A C o m p r e h e n s i v e M a n u a l
cally been ignored in the political process
may at first need to speak louder or more
: Identifying and naming the oppres
often in order to be hear. Or they may
sor is fundamentally different from
need to meet by themselves within a
using the oppressor's coercive tactics as
safe space in order to find their voices.
an instrument of rebellion. We would
favor the former, and oppose the latter.
As long as power hierarchies exist, it is
necessary to name them if we want to
Without civil rights laws
understand and/or change the world.
which specifically ban dis
those who commit acts of violence must
crimination based on sexual
be held accountable for their actions.
orientation, gay people can
lose their jobs, their homes,
and their families and be
For example, it is O.K. for women to say
refused service at public
that men have the vast majority of power
in our society or for people of color to
because they are gay with
talk about the pervasiveness of white
no legal recourse.
supremacy. It is O.K. for people in the
Third World to identify the First World
nations that use the majority of the
All of these activities are attacked as
world's resources. The discomfort
censorship by those accustomed to
caused by questioning these power rela
monopolizing the stage and dominating
tionships inevitably brings charges of
the decision making process. It is both
us them thinking or coercion, but it
ridiculous and dangerous to compare
cannot be compared to the violence
these activities to the historical legacies
involved in enforcing those relationships.
of colonialism and white male suprema
cy. The danger in the anti PC cam
Tactically, there are reasons to avoid
paign is that privileged groups will view
alienating those who hold power. But
challenges to their privilege as fascism
this alienation can only be avoided if peo
in order to justify a violent response.
ple within the system (or members of
oppressor groups ) take some responsi
Conservative groups have repeatedly
bility for continuing this dialogue.
indicated a goal of eliminating the left (or
liberalism). Jack Abramoff, former chair
: Aren't you lumping together legit
of the College Republicans (CRs), went
imate conservative political activi
so far as to say, we are not just trying to
ty with hate groups such as Neo Nazis?
win the next election. We're winning the
next generation . . . It's not our job to seek
: No; we are not equating the two
peaceful co existence with the Left. Our
groups. Harassment and coercive
job is to remove them from power per
political activity are quite different from
manently. [CR 1983 Annual Report]
non coercive persuasion. But to limit our
focus to extreme groups would assume
: By talking so much about the
that these groups are the sole protectors
Right, aren't you labeling people
of inequality: if they were to dissolve
and creating an Us vs. Them dynamic
tomorrow, everything would suddenly
that only breeds violence?
get better. This is not the case. More
T h e R a d i c a l R i g h t
M 2 9 9