment on the Washington Post article which said that based on observations made about Yearly Kos, the progressive blogosphere is a bunch of white males. I spoke with the author, Jose Vargas, at length prior to its publication but what I had to say doesn't seem to be the story he wanted to write and there were many other non-bloggers willing to validate his point and that's what made it into print. From my perspective, while there may have been a socioeconomic bias that may have made it easier for white male non-bloggers to attend Yearly Kos, there is diversity in the blogosphere and more than that a tremendous willingness to embrace more. And I question the authority and the knowledge regarding the progressive blogosphere of people who don't acknowledge that.

[...]

People can insist that the blogosphere is a bunch of white males but it just isn't. I sat there and listened to someone who actually does blog and who I like a lot say that nobody of color was blogging on "A" list blogs about prison reform or immigration and I looked over at Pach, a person of color who writes about those issues frequently on FDL, and we both just shrugged our shoulders. What were we going to do? It wasn't what anybody wanted to hear. [full Jane]

That's when I realized that - of course! - this "response" I had gotten from the white liberal blogging world had actually nothing to do with the underlying comments and issues I had raised. It actually had to do with a side conversation being held between Jane, FDL and whoever about a WaPo article that I hadn't then read, hadn't commented on, and hadn't posted about. That makes your bit about friendship, and hoping, and knowing, and an open mind, and apologizing all pretty much, well, bullshit, in the Harry Frankfurt, On Bullshit sense of "utterances and speech acts which do not add to the meaning of the set of sentences uttered, but which are added purely to persuade interlocutors of the validity or importance of other utterances."

[ Read it all ]

What I find most striking about all of this is the degree to which most white liberals appear to remain utterly clueless about the very meaning of the word "racism". They still seem to think that racism is an interpersonal social faux-pas rather than an interlocking set of societal, economic, political, and cultural institutions which actively, consistently, purposefully benefit whites by oppressing and exploiting people of color. They seem to think, "We already gave you the vote and now we're working to defeat the pointy-hat conservatives at the ballot box, what more do you want from us?!"

A good example of the unexamined intellectual immaturity of white liberal thinking on race is the simultaneous embrace of (1) colorblindness, and (2) diversity. Aside from the obvious illogic, neither of these objectives really resonates among anti-racists (and yes, our lives are our pet issues). As I see it, saying that colorblindness will end racism is kinda like saying that stopping all steroid testing in pro sports will end juicing; if we look away, it'll be okay. Except that those who continue juicing will then have free reign; and white folks are the juicers of modern socio-economic life, the corner-cutters and invisible-affirmative-action-grabbers and wealthy-welfare-abusers who have access to the good stuff while everyone else must work twice as hard for half the results.

This goes far beyond photo-op diversity. I'm talking about creating democratic conditions for communities of color to take hold of significant systemic agenda-setting power. White folks who aren't on board this agenda are, well, racist, in the broader, impersonal, societal sense of the word. The antidote to racism isn't colorblindness but conscious anti-racist agitation which strives to actively overturn a half-millenium of genocidal white supremacy by dismantling the multi-dimensional legacy of everyday racist privilege, exploitation, and oppression.

Comments

[brownfemipower]

really great points kai--in regards to the idea "gender is represented"

um, please do correct me if I'm wrong--but the only woc blogger I know who was there was pam from pams house blend. do women of color not count as women?

that's *totally* my pet peeve--when white folks (and sometimes even men of color) say, look at all the women there, even as there's only one or two women of color, if that at all. just because they're women doesn't mean they have woc's best interests at heart. Much less queer woc or disabled woc or any other marginalized person within our community...

gr.

[Eric Stoller]

The antidote to racism isn't colorblindness but conscious anti-racist agitation which strives to actively overturn a half-millenia of genocidal white supremacy by dismantling the multi-dimensional legacy of everyday racist privilege, exploitation, and oppression.

-Amen.

PS: Great post. I had no idea about the YearlyKos (what it was/is/etc...been crazy busy with my new job) Thanks for opening up the loop and filling in a lot of details.

PPS: I love the word agitation!

[Tom]

"Are these whites for, or against minority rights? The answer is obvious."

I thought so too.

[donna darko]

i've commented at openleft and echidne's so far about this.

[Kai]

BFP, you're right, WOC are so often ignored in these discussions of "diversity", and I agree that MOC do this all the time too. But hey the prominent white liberals are already tired of hearing about these things! At least we know where they stand: not with the marginalized. They want our votes and our money but not our voices or our initiatives.

Eric, I like the word "agitation" too, you and I must be troublemakers. ;-)

Tom, yes I know what you mean.

Donna Darko, I couldn't find your comments at OpenLeft, though I did peruse the threads there about diversity.

