White Supremacy in the Movement
Against the Prison-Industrial Complex

Liz Appel

HITE SUPREMACY IS DEFINED AS A “HISTORICALLY BASED, INSTITUTIONALLY
perpetuated system of exploitation and oppression of continents,
nations, and peoples of color by white peoples and nations of the

European continent, for the purpose of maintaining and defending a system of

‘wealth, power, and privilege” (Martinas, n.d). I s deeply embedded and en-

trenched in the foundation and social institutions of the United States. T wish to

explore the o and various manifestations of white supremacy in leftit politis,

specifically in the emergent movement against the prison-industrial complex. T

posit that white supremacy i (re)produced and perpetuated by most white, slf-

proclaimed activists who fight different aspects of the prison-industrial complesx.

Through various forms of paternalism, reformist politics, romanticizing struggle

and violence, exoification and exceptionalism, and neocolonial divide-and-

‘conquertactics, whites propagate thir privilege and powerintheir organizing and

activism. 1 use the terms “we” and “white activists” almost interchangeably, for

this artile is primarily directed to an sudience of white progressives, a group of
which T consider myself a member.

‘The crux of my argument i not that white supremacy is an inevitable evi that
is the undoing of any social movemen. Instead, I attempt to critique white
progressives whose actions, though wel intentioned, are laden with manifesta-
tions of white supremacy and challenge them to embrace a more radical politics,
one that makes anti-racism a central tenet in any analysis and subsequent action
againsta white-supremacist state. We cannot begin (o fashion a creative blucprint
for a struggle that attempts to actualize a world free of domination without
fundamentally understanding the ways in which our various actions, as white
individuals and organizations, perpetuate the hierarchies and oppressions against
which we wage our battle. Proceeding without fundamentlly questioning the
forms of oppression that are reproduced in our “activist” work ultimately relieves
the state of the need to take an active role against our efforts. Thatis, we will have
already fulfilled the prophecy of white supremacy and ensured the failure of true

Liz Ares. grodusted from Brown University with degree in Edhnic Stdies n 2001 Shehas worked
‘with various abolitonist organizatons sch s Criial Resisance an the Prison Actvst Resource
(Cente and mostrecenly has ben invlved wih daylabororganzing project in Oakland.

Social Justice Vol. 30, No. 2 (2003)
82 AvpeL

freedom. We must not deny or make light ofits power to destroy movements for
justice. Therefore, we must be consistent,disciplined, and cognizantof ourselves,
‘which means being unafraid to check the reproduction of privilege on the part of
fellow whites. In this fasttrack, fascistic police state, in which racist sentiments
of nativism and xenophobia are becoming as American as apple pie, there is an
ever-present need for white activists to dedicate themselves o an anti-
struggle. They must reframe and interrogate their roles within the larger move-
ment. Before we can begin to transcend the barriers of race, we must understand
the deeply rooted nature of white supremacy and the various forms of oppression
faced by different peoples of color.

‘The movement against the prison-industrial complex s multifaceted in its
efforts to dismantle and combat different evils. Thus, hundreds of organizations
throughout the nation are working on issues such as the death penalty, detention
of immigrants, police brutalty, health care within prisons, policing of youth, and
the militarization of public schools. This work is necessary o build a mass
movement that seeks to destroy the prison-industrial complex, and ultimately the
state and its founding principles (capitalism, white supremacy, and male su-
premacy), but we must critique the methods and politics of many white liberal
individuals and organizations involved in this work.

“The international movement around politial prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal is a
perfect example in terms of its abiliy to highlight the various manifestations of
white supremacy. A large percentage of Abu-Jamal's supportrs were galvanized
by the conflcting “facts” used to convict him of murdering Philadelphia police
officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981. Morally opposed to the death penalty, many
people have worked tirelessly 10 poke further holes in the prosecution’s shoddy
case. Death penalty work isinherenly reformist and reaffirms and legitimizes the
role of the state; whereas the decades of caging an individual might be unjust and
unfortunate, putting someone to death i altogether wrong. Under this logic, the
‘more than two million souls facing humiliation, violence, and torture behind bars
at least have been spared from capital punishment. In December 2001, the state
removed Abu-Jamal from death row in a strategic move. How will the state’s
action affect the movement for his freedom? Will removing the threat of capital
‘punishment stuntits growth and longevity? Will the anti-death-penalty contingent
retract fromthe struggle ince their main goal has beenattained? Atevery junction,
the state will tramp reformist movements against the prison-industrial complex,
given the government’s preemptive actions to counter and maintain divisions in
the work of activists.

