But probably the most critical piece of feedback came -- not too surprisingly -- from my "external reader," i.e., the person on my committee who is not on the faculty of my program at SMU.
In scholarly terms, that can be considered ancient history; and I'd probably get more traction in the academy with something more recent and cutting edge, but the simple fact of the matter is this essay is still relevant, for two reasons: it is one of the few pieces of liberation theology where someone who knows herself to be part of an oppressor class can find guidance, and 25 years after it was written, it still has not been taken seriously enough to have been responded to effectively, in the academy or in Christian churches.
More than ten years ago, now, when I was just beginning to find language and opportunity for an anti-racist commitment, identity and practice, I read this essay and it went straight into my heart. In it, Isasi-Díaz describes solidarity as a practice of mutuality based on common commitments, rather than commonalities. She speaks of the solidarity that forms among people experiencing oppression, and also of the solidarity that can form between the people experiencing oppression and those who participate in the oppressing, but who want to move out of that complicity. (The interested reader can find this essay in Isasi-Díaz's Mujerista Theology.)
Over the last ten years, as I learned about dismantling racism from the Damascus Road program's trainings, and from work in local churches and organizations, I found more and more connections between these bodies of knowledge and Isasi-Díaz's work on solidarity. I also found key learnings in Paolo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed, where he speaks of appropriate ways for people considered to be part of "oppressor classes" to work alongside those experiencing oppression.
Isasi-Díaz spoke of liberation as a process that begins with the cry of the oppressed. Freire spoke of trusting the agency of those experiencing oppression, trusting them to know what their liberation required. Damascus Road spoke of following the lead of people of color (which seemed to me a key expression of the trust Freire was talking about), and of always asking the question "who benefits?" and realizing that when there was not a clear benefit for people of color, then the status quo of benefit for white people was being maintained.
These tenets have shaped the structure of my dissertation, which begins with an orientation to the history of South Texas, and how white privilege was constructed alongside the disempowerment and disenfranchisement of Latina/o peoples. Next (in the chapter I am working on now), I follow Isasi-Díaz's dictum to begin with the cry of the oppressed, and I "hear" Latina/o voices expressing their reality today, which unfortunately is still clearly shaped by that history of oppression. My intent is to construct a theology that provides the rationale for and means of working with people of color -- particularly Latino/a people groups, in my project, based on my own experience and setting -- with the clear intent that that work benefit people of color.
And then in the feedback from Isasi-Díaz came a criticism of this basic orientation. In the email dialogue that followed, she wrote "I think it is not theoretically valid from the perspective of liberation theology/philosophy to construct your argument mainly around what you can do for the oppressed. The moral agency of the oppressed in the process of our liberation is very key. For me, if you work at dismantling white racism because it is important for your own liberation ... wow! That would be an enormous contribution ... we are always struggling to find ways of convincing those in power to understand that oppressing others is not in their (the oppressors') best interest ..."
As I reflect on these comments, I know she is right, and yet, following this lead is tricky, and white women's history in this regard is particularly troubling. To give history very short shrift, white women's energy for the abolitionist movement shifted to the suffragist movement when white women shifted their focus from justice for enslaved/formerly enslaved African Americans to justice for (white) women. Similarly, white women took their learnings from and energy for civil rights activism into a women's liberation movement, limited by the a false assumption that women had universal needs focused on gender oppression, to the exclusion of oppressions based on race, class or sexual orientation. In both cases, when white women got in touch with their own experiences of oppression, they moved into ways of thinking and acting that left the concerns of people of color out.
As a white woman, I'm nervous about a commitment to white liberation, even liberation from oppressing. I have been helped by and shaped by and -- I humbly believe -- transformed by a commitment to seeking that my actions materially benefit people of color, even as I am aware of my many failures in that regard. I believe that deliberately shifting one's allegiance to work that benefits people of color is a key means for undoing unconscious white superiority, and dismantling racist structures.
And yet, I know there is a truth, too, in what Isasi-Díaz is telling me. Truths don't always play nicely together; sometimes paradox is created because of the seeming conflict between truths.
True: White people can't liberate people of color; that is their work.
True: Racism is white people's problem, which has a negative impact on both people of color and white people. Because it is white people's problem, we have a responsibility for ending it. And yet, because we benefit from it, our thinking is often faulty, and we need the leadership and insight of people of color, and to be accountable to them for our work.
True: White people's work includes liberating ourselves from oppressing, and from believing in the inherent superiority of white people.
True: Seeking the benefit of people of color helps white people who want to work with people of color at dismantling institutional and systemic racism.
Somewhere among these truths lies a path. I am tempted to say "the path," but my instinct says I will simply find one among many. This is a good time to ask other white people what they know about these paths. And a good time to pray for insight and clarity.
Spirit, illumine this path.
3 comments:
Tam,
This is great. Important questions, and an important area between those truths. Let me add another truth:
True: Historically, when white people have sought to help people of color, they have done so out of superiority and the act of helping has further entrench superiority.
And a distinction:
Seeking to benefit people of color is not necessarily the same as "helping" them. I can choose to patronize POC-owned businesses which benefits POC, but isn't necessarily helping them - or at least the help is mutual.
And perhaps mutuality is a key part of negotiating the space between these disparate truths.
Also, it's still beneficial to POC for white people to take seriously our own liberation from oppression. Oh, that brings up another distinction related to the review you gave of how white women moved from abolition to suffrage. Seeking to liberate one's own group from oppression is good and needed (we can't fault white women's movements for that), but it is a different task to liberate one's group from oppressing.
I think it's a vital task for us to find ways to talk theologically about liberating ourselves from the sin of oppressing. And as we do that work, I suspect the space between the various truths you outlined will be smaller than it first appears.
Tammerie Day,
Thanks again for putting your thoughts before us for response. My sense is that you are on a path that is right for your work. In workshops, I've learned to see with increasingly clarity that once I as a white person recognize how racism damages me (in this case by casting me as an oppressor), I can walk alongside my sisters and brothers of color. I think this work begins to do that very thing.
My only challenge is, should you set your very capable mind toward writing a white theology of liberation from oppressing, be sure to pay attention to helping white people understand how they oppressed. Many of those of us who have come to be called be white live our lives in good relationship with those around us, answer God's call in our lives, and maintain right relationship with those around us. Finding the language to name the oppressing behaviors within those quotidian movements will, I submit, be essential to the efficacy of your overall project. I think you may already have much of that language already.
Again, thanks for asking for feedback.
Hi Tammerie,
I continue to be challenged by your thinking and, simultaneously, ever more thankful to be in relationship with you. Its been a while since I've checked your blog. Catching up has given me much to think about.
I wonder if its helpful to think about equity. I didn't really appreciate or understand that word until I attended an undoing racism workshop with the People's Institute. If equity (of resources, of power, etc.) is the goal for all of us, then its clear that the task for we who have come to be called white is to seek liberation from our oppressing, to know our history, to know and live out our faith (Christianity and Judaism especially). This will benefit people of color, especially materially, but our identities as white folk will benefit too.
I'm so excited to be on this journey with you (even in this microscopically small way)!
Peace and much love,
tim
Post a Comment