The political coalition there is "people of color" - the point of this was to fight anti-black racism by making a unified group containing them and everyone else who was "not white". This is an improvement over the previous system where groups like Italians/Irish became white by being anti-black. (or were thought to have)
Activists then forgot this was the point and changed the name to "BIPOC" to de-emphasize half the "POC" group (the ones who aren't "BI"), but the whole point was to keep them in the group.
I think the notion of a “BIPOC coalition” has many angles. Many black political thinkers and academics focus on a black/white binary, and extending the concept of “black” to “people of color” was natural. This was also appealing to white democrats, whose coalition with black people is heavily focused on fighting purported racism and discrimination in return for loyal democratic voting.
Couple that with the prospect of America becoming a majority non-white, it’s easy to see why the broader left of center embraced the rhetoric and policies they did over the last decade—e.g. reframing policy issues like immigration and policing in racial justice terms.
The problem is that “white racism” as a lens for understanding America—widely shared by modern liberals—is a poor tool for understanding Latinos and Asians.
I understand what you think you are seeing and that you are probably not alone in this. But you haven’t managed to convince me that there is a «cohesive coalition». I think people who believe that this is what they see may have gotten a bit carried away.
The political coalition there is "people of color" - the point of this was to fight anti-black racism by making a unified group containing them and everyone else who was "not white". This is an improvement over the previous system where groups like Italians/Irish became white by being anti-black. (or were thought to have)
Activists then forgot this was the point and changed the name to "BIPOC" to de-emphasize half the "POC" group (the ones who aren't "BI"), but the whole point was to keep them in the group.
I think the notion of a “BIPOC coalition” has many angles. Many black political thinkers and academics focus on a black/white binary, and extending the concept of “black” to “people of color” was natural. This was also appealing to white democrats, whose coalition with black people is heavily focused on fighting purported racism and discrimination in return for loyal democratic voting.
Couple that with the prospect of America becoming a majority non-white, it’s easy to see why the broader left of center embraced the rhetoric and policies they did over the last decade—e.g. reframing policy issues like immigration and policing in racial justice terms.
The problem is that “white racism” as a lens for understanding America—widely shared by modern liberals—is a poor tool for understanding Latinos and Asians.
I understand what you think you are seeing and that you are probably not alone in this. But you haven’t managed to convince me that there is a «cohesive coalition». I think people who believe that this is what they see may have gotten a bit carried away.
1 reply →
It’s certainly consistent with the belief that non-whites have political common cause with other non-whites against whites.