the really great thing about this past week was the discussions that happened with other people of color organizers. one particularly important discussion happened around the oft cited logic by communities of color in the US that we have to stop war because funding war takes resources away from our communities.
the discussion we had didn’t really finally decide anything (i.e. this is a shitty theory and we need to call it out, this is a great point and we need to support it) but it did complicate things for me.
what does it mean to stop bombing in one country so we can get resources in this country in the context of globalization and the ideology of capitalism? is it a type of resource hoarding? is it recreating (albeit unintentionally) capitalism/globalization when so many communities throughout the world are calling for a dismantling of globalization in response to militaristic violence? (see: the Filipino community from above that spoke about a new trade agreement that is being proposed that would be worse for them than NATO has been for mexico and would be enforced through NATO.)
how does the US get the resources that communities of color are fighting so hard for? the ones we want directed into us instead of bombing? is it fair and just means?
what does it mean to be in a poverty stricken community and *not* demand resources? what would anti-poverty organizing that doesn’t demand a bigger share of nation/state resources look like? would it be ridiculous? or liberatory?
there’s so many deep and important questions that our communities need to think through and talk about together. and while i think that the discussions that need to happen are always difficult (as they *always* are when it comes to resources and who is going to get them, especially when it comes to communities that already are on the brink of survival)—it was a relief to have them. and to have them with people who take the questions/discussions seriously. who honestly see legitimate organizing strategies in response to the discussions.