My impression is that the white YearlyKos crowd simply wants more diversity in their photo ops in order to get better PR. I read some discussion about stagnant traffic in the liberal blogosphere, and how in order to boost traffic and advertising dollars they need to reach new demographic sectors and that means more diversity. Thing is, their idea of diversity is having people with different skin colors and phenotypes playing the same game they're playing: chasing the corporate fake-news all day every day, turning links into barter currency rather than intellectual citations, cranking out Democratic Party talking points, focusing on marketing and advertising rather than original political or cultural production, focusing on electoral TV politics rather than grassroots community-building and movement-building. They haven't figured out that these are many of the reasons why so many of us don't even participate in all that mess.

[Catty]

Thanks for the post. I greatly appreciate your comments.

[Lloyd Webber]

This is an awesome post. I especially agree with the idea that white liberals only want to hear and talk about racism as a political tool against rethuglicans. However, I'll add that they also do it in order to get "cookies" for not being like those other "evil" whiteys...Pretty effing sad

[Carmen D.]

Kai, you nailed it. I was so put off by Hamsher's response to the WaPo article. As I read it I could just hear, "No. No. YOU don't understand. I have black and Hispanic friends, really, their names are ...."

I attended YearlyKos although I haven't really talked about it much. I met incredible individuals of all races. And I plan to stay connected to them. But the overall institutional feeling? It left me exhilirated and sad. As a black woman, you begin to think, "If these are my friends..."

[sokari]

Great post - particularly I like the comment on the photo of only Black man there but hardly in the picture!

Dont know whether you read about the banning of pro-Palestinian bloggers from the Daily Kos - Daily Censor. Based on that alone this is not really surprising but nonetheless sickening.

[Nezua Limón Xolagrafik-Jonez]

keep speakin it brother.

[liza]

i have had writer's block for a few weeks now, but i wanted to tell you ... I LOVE YOU!!!!!!!!!

[BLackAmazon]

Does it hurt you to be this consistently awesome? I wonder at times you must pull something , or walk past mirrors and go damn I'm awesome you know something

[James]

I noticed a lot of the same sort of weak commentary in aappundit's same diary over at MLW.

[Nezua Limón Xolagrafik-Jonez]

You are so right, 'mano. For the most part, we be az tha pitcher of sangría next to un bowl de warm leche.

[Nanette]

They haven't figured out that these are many of the reasons why so many of us don't even participate in all that mess.

This is so true.

I started this comment earlier, and in the meantime happened to read both myleftwing and dailykos (as well as the Hamsher and Bowers/Stoller stuff earlier) and I see "the Netroots" have settled on their "debunking" (read "containment") theme, which they are pushing for all they are worth.

"It's not that the major blogs are unwelcoming or, more importantly, unappealing to many people of color... it's that the colored folks are too poor, uneducated and ignernt and so don't blog - and *that's* why the sites, conferences and so on are so white."

It's interesting to watch the different reactions at the two sites (dk and mlw) to that nonsense - at mlw there was immediate pushback and calling out of the racism in that view - on dailykos (and mydd, openleft, FDL, so on), they consistently swallow that nonsense whole and often start planning literacy drives and wondering how to get them computers, to teach the colored folk how to read and to get the poor folk online.

Not only are they (the large sites) losing market share and traffic, due to the prior (and current, actually) deliberate strategy of appealing to a richer, whiter, righter, male(er) crowd (makes a better ATM machine) but I think the consistent ignoring of the fact that there are many vibrant communities of color online, consisting of people who actually can read and write and afford an internet connection (even if they write majorly run-on sentences, as this one is going to be), and the insistence of not speaking to bloggers themselves, but to communities of color "leaders" indicates to me that they are simply attempting to position themselves as the "great white liberal saviors" who generously will show the ignorant poor folks "how it's done".

[Donna Darko]

I made such strong statements I was afraid to go check back there until today. When do you notice anything I do anyway? ;)

[Blackamazon]

Nanette you do love me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cause that was the best laugh I had in days

ARE THEY SERIOUS?!?!

[Nanette]

BA, of course I do! And you'd be surprised (well, probably not) at the tide of stupid that sweeps over people in conversations like that. lol, *especially* on dailykos. Doesn't matter what you say, or how often you say it (fabooj, a long time poster there, who is black, has been trying for years - I gave up on the site long ago) it just does not compute for some of them that the vast majority of poc can both read and write, and even know how to turn on a computer.

DonnaD, who does not notice what you do? I noticed you in the openleft thread, anyway. More clueless people - or at least pretending they are.

[Kai]

Catty, Lloyd Webber, Carmen D, Sokari, Nezua, Liza, Blackamazon, James, Nanette, Donna D, thanks for all your thoughts and comments!

Damn, the threads at MyLeftWing and DailyKos were indeed funny, especially that thereisnospoon clown who oozes a noxious stenchy contempt toward people of color, the working class, school teachers, the sixties, liberalism, feminism, counterculture, writers who don't publish in peer-reviewed academic journals, and basically anyone who isn't him. That is one pathetic dude.