“The anti-death-penalty movement prides itslf on seeking “truth” o fight for
the freedom of prisoners unjustly accused of crimes. However, the anti-death-
penalty movement uses sate terms such as innocence and guil, thercby legitimat-
ing the government's definition of crime (individual activity) and its understand-
ing of who consiitutes criminals (people of color and poor people). The state’s

White Supremacy in the Movement Against the Prison-Industrial Complex 83

responsibiliy for propagating violence and visiting terror upon various poor
‘communities of color within and beyond U.S. borders is thus absolved. What if
Munia Abu-Jamal had shot and killed Daniel Faulkner? Would his caging be
justified or at least founded? Either way, we continue o focus on the individual act
and effectively negate the state’srole i establishing the conditions necessary for
crime o exist. In an essay on political prisoners, Angela Davis (1998: 45)
approaches the tate’s definition of rime and the criminal with an understanding
that actsof survival are necessary in an unequal capitalst society. She states, “the
occurrence of crime is inevitable in a society in which wealth is unequally
distributed, as one of the constant reminders that society’s productive forces are
being channeled in the wrong direction.” White activists in particular must
embrace a much more radical politics, one that understands the hegemonic effect
of using state language and frameworks. Their work and analysis must reflect their
understanding of state-sponsored terror and violence and not reiterate white
supremacist politcs.

Tt equally important o expose i the movement around Muia’s case the
great exceptionalism that occurs. From the onset, white supremacy based its
existence on the sub-humanization and subsequent oppression of peoples of
color. Can super-humanization also be a form of white supremacy? Mumia
himself has taken strong stances against his superhero status, trying instead to
focus attention on the plight of those suffering in Pennsylvania prisons or to shed
light on various forms of oppression throughout the world. His autobiographical
Live from Death Row s not plea for his own salvation, but rather a political act
in defiance of the state’s attempt t0 silence his revolutionary voice. A tool for
political education, it seeks to understand the multifaceted nature of state
violence. How many people know of Mumia’s politicalideology or have read hi
‘works? Similarly, the rock star satus of abolitionist and former political prisoner
Angela Davis has served to neutralize her radical messages. Most people are
unaware that her onetime co-defendant, Ruchell Magee, remains incarcerated to
this day. Recently freed political prisoner Geronimo ji Jaga (2001: 72) has
discussed this phenomenon:

1did notjoin a movement tosign autographs. 1 did not oin a movement
for fortune or fame. | joined a movement o win.... But I have to explain
10 you that we are under collective discipline not to promote ourselves
‘We cannot promote individuals, we can only promote the revolution, the
struggle. When you confront the level of commitment of someone like:
Ruchell Magee, or Hugo Pinell, Leonard Peltier, Sundiata Acoli, Dr.
Mutulu Shakur, Marilyn Buck, Susan Rosenberg, and on and on and
on,..understand that we don’t care if you say free this person, free that
person, or put our names on posters. We didn’t join the movement for
that. We understood that we were making a sacrifice. that we might go
84 AvrL

toprison, that we might getkilled, that we mightend up exiled —because
we knew the nature of our enemy.

Exceptionalism falls in line with the state’s individualistic politics, diverting
attention away from sites of collective struggle. Thus, Mumia Abu-Jamal and
‘Angela Davis arguably serve aperformative function for most white activists who
iconize their heroes, completely unaware that they have effectively diffused any
‘galvanizing potential o the politcal education and revolutionary analyses of their
idols. Joy James (1999: 122) critcally analyzes the trend toward the racialized
iconization of Angela Davis:

Progressive icons are significant because they function to popularize
political movements and struggles. However, this popularization pardly
reflects selective political memory and representations skewed toward
elite leadership and symbolism. Selective memory, masked by an un-
ritical valorization of cons...deflects attention from revolutionary poli-
tics and rank-and-file leadership.

Along with exceptionalism, tokenism and pateralism take place in many
organizing efforts by white-dominated groups fighting the prison-industrial
complex. Having been criticized for theirperpetuation of racism or equipped with
an understanding that racism has been a major barrier in the movement for social
justice, many well-intentioned white folks wish 1o incorporate an anti-racist
approach into their work. Seeking 2 quick resolve, the problem of racism is often
superficially addressed, however. Focusing on tangible and visible solutions, they
tokenize individual people of color, perhaps by bringing a few nonwhite people
into public spaces and circles of power (as board members, speakers, etc.), in an
attempt o demonstrate the “diverse” nature of the struggle and those that make up
the fight. This is not to say that every atiempt to incorporate peaple of color is
inherently racistand slf-serving. As white activists, we must fight the neocolonial
divide-and-conquer tendencies that run deep for those with power and privilege.
‘The state disingenuously places nonwhite faces in public positions, a posture we
cannot reproduce while simultancously leading the struggle. Addressing white
supremacy through superficial solutions will only widen the racial gap. Does not
the fact that whites are able o select people of color for inclusion in our efforts
reaffirm our power and privilege?

