Reaction: Black Lives Matter – PLSC 359: Global Governance

Last week, we attended a talk by Alicia Garza, one of the “co-founders” of the Black Lives Matter hashtag and subsequent movement. As a WGSS student and social activist, most of what she discussed had been covered in my courses or was something I had read about online. Because of that, there was minimal shock value in her words, and I was able to really appreciate her true commitment to ending white supremacy and racial injustice.

What I did not understand while attending her talk was that for many people in the audience, this was their first experience confronting the role they play on a daily basis in the perpetuation of white supremacy and institutional racial violence. As I walked to my car after the lecture, I had the great displeasure of being directly behind a Richmond student loudly voicing his (racist) opinions on Alicia Garza’s presentation. Let me preface this by saying that I am in no way condemning this student for speaking his mind; I am well aware that everyone is entitled to a certain degree of free speech on this campus, and that he was not speaking directly to me. That being said, he was speaking quite loudly (on the phone with someone who seemed to be his significant other due to the frequent use of the word “babe”), and we just so happened to be walking to the same distant parking lot.

As I reluctantly trailed behind him, I got a true earful of what I had hoped no longer existed in this world and certainly not on this campus. This particular student used both racially and gender-based slurs to describe Garza, and “joked” that he wished he had brought a gun to the talk (which he referred to as a “sermon”). I was so taken aback by his violent words and clear disregard for who could hear them that some of my own minor critiques of Garza’s lecture seemed suddenly unimportant.

I had planned to write this blog post about how I understand that some white students may have felt uncomfortable confronting their potentially subconscious complicity in racial injustices, and how I felt that her tone bordered on condescending at times. I was going to talk about how I noticed some of her more drastic statements coming across as too extreme to those who may not understand the scope of racial inequity in our country and across the globe. I had a very different blog post in mind as I stood up to leave Alicia Garza’s talk, but what you are reading today is a product of a fellow student’s ignorance and racism. It is coming from a place of anger, embarrassment, and shame as I walked behind this student loudly saying the n-word and c-word to deflect his own role in continuing white supremacy through hate speech. Although Alicia Garza’s talk was not perfect, it is people like this student who make it all too clear that her words need to be spoken even louder to be heard over the privileged voices of hatred.

antone says:

April 13, 2016 at 4:16 pm

Like Naomi, I’ve thought a lot and been occasionally shocked by casual racism. I’ve come to the collision that people use casual racism to tighten social bonds. By excluding and denigrating an out-group, it allows for a tighter in-group. By insulting other people, those not insulted are brought together. The more drastic, the more it brings people together.
Dr Omar McDhoom 2012 researching the Rwandan genocide, found that those most likely to kill people were those with the socially weakest position. So by that logic, those most likely to use hate speech are doing it because of their weakening social standing.

Natalie Larsen-Palomino says:

April 23, 2016 at 1:20 pm

It makes me sad to hear that a fellow Richmond student is so aggressive in his response to learning about an important social issue. Racism is a difficult subject for many to talk about, especially in settings in which both sides are represented. I actually noticed this in the global governance class period after attending the Alicia Garza talk, as Datta prompted us to share thoughts about it. It was strange for me to watch as there was a heated discussion in which both sides seemed to feel attacked, even though it seemed that they agreed on the same basic premises. The discussion was filled with eye rolling and intense remarks, which made me disappointed. I feel that this was an accurate representation of the United States general discourse on racism, most rational people agree on the basic issue: racism is wrong and cannot be tolerated any longer. Unfortunately, communicating without having one side feeling attacked is the difficult part. My biggest wish is that someday we will be able to have discourse without feeling personally attacked, this movement needs us to move forward and make amends rather than be stuck in a stalemate where all we do is point fingers.

Casey Nolan says:

April 29, 2016 at 11:50 pm

In reading this, I wish I could say that I am surprised by this type of behavior and language on our campus. The fact that I am not surprised in the least is truly concerning for a university that desires to an inclusive environment. In wrestling with this question of inclusivity, does that mean that we should have to make students, like the one described in this story, feel welcomed? I would argue not. At the point in which one students makes another feel marginalized I would argue the point becomes moot. All that to say, I am very excited for Dr. Crutcher to lead this university as I feel his intentions of extending equity to campus are exactly the next move this university needs to make.