As for the DailyKos piece by Miss Laura, its central thesis is that the mainstream news media is even less diverse than YearlyKos (neatly conflating YearklyKos attendance with DailyKos readership along the way). It doesn't really support this claim with data; but even if it's true, I have no idea what it's supposed to mean. I guess we're supposed to be grateful...?

I suppose that this whole issue simply further shows that mainstream liberal blogs are essentially interested in intra-white rhetoric and (despite all the nominal MSM-bashing) mainstream media political gamesmanship. All that idealism about "people-power politics" and all that progressive jazz is an advertising lie, like all ads which purport one thing in order to sell you another.

[Joan Kelly]

Hi Kai,

I found you through Nez's site, have enjoyed your comments over there, and am now enjoying your blogging here. What you said about the quality of writing amongst the white bloggers/commenters who talk(down to all) about literacy issues among people/bloggers of color... I have had the good fortune to read such well-written blogs, and they attract such well spoken comments/commenters...I had no idea what I was missing out on elsewhere until I clicked on some of the links in the YearlyKos discussion posts here and elsewhere. Yeesh.

[Kai]

Hullo there Joan Kelly and welcome! Come on, I've been reading your wonderful comments at Nez's and BFP's and BA's and Sylvia's and seemingly all over my online orbit of late, I know you and dig your style. You should fire up a blog yourself. Anyway I'm glad you're enjoying this side of the blogosphere, this is where the real action is, right? Rhythms here too complex for them other folks. Only game in town as far as I'm concerned. ;-)

[dopper0189]

Sorry but I have to call some bullshit when I see it. I hate to just sign up and do it but, that's what I have to do. I deal with Racism, Black issues on DKos all the time, so why doesn't someone go there look up my screen name, and quote all the offensive remark I have ever got. Look up the same with all my comments.

The netroots is where the knew power structure in the Democratic party is going to be. Way too often we wait around until the power structure develops, the rules get set, the best positions taken, and then we try to shape the agenda. I want to be at the front of the movement. The net roots is only 3-4 years old, it's not set in stone, we can still shape the agenda. Do we really want it to develop into another all White structure. Yeah haters can come up with all sorts of negatives on Obama, all excuse about how he is 1/2 white blah, blah. The fact of the matter is a Black guy from Chicagos south side raised more money then EVERY WHITE candidate. Duval Patrick the Black governor of freakin' Massachusetts blew away hs White opponent, and he was a civil rights attorney in the Clinton Admin. When you agree with White Conservatives crap that "Liberals only voted for these guys to feel good" what you agreeing with is that some of our brightest Black people can't come up with ideas good enough to win over White people. It's only the guilt Black people can't come up with anything.

Do White folk on Daily Kos or at Yearly Kos say dumb stuff? Yeah they do like White people everywhere. But is it out of hate or ignorance? If I ask a person who is "Muslim do you want some pork? I may offend him but if I didn't know Muslims didn't eat pork the it as out of ignorance. If I go ask him knowing he doesn't eat it, then that is trying to be offensive. So do you want educate people or not?

What's everyone here who is bitching perscription? I would rather go to Yearly Kos and make an attempt to change the system, then sit around and bitch. If no one goes there it will stay White. What was there a sign that said no Black allowed that I missed?

Let's just say there are those people who would sit at the lunch counter and demand to be served, those people who sat in the fron of the bus and said treat me like a person, and those who just complained. I don't go to Daily Kos to suck up to White people, I don't need to get there approval. I go there because dam it, I'm smart, I have something to say and I will be heard.

By the way. I told the people off on Daily Kos for a different reason. I told them they didn't reach out enough. They should have invited some people from Ebony and Essense since they were in Chicago, and Tavis Smiley is from Indiana (next door). I call bullshit out where ever i see it!

Peace

[Kai]

Welcome, dopper0189, I like your attitude. I'm glad you do DKos and YKos; as I see it, the more people of color in the mix, the better. Indeed, most of the bloggers I quote in this post were there, as well as several of the commenters in this thread (and needless to say, this is a melanin-rich website). I didn't mean to give the impression that I believe POC should not participate in the mainstream liberal blog world; they (you) certainly can and do; and they nobly attempt to bring some light and sense to issues of concern to communities of color. Be sure to check out mi hermano Nezua's upcoming documentary on his whole journey through Chitown.

