Ajamu Baraka on Racial Justice and Fighting Neoliberalism Under Biden Admin
Interview by Erin Merl
This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
RIFT: Today we're joined by Ajamu Baraka, the founding executive director of the US Human Rights Network, the national organizer for The Black Alliance for Peace, and the Green Party vice presidential candidate in 2016. Ajamu, thank you so much for speaking with us today.
Ajamu Baraka: It’s my pleasure to be here. Thank you.
RIFT: With the Black Lives Matter movement we've seen an historic uprising against racist policing, police brutality, and institutional racism. As someone who has organized for the empowerment of black people for most of your life, what is it like to see this unfolding?
AB: Well, it's a very interesting phenomenon. It’s a timely one, of course. Whenever you see people in resistance, that's always a good thing. It is something that is historically significant in that the timing of the uprisings really started under the administration of the first black president. And that was something that was quite extraordinary in the sense that these issues have been issues within the black community for decades, but it wasn't until Trayvon Martin and then the uprisings in Ferguson and Baltimore that this issue seemed to come to a head. Now what was really interesting and perhaps maybe even contradictory about this was there were certain demands that were raised with the Obama administration, but not very aggressively. One was that the Department of Justice had the power to actually investigate a number of these situations where police forces murdered young black men and women, to see if their civil rights were violated, yet we find that in the eight years of the Obama administration the only prosecution that took place was out of South Carolina with the killing of Walter Scott. One out of the rash of killings was seen as appropriate for federal investigation and prosecution. So, you know, the struggle continues. It intensified as a consequence of the George Floyd situation. It took off across the country with demonstrations that weren't just populated by black folks, but the multiracial character of the resistance was something that was quite impressive. And I think it took the authorities by surprise and therefore there were some moves made by the authorities to attempt to try to undermine the character of this multiracial expression. So this is a very important activity, a very important uprising. It continues, but it is being kind of stalled out in the sense that there are other issues related to the question of racial justice that are not getting the kind of attention that they probably should be getting.
RIFT: Can you talk a little bit about some of those issues?
AB: When we talk about the issue of racial justice and the demand for racial justice, it has to be connected also to another issue that emerged out of the corona pandemic: This virus was disproportionately impacting black people and people of color because of the internal weaknesses of the economic system, and the decisions being made by states that resulted in a weakened national healthcare structure and communities vulnerable to pollution and industrial activities having the underlying medical conditions that made them more vulnerable to this virus. So there was a racial component to that that resulted in real death, and other contradictions, and yet those issues weren’t really defined as racial justice therefore they didn't receive the kind of targeting that I believe they should have received. So racial justice goes beyond just the police killings, it goes to the heart of the nature of the system.
RIFT: Sometimes the protests have manifested as riots with protesters burning police stations down and breaking windows of corporate businesses. What is your response to the liberal and conservative narratives that property destruction is violent and counterproductive?
AB: I saw that basically as a diversion from the real issues, but it was a very convenient one because it would allow for the authorities to create the trope of the good protesters versus the bad protesters. And it was used as one of the devices that I referred to a moment ago to undermine the multiracial character of the resistance that was developing in the US, because then you have the trope of the outside agitator, and those outside agitators became white. Therefore it was their attempt to cast suspicion on white allies. And that was the response from the demonstrators — to begin to police the protest so that those attacks against property wouldn't take place. But it was a bogus concern and it also was a concern that reflected the contradictory nature of the value system in the US, where instead of the focus being on the issues around racial justice and killer cops, the issue became the attack on property. So this is a diversionary, ideological and propaganda move on the part of the authorities, one which some of us didn't really give a lot of mental attention.
RIFT: You’re the national organizer for The Black Alliance for Peace. Could you talk about the work you're doing and the mission of the organization?
AB: The Black Alliance for Peace was born in April 4, 2017 to address some of the issues we are talking about, and that is the propensity for the state in the US to engage in excessive violence against African Americans and other people of color, because of the need for intensified policing of the black working-class and poor communities, because of the inability of the economic system to provide gainful employment and to address the issues of crime and poverty. The response from the authorities was to ensure that any social unrest would be contained. And in that process of attempting to contain and control the populations you had these highly publicized beatings and killings. So The Black Alliance for Peace said that we have to have a program of resistance that helps us to understand why this is happening. Why is it that the state is more violent in his relationship to the black community? And we made the connection between the intensified violence of the state in the US with the intensification of violence by the state abroad. So we connected the issues of domestic violence, domestic repression, and the issue of global militarism. It’s part and parcel of the same system emanating from the same oppressive sources. So in order to address this we had to build an organization, build a formation to organize our people, and to educate the public on this threat so that we can counter that threat. That's what we've been doing over the last four years.
RIFT: I'd like to switch gears for just a moment and talk about the recent election. Establishment Democrats defeated Bernie’s movement by consolidating behind a right-leaning candidate, Biden, and Biden’s win was underwhelming at best. At the same time we saw some Bernie-inspired progressive candidates win big — Bowman, Bush, Jones as well as the reelection of AOC, Ilhan Omar and Presley. What does this clear direction towards progressive wins in contrast with the relentlessly “centrist” Democratic establishment mean for the future of the Democratic Party and the Green Party? How do you see this direction playing out in upcoming elections?
