Funferal

Of coalitions, racism, and the U of I

Since being pointed to it by the fine folks at the Prisonship I’ve been reading and rereading the Red Pepper interview with Chantal Mouffe and Ernesto Laclau. There’s just so much food for thought here, for scholars and activists.
Not only do they clearly articulate the shortcomings of a Habermasian approach to democracy, where we are each to subsume our personal preferences and experiences to an abstract service to the public good, but they provide a provocative and stirring sketch of what the Left should be doing instead.

Noting that “there are forms of antagonism which cannot be understood purely as an affect of the capitalist system”, they claim nonetheless that it is possible for the struggle of different groups to be drawn together in a “chain of ecquivalence” in which each group’s struggle and identity is transformed through its linkage with others, but yet retains its distinctiveness.
They draw on Gramsci’s examination of the success of the Communist party in Italy, which:

lay in building an allegiance between the labour movement and other democratic forces, such as the movement for the development of school co-operatives and the fight against the Mafia. These connections were much more than a tactical alliance. They had to involve a transformation of political consciousness so that participants in one movement saw that their demands could not be satisfied without also taking account of the demands of other groups.

Thus, no one struggle is ‘primary’, but each is locked in a true coalition.
The struggle to build a coalition in practice, of course, is not as simple as saying ‘make it so’ or even having the members of each group recognize the desirability of a coalition. I’m prompted to think about this not just because of my academic work – I’m currently trying to think/write about how community radio might be seen as a site for the generation/performance of such a coalition – but also because of various events on the U of Illinois campus recently. Those in the area cannot have missed the recent furore over Tacos and Tequila and racism in the Frat/Sorority community, but they may not have tracked so closely the coalition-building that has resulted, in large part, from that event.
For the unfamiliar: a frat (Zeta Beta Tau) and sorority (Delta Delta Delta) held an ‘exchange’ – for some reason the term always reminds me of ‘Wife Swap’ – in early October, with the theme ‘Fiesta’. Since the controversy of a ‘Pimps and Hos’ party last year, themes for such events must be approved by a campus committee, as was this. Internally in the frat, however, the theme was described as ‘Tacos and Tequila’ and it was understood by many that the party would play on stereotypes of Mexican life and culture.
Going a step beyond imagery around consumption of food and drink, about 20 attendees chose costumes that have since been widely condemned as demeaning and offensive. At least one sorority member dressed as ‘a pregnant Mexican’, several frat members dressed as ‘[immigrant] farmworkers/gardeners”. When this became public a week or two after the event, condemnation from the university was swift. Chancellor Herman described the actions as “juvenile”, expressed the university’s commitment to respect and tolerance, and hoped that the event would have an upside in sparking a campus dialogue on issues of tolerance.
The tri-Delts issued an apology for any hurt caused to others, before their national office issued a gag order, hoping to kill the controversy, directing members not to discuss the issue in any public forum (such as classroom discussion or in dialog with other campus groups) and cancelling chapter plans for public penance through the always reliable “community service.” [Note that the order has been imperfectly followed, which is how we know of it, but the fact that it has held in general tells you something about the power of the hierarchical structure of sororities.]
There are numerous angles to this that will no doubt provide fodder for a variety of academic papers. The elephant in the room is ‘Chief Illiniwek’, officially sanctioned symbol of the university, and itself a caricature of Native Americans. As a speaker from the Mexican Students’ Association noted in speaking to the University Board of Trustees, it is impossible for the University to honestly condemn undergrads’ enactment of stereotyping when at every major sports event on campus this BoT-approved caricature performs. The Chancellor’s mail to the university community was notable for framing the event as the result of a few bad apples, as signs of immaturity, rather than looking to, or acknowledging, structural factors. [I should note that at a later talk, in the University YMCA, the Chancellor did introduce the word ‘racism’ to the discussion, an interesting, and potentially positive development.]
The tri-Delt response [ZBT have been far better at laying low on this one] is striking, also, for their instinctive response. Their response was largely to apologize for the hurt caused by news of the costumes, not to ponder or decry the racism that underlay the costume-wearing – there has been some comment that the response came only when the event was made public, though it’s unclear whether the sorority took some initial actions prior to that time. Further, though, tri-Delts that I’ve seen talk on the topic have sought guidance on how they might find appropriate vulnerable minorities who they might ‘help’ as a form of community service. The notion that it is the ‘poor’ minorities who need help in this situation – while perhaps it can be read as a recognition of the privilege of this largely white group – fails to acknowledge that it is the tri-Delts who have/are the problem here, and that it is the surrendering of presumption of privilege, the transformation of the prejudiced, rather than the appeasement of the hurt, that is appropriate here. Thus, suggestions that the best community service would be for the sorority to educate itself about the ‘Chief’, and join the campaign for its removal, have been met primarily with a sense of confusion – first “what’s that got to do with it?” and second incomprehension of how education this topic might be more appropriate than spending some set number of hours picking up litter, or providing homework support, or whatever modes it is ‘community service’ takes these days.
I’ve veered a little from my starting point, the notion of coalition-building but not, I think, too far. One interesting thing to observe in the aftermath of the ‘Tacos’ fallout has been the development of a campus coalition to address the issue. The range of groups involved – from radical activists to frats and sororities – complicates the task of getting everyone on the same page regarding goals and tactics, but there has been perhaps surprising success. The difficulty at this stage is perhaps not so much around goals as with tactics. With the range of experience and politics of those engaged, it can be difficult to accept a common road forward. Is it worthwhile to seek to meet with senior administrators, or will such requests merely be dragged out and remove energy from the movement? Will direct action be counter-productive? It’s obviously a continuing story, so I expect to be reporting back on further developments in coming weeks and months. As I finish off this piece, students have finally gained a meeting with the Vice-Chancellor for this coming Wednesday. As Drudge would say, “developing….”