But the majority of bloggers of color aren't interested in assimilating into the MSM-lite blogosphere; most of us are coming from different worlds and different perspectives, so assimilating into those largely white middle-class scenes with their many cultural signifiers and social cues and political priorities and narrow heuristic frames is a project that we feel would actually involve getting rid much of what we are and do; not to mention chasing the corporate media all day and reducing politics to TV gamesmanship. Of course, if you have the energy and adeptness to pull it all off, more power to you; but many of us are more into micro-regional grassroots organizing, community-building and movement-building, small unglamorous stuff; I mean, there's a lot more to politics than electoral strategery, and in my experience many progressive people of color have stopped looking to national politics as a viable location of meaningful change, with both parties thoroughly corrupted, when there are kids on the street right now whom I can mentor and strapped local organizations where I can volunteer and vocational classes I can teach and immigrant-rights rallies and police brutality protests I can attend and articles I can write for free street rags and on and on and on. In the end I suppose everyone does their thing as they see fit, and it's all necessary and good.

As for Obama, I remain on the fence about his candidacy. Needless to say I agree with you, he's Black, that whole conversation is bullshit (and mostly a white conversation, at that). My beef is with his emergence from the DLC, his support from the Daly political dynasty, and his ongoing mealy-mouthed rhetoric. One of the bloggers I respect most on national politics is Skeptical Brotha and I find myself nodding along with this post; but I guess we'll see. I'm always hoping that something amazing will happen, and sometimes it does.

Anyway, thanks for dropping by, and for your good work out there. Peace.

[Blackamazon]

SO Now I'm calling BULLSHIT

Maybe just maybe considering the multitude of issues we DO care about on a deep involved level

We don't want to expend large amounts of time and energy going to an unwelcome un connected unfocused environment and telling them how to be better.

No one is speaking about specific posters , we're talking about a prevalent working structure.

I don't believe the netroots ( or at least DKOs' and teh like ) will be at the forefront UNLESS I and others like me help em get there. And the mule store is closed today.

You obviously haven't read ehhhh just about anybody's blog here because as Kai, Nez, Nanette,bFP,sylvia,EBOG, and on and on have stated ad infinitum

It's not our bag. .

At some point ignorance IS violence and it IS entitlement. Go read your stuff cause it will change us?! Bring it here . We're not there and guess what it upsets them more than it upsets us at the moment.

Cause little secret

WE'RE GETTING HEARD ANYWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not DKOS blown up but I get enough visitors on my lonesome from people who actually do things and write letters around the world and make it happen

and on too your obama/patrick/civil rights analogy

WHich is pretty damn insulting but I'll roll with it for now.
I am not about to give MY energy and time to help another man build shit where he repeatedly and continually takes me not just for granted but is insulting and disrespectful to me and mine, I don't care how big and shiny his movement looks.

And first and foremost ,name one person who said that bullshit line you invented about it's only guilt?

Cause it's not only a fallacy but a pretty damn condescending take on the nuanced points of POC but hey were "haters" so cause we not in the shiny new netroots we can't be strong enough to sway em?

And frankly leveling thinly veiled charges of self hate and non love at us about two people we didn't bring up .

We don't accept your attempt at reframe.Try again.

Those men got where they were because they were capable and THAT'S WHERE THEY WANTED TO BE

Our point is frankly the POCspher, the Afrosphere, The Asiasphere,The Latinosphere, LGBT sphere, ablism, the WOCsphere, the nativesphere ET ALL have MORE THAN ENOUGH

I'm talking embarrassment of riches good enough writers,thinkers discussions ( shoot some folks who don't even write blogs and spit that hot fire)

WHO DON'T WANT TO BE THERE

and have damn good reasons why.

and It's the "netroots"

Who can't leave us alone their game needs us

and are PISSED cause the MSM they assault so bad sees it, progressives see it, radicals, see it and

so instead of doing their own actual work they try and erase it, ignore it

Or just out right lie

which is fine and glorious but not being with em hasn't stopped us from getting heard

s o if I was to use your "civil rights" analogu

YEs some sat at lunch counters some complained.

And some believing that while the struggle of their brothers ,hermanas and les gens de monde for acceptance and rights was noble and good

BUT

that the white mans water was not more wet

made spaces of their own in which they could thrive and support all who need them.

So have a cool drink step in when your parched again

[Kai]

Oh, okay so Blackamazon's response to dopper0189's vague cry of "bullshit!" is, shall we say, a bit more to the point than mine. Heh. But we're essentially saying the same things, I think. Thanks for your poetry, Ms. Amazon, it's always a cool drink for the parched. ;-)

[Nanette]

dopper, I've seen some of your 'black kos' diaries, when surfing by, and have found them enjoyable and informative most times. Of course, the reason there was a need for that sort of thing is because black issues were (and are still) regularly ignored on the site. Am not sure what happened to the short lived 'latino kos' series.

A couple of things - and mind, I personally am not making any judgments on where people choose to hang out, or with whom or anything like that. Freedom of the net!

The netroots is where the knew power structure in the Democratic party is going to be. Way too often we wait around until the power structure develops, the rules get set, the best positions taken, and then we try to shape the agenda. I want to be at the front of the movement.