Given our unique position as beneficiaries of the white supremacist state, we.
must be cognizant of ourignorance of the oppression faced by people of color and
refuse to act patemnalistically toward their struggles or claim them as our own.
Doing so can render these voices, nitially intended as weapons that threaten the
state’slegitimacy, completely neutral. Thus, i the movement against the prison-
industrial complesx, we must ask ourselves: Whose struggle is this? How does the
‘movement we are building fight the various forms of oppression and attempt 0
White Supremacy in the Movement Against the Prison-Industrial Complex 85

actualize a world free of domination? This must not be conflated with, o reduced
o, feeling a sense of entitlement. Rather, we must address who is facing the bulk
of state violence. What i the role of whites when there is an obvious war being
waged against various peoples of color?

These questions segue into a discussion of the role of whites in popular
struggles for liberation, national and otherwise. The 1960s and 19705 were
historic moment when anti-colonial battles were being waged throughout the
‘world. Ternal colonies within the United States were also resisting the centuries
of racist domination imposed o them by the empire. The growing revolutionary
potential in various communities of color throughout the U.S. posed a serious
threat to the state. To ensure its future, the government created a multi-tiered
assault that employed counterinsurgency warfure to dismantl the offensive.
‘Whites were visibly present and took an active role inthe Civil Rights Movement
and against the Vietnam War, but when the level of government violence began
toincrease, they did not receive the brunt of this repression. The main targets of
the FBI's Counterintelligence Program (COINTELPRO) were groups such as the
Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement, which suffered enor-
‘mous casualtes, thousands of arrests and subsequent prison sentences o trumped-
up charges, and internal conflcts due to careflly crafted programs of infilration
and manipulation,

‘Some whites understood their obligation to their comrades in the movement
who had stepped up thir struggle. putting themselves on the line and engaging in
various actions of armed self-defense. They sought to deflect some of the state’s
violent energy away from people of color, These whites were an aberration and were
even critcized by fellow white progressives who disagreed with thir use of force.
“The issue of violence and armed sel-defease in any movement against an imperial
power can occupy hundreds of pages. For the sake of brevity, I wish to iscuss how
arguments for pacifism perpetuate the tate’s white supremacist agenda.

Violence and tertor are not tobe taken lightlyin any discussion. First, we must
‘consider what we understand to be violence, especially as bourgeois white people,
‘whocomprisedamajor contingentin the progressive movements of the 19605, and
do today as well. We must be stringent in inerrogating the hegemonic forms of
media through which we are exposed (o violence. In what light is that violence
framed? What language is used and how are black and brown people normalized
as criminals? The later is so extensive that, as Joy James (1999: 29) points out,
“punitve torture n the United Statesbecame inscribed on the black body.” Should
we not frame as violence the fact that a significant portion of the world's
population suffers and ultimately dies from treatable communicable diseases due
o lack of potable water and basic nutition? Are structural adjustment programs
and major financial institutions considered criminal for the death and destruction
they perpetrate against Third World nations in the world? Linda Evans and Eve
Goldberg (1998: 15) allude to this worldwide system of structural violence:

86 AvprL

Actoss the globe, wages are plummeting, indigenous peoples are being
forced off their lands...und more and more people are being forced into
illegal activiy for their own survival as traditional culture and social
structures are destroyed.

Has the U.S. government owned up to and begun paying for its crimes,
including black slavery, the genocide of Native Americans, the theft of Mexico,
colonization of Puerto Rico and the Philippines, and the internment of Japanese
Americans? Violence ocurs on many levels ina capitalist and imperialist world.
‘Whereasindividual acts of violence are not to be overlooked, we must understand
them within a larger context of systematic hierarchies and interrogate those who
ereate the conditions in which individual acts of violence occur.

