BTR vs. APOC
this post is for those avid followers of the crucial debate between Bring the Ruckus and Anarchist People of Color. Among the issues separating the two otherwise like-minded organizations is the difference between “settler” politics and “race traitor” politics, and the respective views of the white working class that the two entail.
Specifically, much of APOC centers around former members of BTR (Ernesto Aguilar and Heather Ajani), who split with the organization recently. Their specific reasons for leaving were laid out in internal organization communications, but can be pieced together from this more recent critique of an article by BTR member Roy San Filippo.
The BTR site also offers recent pieces on the election: here, here, here, here, and i most especially recommend the one here.
Also of interest on the APOC site are a couple of articles on the Revolutionary Communist Party, specifically this critique and this argument for why anarchists must work with the RCP. Their reading section also has a wonderful selection of resources on race and anarchism, and for the sake of our british readers, i highlight a selection on one of my pet peeves, “Anarchist Orientalism.” APOC also has, i should note, a cool PDF export feature, which means of course that they win the debate by virtue of sheer technological prowess.
2 comments
Leave a comment
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
This is really good stuff. thanks Geo. I thought that bring the ruckus were quite cool when I saw their “neither the vanguard or the network” organising structure. I was disappointed to learn that they actually think that white people are that necessary in anti racist struggle. I also think that a copy of the anarchist orientalism article should be given to all people before they become anarchists.
Comment by rachel @ 11/23/2004 11:48 pm
glad to see your interest - i think this is crucial stuff (tho perhaps less so in the UK). on that note, i think it’s important to bear in mind that BTR’s analysis is rooted directly in the US experience, and doesn’t claim to go beyond that. they see “minority” struggles as setting off a crisis in american whiteness, and thereby creating a more general crisis. so in a way, white folks are only secondary in their historical read, but in practical organizing they have focused on “race traitorism” in an effort to facilitate the general side of the crisis. i think we have similar concerns, as i oscillate between feeling that the white working class is totally necessary and that, alternatively, we may as well give up on them. in a way, i think that BTR’s politics lean to the former, but not definitively, as they themselves provide the critique of the historical co-optation of whites.
Comment by geo @ 11/23/2004 11:57 pm