See, I have a different way of looking at this. I do agree that the "netroots" - meaning, in general, those who support Democrats with words, but most importantly, with funds - is and will be a power structure of some sort within the Democratic Party. What sort and how effective is yet to be determined. As you say, it's a fairly new thing. However, a netroots power structure has already developed, is jealously protected, and while it's likely others will be brought in to be part of that structure, for appearances sake if nothing else, I see no reason at all to think that the existing setup will change much.

And that is perfectly fine. A lot of people worked really hard, pulled together, supported and talked up each other, established their circle, typed a lot of text, chased after politicians, various establishment groups and media, grew their influence and are now reaping some of the benefits. I'm sure they have more growing they plan to do and, if one wishes to operate within that structure - which is, at this point in time, indeed a white power structure - surely the best thing to do is to join in their agenda, get with their program and follow their lead. That you liken your quest to getting a seat at the lunch counter is... interesting.

There are, however, other options that many people - including various communities of color, some of whom have different interests from making sure Democrats are elected (such as making sure their issues are recognized, heard and acted on, beyond just flyby visits from politicians at election time) - are working to implement. For whatever reason, the main "netroots" sites are not appealing to vast numbers of non-white people online - still, that doesn't mean we've ceased to exist, ceased to plan, coalition and build ways to increase our own influence, or that we have ceased pursuing ways to advance our own agenda.

The night is still young :)

[Nanette]

Oh man, I'm such a slow typist, sometimes! Had a waited just a few more minutes I could have just typed "What BA and Kai said", lol.

[Nanette]

You know, it's occurred to me that about the only group that can't, as a general rule, hear and recognize racist dog whistles are well-meaning white liberals.

The people they are meant for hear them. People of color, in general, hear them. Well meaning white liberals/progressives, though... especially when the whistle is being blown by someone they know, trust and consider a fellow progressive, do not.

As an example, let's listen:

Daily Kos front page poster

Both parties, these folks assume, have accepted extremists in to their ranks, and the extremists have to be denounced, because the American people are in the "middle," and they have to be assured us Democrats (as in the case of the DLC and their ilk) will distance ourselves from the extremists who don’t share heartland values.

We know the extremists who are part of the Republican coalition: the radical religious right, the people who want to undo the New Deal, the people who want to teach creationism, the Citizens Councils of America and the like. But here’s the thing: we don’t have odious or whacko or fringe groups as part of our coalition. Tom Wolfe wrote about radical chic over 30 years ago. Markos may live in Oakland, but it's not 1968, and he's not hanging out with Fred Hampton and Huey P. Newton and there will be no slow motion or still life of Markos Moulitsas Zúniga strolling through Watts in a Red, Black and Green liberation jumpsuit that he had been saving for just the proper occasion. We're not a fringe group. We're the mainstream.

Well, and we all know what "mainstream" means, no? Not, certainly, "odious or whacko or fringe groups" like the Black Panthers.

This sort of thing is what (many) poc have heard coming from the "leaders of the blogosphere" circle of sites for ages, although not usually in quite so blatant a manner... - "Hey, look at us! We're not scary Negros or Brown people who are going to demand that things change, or bother you with social justice stuff. We're "mainstream" - look at our demograpics! We're White, well-off, male, educated... the people with money and influence that you're trying to reach with your ads and your political "asks". And we're not going to ask anything of you at all except that you say you're a Democrat! "

This is why there is little or no concern about "diversity", except when it's a PR issue (or, as Chris Bowers said a couple of weeks ago, "The Progressive Movement" is stalling, apparently due to the fact that the pool of interested White folks has been tapped out).

It's in the business plan.

As an aside - sort of - BooMan, (among others) is having a hard time understanding why Latin@s and many others consider Markos to be a blogger who is of Latino ancestry, but not a Latino blogger. Tough distinction for people to grasp, it seems. Whistles or no.

[dopper0189]

Look, the point is we a Blackosphere. There are times we need to discuss things amongst ourselves. But it's a lot harder to win a war without allies (see Iraq). Wee need our own movement, and we need places to talk and solve our own problems. But we also need places to unite and form a common mission. We don't live in a binary world, we need to do both.

BlackAmazon, I wasn't saying your or this diary was saying these things about Obama/Patrick I don't use starwmen. But be realistic, try and tell me you haven't heard those arguments thrown around?

We need our own spaces, but we also need to shape the spaces around us. If we want change we need to do both.

[Blackamazon]

Number one

WE HAVE ALLIES , on our own terms who actually do and support stuff. Point blank besides get their faces on tv I have no idea what thes ebig spots have done . And it aggravates me and is point blank disrespectful that they still TALK ABOUT US without talking to us. We don't live in a binary world

and telling this to people who have advocated for teh inclusion of many more is actively insulting as it shows a lack of common intellectual decency to read what we wrote and challendge us on WHAT WE WROTE not the perceived damage of our opinions.

