The
protests over the killing of George Floyd continue across the country. In some cities, widespread rioting and
looting have occurred.
One
of these cities was Sacramento, where the losses have been estimated at $10
million. City officials have been quoted
as saying that “outside agitators” were to blame. Arrest records demonstrate otherwise, with
the majority of those taken into custody being locals.
The
vague catchall “outside agitators” has a familiar ring. It came up in the South during the Civil
Rights Movement as organizers worked to build solidarity against Jim Crow. It came up again during the antiwar protests
of the 1960s. (I once visited a military
museum where the narrative for its Vietnam War exhibit solemnly informed us
that the demonstrations were provoked by agitators in the pay of the Soviets
and Red Chinese.) Now we are hearing it
in the context of this week’s uprisings.
The
agitators in this case are reputed by sundry sources to be the mysterious and
menacing “Antifa.” Conservative media for
the past several years have conjured the specter of a frighteningly monolithic force
of exceptionally well-organized fanatics poised to strike at the American
heartland.
The
references have been sporadic until now.
The Tweeter-in-Chief, needing to be on the cusp of whatever flight of
fancy has seized the “base” at any given moment, messaged that he would issue
an executive order designating Antifa as a terrorist organization, an authority
he does not possess, although reality has never stopped him from such sweeping proclamations.
Coming
back to the situation in Sacramento, local news outlets reported yesterday that
some residents in the suburbs had called law enforcement reporting suspicious
activity they thought was protest-related.
Posters on social media platforms such as NextDoor stoked anxieties cautioning
residents to be on the lookout for phenomena such as stacked rocks or bricks,
individuals carrying water bottles filled with “a non-water substance,” and (my
personal favorite) antifa who “like to dress up like wannabe ninjas, all black
and face masks and usually carrying a backpack.”
The
fears mostly proved unfounded, with only a few scattered street corner
demonstrations. People in those
communities were probably more at risk from “patriots” who like to dress up like
wannabe soldiers, all camouflage and all too often brandishing firearms.
All
of this begs the question of what is everyone from the White House to Fox News
to suburbanites so worked up about. Let’s
keep our feet firmly planted on terra firma, shall we?
Firstly,
antifa is short for “anti-fascist.” Aren’t
we supposed to be against fascism?
Nothing wrong there ideologically.
The
next important thing to keep in mind is that hierarchical organization is
antithetical to the antifa movement.
Antifa groups span a wide political spectrum, though they have certain
shared values such as opposition to capitalism and discrimination. Much of antifa activity appears to consist of
information sharing and ad hoc confrontations with far-right agitators, such as
those at the 2017 Unite the Right rally.
Many of them dress in dark colors as an expression of solidarity, and
the masks afford protection from being identified as targets for
retaliation.
Antifa
isn’t even a new movement. I remember
talk of antifa when I was an undergrad thirty years ago though I never knew anyone
involved. It has gained prominence since
the 2016 election in large part because the far-right has become emboldened by
a Trump presidency.
The
relative tolerance for the far-right among white suburban Republicans is because
it says things they agree with but are inhibited from expressing themselves on
account of the thin veneer of civility remaining in the national discourse. Consider some of the reasons the suburbs
emerged. Folks certainly wanted to
escape the crowding of big cities, but just as importantly they didn’t want share
their neighborhoods with people of color.
Redlining and restrictive covenants kept out any upwardly mobile African
Americans and Latinos.
Even
after these racist practices were outlawed decades ago, income inequality has
kept suburbia predominately white. However,
slow as progress has been, acceptance of a multicultural society is
growing. Antifa’s perceived threat to people
living outside the urban core, then, is purely symbolic. It openly stands up to white suburbanites’ last
best hope for preserving their way of life without getting their own hands dirty,
whether that takes the form of President Trump’s dog whistle rhetoric or the
overt militancy of neo-Nazis and Klansmen.
This is even more true of genuine mass movements like Black Lives Matter
which may actually lead to dismantling the repressive structures people of
color have confronted throughout the nation’s history.
But
you needn’t worry for now, dear suburbanite.
Antifa isn’t interested in suburbia.
They aren’t coming for your tract houses and SUVs. Not today, anyhow. Nor are they coming for your
tacky strip malls, big box stores, and megachurches. Don’t lose sleep over the fate of Walmart or
Chick-fil-A for the time being, or that of your kids’ Little League games and
your backyard barbecues. This is a long-run
struggle over hearts and minds, of how we define ourselves as a society. You may wish it away, but a reckoning will be
upon all of us soon enough. It’s a
question of being part of the problem or the solution.
©
2020 The Unassuming Scholar
No comments:
Post a Comment