‘White activists have a long history of pushing for nonviolent forms of social
change. Within the movement against the prison-industrial complex, as well, a
distinction is made between those who commit violent and nonviolent crimes.
Given this division, we are to assume that the 80% of women i prison convicted
of nonviolent charges are unjustly incarcerated. According to this logic, the
remaining 20%,although probably facing oppressionandabuse, must be punished
for their deeds. Secking t0 aid a reformist batte, such notions embrace the white
supremacist thetoric o the state and are blind to the raist images of violence thus
perpetuated. Such suggestions are often made from a position of comfort and
privilege by those who have neverbeen collective victims of violence. Indeed, our
distance from violence is predicated on the fact that thers are oppressed by it. In
a pamphlet published by The Movement, Huey Newton discusses this removal
from oppression among white activists:

“The white mother country radical s the off-spring of the children of the
beastthathas plundered the world exploitingall people, concentrating on
the people of color.... The white mother country radical, in resisting the
system, becomes somewhat of an abstract thing because he’s not op-
pressed as much as black people are. As a matter of fact his oppression
is somewhat abstract simply because he doesn't have (o live in a reality
of oppression.... The whites are rebels, many of them from the middie
class and as far as any overt oppression this is not the case. So therefore
Lcall their rejection of te system somerwhat of an abstract thing.

Therefore, we must support comrades in liberation struggles, whose numbers.
are quickly decreasing through various forms of state domination. We must act,
not stand, in solidarity with those who have sacrificed their lives for the self-
determination of their peoples. The struggle for the acknowledgement and
freedom of politial prisoners and prisoners of war must be partof the ight against
the prison-industrial complex.

Embracing the concept of armed self-defense does not necessarily translate
White Supremacy in the Movement Against the Prison-Industrial Complex 87

into picking up a gun. We must be equally wary of romanticizing violence that
‘oceurs from our distanced position. This can also perpetuate hegemonic images
that pathologize peoples of color,images that were created to produce fear in, and
consequently gain consent from, white people o justify their policing, imprison-
‘ment, and torture. The Black Panther Party did not pose a threat o the government
becauseof thir militant ress and atitude or because they were shown (oting guns.
Ulimately, Fred Hampton was murdered because of his extraordinary ability o
organize various once-conflicting Chicago communities against a common en-
emy. Intheir groundbreaking work exposing COINTELPRO, Ward Churchill and
Jim Vander Wall (1990: 135-139) shed light on the FBI's plot to discredit and
neutralize Fred Hampton as the Chicago leader:

Comparable methods were used in Chicago, where BPP leader Fred
Hampton was showing considerable promise in negotiating a working
alliance with a huge black street gang known as the Blackstone Rang-
ers.... Tactics were employed to block or "destabilize” emerging alli-
ances between the Chicago BPP and another black gang, the Mau Maus,
as well as the already politicized Puertorriqueno Young Lords, a white
street gang called the Young Patriots, and even SDS, the white radical
organization.

‘We must clearly distinguish between armed self-defense and violence. We.
understand that the most serious acts of violence perpetrated against communities
of color throughout the world over the lastseveral centuries have been committed,
sanctioned, funded, or supplied training by the U.S. government.

Inthe movement against the prison-industrial complex, various forms of white.
supremacy have served o obstruct opportunities for change. As white activists, we
must be disciplined in our self-<ritique, constantly questioning our privilege and
power. Taking an ani-racist stance s not an overnight decision, but rather &
process. Since white supremacy takes on various forms, we must be cognizant of
our language, ideology, and actions n attempts to create a new society. We must
listen to the wisdom of white anti-imperialists who have experience in anti-racist
struggle, urging us against litst and authoritarian forms of organization. In the
end, the masses must overtake the hierarchical social system. Therefore, creating
an esoteric revolutionary vanguard is counterproductive, self-serving, and lacks
the political humility and sense of collectivity needed to wage and sustain a long-
term batle. Having a purist revolutionary politics and being ever so critical from
a comfortable distance cannot match the threat posed by engaging a politics and
fight with people for liberation and self-determination.
REFERENCES

Churchil, Ward nd Jim Vander Wall
1990 “The COINTELPRO Papers: Docunenis from the FBI's Scret Wars Againsi
Disentin the United Siate. Boston: South End Press.
Davis, Angela Y.
1998 “Polica Prisoners, Prisons,and Blck Liberation” Joy A. James (ed).
Angela Y. Davis Reader. Maldn: Blackwell Publisers.
Evans,Linda and Eve Goldberg.

1998 The Prison-Industrial Compls and the Global Economy. Bekeley: Agit
Press.
Jumes,Joy
1999 “Revolutionary cons and Neoslave Naratives.™ Shadowbosing. New York:

St Mari's res,
Jidaga, Geroimo

2001 “Every Nation Suugglin to B Free Has a Right o Siuggle, a Dty to
Strugge.” Katheen Cleave and George Kasiaficas (eds.) Liberaton,
Imaginaion and he Black Panthr Parey. New York: Rouedge

True Leap Zine Distro
P.O. Boxs0ss
Concord, Ca 91524