I HAVE WEBSITES I CAN GO TO FOR A COMMON MISSION

Ther enot kos or open left but i have em and they have been wonderful.

This perceived lack your talking about is not felt by me.

DO i want money for my causes shit for my self

YEP

do i at times want more care paid to my issues

OH SWEET MARY YES

do i think i'm gonna get it from people who give front page to a man who says rape don't exist and someone who openly mocks the panthers without substance

NOPE

and do I care that tehy are wondering around bemoaning their lack of audience instead of trying to actually DO THE WORK of talking to people

not at all.

And I'm plenty realistic thank you, you were the first person to bring up Obama and Patrick in a conversation where no one else ahd used them to paint us in a bag light

Once again we do not accept your attempt at misdirection, want to reframe that using the courtesy of actuall adressing what we HAVE talked about instead of how we aren't doing what you want us too?

We need our spaces

we made them

we are shaping teh spaces around us

cause I still haven't been on DKOs as a commenter nor Kai but whoohoo suddenly both are there

and even in other spaces our issues are coming up.

CAUSE I DON'T NEED TO CONVINCE PEOPLE MY PEOPLE ARE IMPORTANT

they COULD have done this in an egalitarian truly progressive way

THEY DIDN'T and now they (trying ) to learn

I get paid to teach children not grown ass adults who call me names and disrespect my intellect .

We do need both we are getting both. Maybe not in teh way YOU think is important but we doing alright

Now if you asked questions instead of telling us why we so wrong you'd get further in finding out why we fell so secrue in our stuff while it seems teh Netroots don't

[Nezua Limón Xolagrafik-Jonez]

WOOHOO yeah. :) what mi hermana said!

[Nanette]

doppler - well, what Black Amazon said. I love that ending:

Now if you asked questions instead of telling us why we so wrong you'd get further in finding out why we fell so secrue in our stuff while it seems teh Netroots don't

Think about that for a minute.

Also, just remember... no matter where the Democrats are going or who is leading them, they don't get there without us colorful folks. It simply does not happen. And, of course we need allies and to work together... but there really is no reason to sit at the counter and clamor for a piece of generic pie when it's much more satisfying and filling to just make your own.

Mind you, this is not to say that anyone who wants to shouldn't participate at this or that site, or work together with people they feel comfortable allying with and so on. Might as well be everywhere, ya know.

[dopper0189]

Black Amazon, I have told off the people on DKos, myself. Go look it up. If you think I just came to slam you I didn't. But I think both sides of this argument are wrong. I'm Black too you know and many of the things they do piss me off just as much. Give me a liitle credit I know why more Black people didn't show up. I know why more Black people don't come on Daily Kos. If I insulted you by not asking you "Why" I'm sorry. I think I have a pretty good understanding of the why all ready.

I did bring up Obama and Patrick first. I once again didn't say that anyone here said negative things about them. My point in bringing them up, was that both these guys found a receptive audience with White Liberals progresives. This suggest that there is and audience amongst them.

What I'm mainly arguing against is BINARY thinking. "Your either with me or against me" type thinking. I suggets that we can both maintain our own sites, our own movement, AND at the same time participate in another online movement. Let me be more blunt, we SHOULD participate in it.

I don't agree with everything my wife say, and neither does she everything I say. But we compromise. She does her things I care nothing about, I do my things she thinks are silly, but we also come together and we are stronger for it. I'm looking for such a "marriage" of all the different parts of the online net roots.

If you look at conservatives, Wall Street conservatives, have been able to get generally poorer Social Conservatives to vote for Tax Cuts for the Rich, that don't benefit them. This is because the Social Conservatives know they will give money to fund anti-Abortion groups, that trust me most guys on Wall St. don't feel that strongly about.

I want us to be in a position to say, OK you want us to turn out Black voters on issue X, then you better support issue Y. Currently most of us vote because we are afraid that we will get another guy who will let Katrina victims down, not because we have enormous sway in a party we help elect! I want us to have sway, to be able to demand things because we can back it up!

Let's face us there are issue we really don't want or need White People around when we talk about them. If I can get back to my wife, there are issues that should stay inside the family. So yeah I'm all for our own space too. Once again I don't want Binary thinking. Yes there are people who will only want to participate in the Blackosphere, and some who want to do both, that's everyone right. I just wanted to suggest thhat more of us need to do both.

Lastly your a grown adult, you don't need me to lecture you, I'm just stating my opinion.

[Kai]

Okay okay I think we can de-escalate this thing at this point. I think everyone's had their say and we all pretty much understand where we're respectively coming from. We all make the best political choices we can based on our understandings and situations and priorities, and we need to respect that about each other.

dopper, nobody's going to criticize you for toughing it in the MSM-lite blog scene, indeed I admire the persistence in the face of a lot of cluelessness; but hopefully you see what BA and Nanette and others round here are saying, which is that we've got plenty of meaningful netroots and grassroots activism taking place outside of that scene, to which we are committed and which takes up most of our time and energy; and our calculation, unlike yours, is that getting involved in the Kos-or-whatever scene isn't really worth it at this point; but who knows, things may change. Also, going forward, please avoid posting the exact same comments calling "bullshit" on several of our blogs, it ain't cool dude.

[Blackamazon]

Okay iT' s early in the morning I did just go into that dkos thread and what I found upset me but hey I have no feelings in these things cause I never do ( this is not the first time that I have been used as a lightening rod and whipping girl without common intellectual courtesy on sites i don't visit but you too can go look it up)

The thing That is upsetting is that all of your talk of combination and marriage HAS BEEN ACHIEVED by various groups

( Side not it is now pretty damn Galling at the use of " Blackosphere" because 1) it''s a reactionary term cause they didn't like the term whiteosphere 2) if we need more proof they didn't read, Whiteospere was used by KAI who is NOT black and 3) the pretty large conglomerate of black bloggers named themselves and its AFROSPHERE)

Kai as far as I know is NOT a black multiethnic 1G immigrant guyanese cisgendered straight woman. But if Kai needs something or the word out and drops me so much as a one line email or blog comment.

Hopefully I got to it cy the time he finished posting

It's HIS , almost ( sorry Kai always gotta put that in there but you know it's love) no questions asked.

BFP has to keep me out of fights on her behalf

Kactus need only breathe for it if i got it it's hers if I don't I'm asking everybody else.

Because I believe in their voices and what they do

and they have shown the same if not more courtesy care and respect for my opinions.

THAT'S how we build "marriages" and agendas and strength.Not cause they have power ( which considering the felt success of the Demos agenda that power could run a solar calculator)

Online net roots have married have been sucessful in raising awareness defending people,historical recording and GASP AND AWE

FUNDRAISING for rather important shit often without mighty BB

And once again with Obama and patrick and the receptive white audience

WE DON'T CARE OUR GOAL IS NOT SPECIFICALLY TO FIND RECEPTIVE WHITE PEOPLE

We're not talking about government politics we're talking about the organization and progress of what even the white folk who can't sya my Kai,NEz,BFP or Nanettes name

AGREE HAS STALLED.

Which is gasp now when they start paying attention to us ?

And were the problem for NOTICING THAT ?

We do have the power and glory be we're exercising it

You aint done a damn for us we're not there

and guess what even in the horrible no stamina way that entitled white folks have their paying attention

We instantly got sway when they got bad press

Net roots is married marriage of love among all SORTS of people

and finally by saying this

Let me be more blunt, we SHOULD participate in it.

negates your last sentence of this

Lastly your a grown adult, you don't need me to lecture you, I'm just stating my opinion.

Telling me what I should do in a comment that actually dresses none of my points that aren't your points, whil telling me to go look it up, and not even sharing Why's

is a lecture

[Joan Kelly]

"which considering the felt success of the Demos agenda that power could run a solar calculator"

And I am now in full swoon.

Interested in this discussion, grateful that people are having it. I aspire to both Kai's welcoming-ness to dissenters and BA's everything-ness to everything. And now also want to say the f-word in conjunction with describing my newest blog/commenter crush, Nanette.

Love to all the commenters. And Donna Darko, it's extra happy for me to see you here and elsewhere, I have missed a couple of other people's voices since I stopped going where I first heard them, which is also where I first heard you.

And Kai - thank you for the kind words. Made my day. And no kidding about the only game in town.

[Joan Kelly]

p.s. as in, I f-ing love Nanette.

[Kai]

Joan, well who doesn't have a blog crush on Nanette?

Nanette, that DKos post you quote, about not being associated with fringe or radical groups, is just ridiculous. The compliant buying-into mainstream/conservative fears is disgusting. And ya sir, them's our white liberal allies right there. Uh huh.

[Nanette]

Hah! I'm the one with all the blog crushes - too amazing, you guys are.

Sadly, the conservative framing works, for the demographics they are trying to reach. You'll notice in the Open Left thread, what sort of bloggers of color Stoller is looking for... stalking horses. Ones who will attack Black (and, Brown, I guess) institutions, like the NAACP, CBC, and the CHC (congressional Hispanic Caucus, I think that is) for them - I suppose so that they can then point to them and say, "See? Black/Brown person said!" like they were all doing with Color of Change and the FOX/CBC Democratic debate.

Every day, it seemed, at least a couple of the "leaders of the blogosphere" blogs would be saying, "Color of Change said this, and said that!". But now that CoC has switched its focus to the Jena Six and the continuing Katrina disaster... not a peep about them out of the big blogs (that I have seen).

No shame at all, these folks and - I suspect - very little self awareness either.

[Kai]

Nanette, yeah I must say that I was actually mildly surprised at the overtness of the racism in that Stoller comment (most white liberals usually try much harder to keep it covert) about how the KosStollerHamsher types would welcome the right black blogger who would criticize the NAACP and the CBC. Presumably hippity hop music, petty street crime, and welfare abuse, too. Again, we see this pattern of conditioning "diversity" on the demand for assimilation into a set of cues and concerns and priorities; so once again, we see that what these folks mean by "diversity" is finding people with melanin who share the same thoughts and concerns and signifiers as those without melanin -- a narrow worldview which white folks call "universal" and the rest of the world calls "white".

[Ravenmn]

dopper0189, it seems like you only see two choices here. One is playing with the big guys like Kos, the other is POC talking privately amongst themselves. That is binary thinking.

POC are blogging, are communicating far outside their own communities and are building a movement full of allies who are willing to take action when called.

More at my own blog.

Also crushing on you fabulous bloggers.

[Nightprowlkitty]

Wow. What a great conversation. I have come to this fantastic rich territory of the internets via Kid Oakland's links at Daily Kos, wherein I found Nezua and Blackamazon and now you, kai.

Thus far I have, in my rather bumbling journey across cyberspace, discovered two different rich territories of single blogs connected into a far greater whole than any sum of the parts. One is the local New Orleans blogs which have sprung up post-Katrina and which I do my best to blog about and now this! What great fortune for me.

I love dopper and until I read Blackamazon's posts I would have agreed with him entirely -- seeing it as an issue of power, of having a say even with a group of folks who are pretty dim about issues outside their chosen area of expertise, the numbers, the polls, the battles with the media, trying to rebrand Democrats and liberals, etc.

But I am a perfect example of why Blackamazon is absolutely right -- this great gathering of blogs did NOT have to come to Daily Kos or FDL, etc. Just one mention of them at Daily Kos and I flew here with my own wings. And you had better believe I will use what I am learning here in my arguments there; already have, as a matter of fact. Might not always do it well, but I will most certainly do it.

Blackamazon and kai are right - there is more than one way to have an impact, to reach everyone.

Here's a really bad analogy. It's like I'm wandering through a harsh and inhospitable desert. Through a fortunate twist of fate, I stumble upon a mighty nation, rich in culture, material and law. Do I ask all of them to come back with me to my little village? Or do I learn as much as I can, take as much as I can carry, given me through this nation's generosity, and go back to my village and share what I know? Frankly, I think the second choice is a wee bit more practical.

Anyway, yes, I am gushing, can't help it. As I commented to Nezua, the doors of my perception are being blown wide open by encountering all you folks.

[Kai]

Ravenmn, exactly right, I can't see how anyone in this thread has suggested any "binary thinking" aside from dopper.

Welcome, Nightprowlkitty, glad you're enjoying the hood and soaking up some new views. Kick back, knock back a few strong concotions, find your way home safely. ;-)

[MB Williams]

You know, I'm so freakin' sick of this. If Jane Hamsher is now claiming she is a white woman, then why the hell did she claim to me, "[a]s an American Indian and a woman, won't be the first time I've had dirt kicked in my face and credit for all my work handed over to someone else." [direct freaking quote.]

So what is it? Is she now going to uncover some long lost African-American heritage? How about that Chinese friend of her gr-gr-gr-grandfather's (oops, you mean there's a difference between an actual friend and someone who brought in the ice blocks?)

I've been hanging out lately on some LSAT discussion boards, and I'm just about ready to puke. Posts like, "I'm adopted and just found out I have some [insert minority] background. I look completely white and have experienced no prejudice due to this unknown heritage. Can I now "check the URM (Under-Reporting Minority) box" and get the significant bump, despite the fact I may be screwing a more deserving URM out of a spot at a top tier school?" When I say, fuck no!, I get the "you're just a racist" because you won't let white-privilige-adopted-Johnny make himself feel justified for behaving unethically.

Great post, Kai. I wish I wasn't so swamped with this Law School thingie that I could have read it when it was fresh. Maybe after October, neh?

[Kai]

MB, yeah I think it's pretty clear by now that Hamsher wasn't being exactly honest with you there; as I've said before, I do believe that she believed for a time that she was Indian -- while on mushrooms in the desert listening to The Doors. As the old saying goes, white folks like to steal from black and brown folks everything but the burden.

Hope the law school thingie's going well! Good to see ya!

[donna darko]

The whole response was racism in the netroots is "structural." Or society is racist so we are too.

That's as retro as Bush saying he won't take on global warming because China hasn't.

[donna darko]

oh nannette i wasn't talking about you.

i think stoller and bowers took my comments at mydd and openleft to heart but they never responded to me because i'm a girl. i noticed they always respond to men of color.