AB: The future of politics in the US is one in which the left/right polarization will continue. It will continue because the country's split around the vision of where the country should be going, and in fact what are the major explanations for why we have the kind of economic contradictions we have in the U.S. The progressives are on the right side of history, if you ask me. They recognize that the neoliberal economic system is unable to address the needs of working people and the poor in this country. What we have, in essence, is a system that has failed the vast majority of the people. So attempting to try to skirt around these issues, that the centrists are involved in…The progressives will say we've got to address the material needs of the population. They say that the policies of the Democratic Party, for example, have to be in alignment with the concerns and the demands coming from the public. They say it makes no sense for the party to run away from the issue of, for example, Medicare for All, when more than 80% of democrats are in support of that and the majority of the people in the US are in support of Medicare for All. So they say that they have read the the mood of the country correctly and that if they stay true to their politics then they would in fact gain influence inside the Democratic Party. The Republicans, on the other hand, by embracing Trump and Trumpism, they are embracing a set of politics that in fact will make them vulnerable to a progressives message, a message very similar to what we saw reflected in the Sanders’ campaign. Because the rhetoric of Trump and Trumpism that identifies the economic elite as the enemy yet offers nothing to the people (because the very limitations of the capitalist system is such where they can’t really offer much more than rhetoric) is going to make them vulnerable to having their base in fact penetrated by progressive politics. So this divide will continue, it will only get intensified, and we're going to have a coalition built among the people in resistance to a new political realignment taking place between Republicans and Neoliberals, among the elite against the people.
RIFT: You've rejected the idea that the Trump presidency was more dangerous, and the sentiment that it would be strategically wise for progressives to vote for Biden. Can you explain your thinking behind this? Wouldn’t leftists waste more energy fighting a right-wing fascist government than they would a neoliberal government? And wouldn’t say a Medicare expansion or a federal minimum wage which could be achieved under a Biden presidency better position the working class to fight both corrupt parties?
AB: Well one would think that. And we know the theory is that under a Biden administration there would be more space to pursue progressive policies like Medicare for All and that there will be more space for progressive politics. I tend to question that because Biden said that even if the representatives of the people, members of Congress, passed a Medicare for All bill, if it came to his desk he would veto that bill. So, in whose interest is he operating from by vetoing that bill that the American people are calling for and obviously the nation needs? What is the interest of the elite? The interest of the insurance companies? And with the Democrats in the White House and the Republicans still controlling the Senate, the political cover will be there for the neoliberal Democrats to not pursue anything that’s really progressive with the excuse that they are being blocked by the Senate. It’s a cynical game being played. In terms of political space, I've always been more concerned about the limitations of political space, of speech, that’s emanating not from the political right but from neoliberals. In particular, the kind of troubling constriction of speech being pushed by Silicon Valley. The big digital platforms that are determining what is supposed to be misinformation. They are involved in a content political censorship and the public appears to be in acceptance of that. That to me is a more severe threat than anything one can imagine coming from the Trump forces. So I believe that under a Biden administration that freedom of speech and even assembly are more threatened in many ways, that leftists are more vulnerable because nobody hates leftists more than liberals. So you know this is a very dangerous situation I think for those of us who are on the authentic left, who are not going to stop talking about the need for a socialist transformation because these folks will have a free rein to assault us without any real support coming from liberal allies.
RIFT: Over the past few years we've seen the rise of the conservative-backed anti-Trump group, the Lincoln Project. They have gained considerable monetary support from Democrats in the recent presidential election, however they have received criticism as well. Both Ilhan Omar and AOC recently called out one of the founders, Rick Wilson, for his history of Islamophobic tweets. How do you feel about allying with conservatives and is it an appropriate strategy to take?
AB: I think it’s a quite backwards strategy. I think it’s reflective of the corruption of the neoliberals that control the Democratic Party. When you align yourself with those kind of forces you are aligning yourself with criminals. Not only in terms of people who are articulating policies that will perpetuate the status quo domestically, but elements that are in full support of the imperialist objectives of the US state abroad. So it makes no sense, in my opinion, to align yourself with a neoliberal fascist supposedly to put a brake on the fascism coming from the Trump forces. They are correct in calling out that project, and calling out the fact that with the tremendous amount of money that was raised by that project and the alignment with the Democrats, Biden still barely achieved victory. Of course, you know, they were able to generate 75 million votes, but the number of votes between the Biden camp and the Trump camp is about 2 percent. It’s still squeaking out a victory. They outspent the Trump forces two to one but this is the result. So I'm not impressed. I think they were correct in calling out these forces and raising the questions around the strategic wisdom of engaging in those kinds of strategic alliances.
RIFT: What are your thoughts on Democrats who claim Biden's presidency will be a return to normalcy? Do you see Democrats becoming complacent under his administration and if so how can progressives counteract that?
AB: I think there will be a tendency to demobilize. We’re already seeing it in some ways. It feels very similar to what happened with Barak Hussein Obama, who ascended to the White House. There’s a marked demobilization and the excuses will be the same: ‘We have to give Biden some time to get his administration in place. We have to give him more time as he attempts to clean up the mess. Now we have the upcoming 2022 midterms. Now we have to give them time that's critical to win the Senate back.’ On, and on, and on. We will resist that, and unlike under the Obama administration the mood of the country is different. In particular, you have sets of young people in the U. S. today who see quite clearly that there is no future for them in the status quo. They see the contradictions of the capitalist system and they are not going to be amenable to the kinds of slick propaganda coming from the Democrats, especially from a flawed messenger like Joe Biden. So there will be resistance. Now the resistance won’t be as strong as the resistance to Trump, because that resistance is not independent. In the sense that under Trump you had all the NGOs that were associated with the Democratic Party and all the money that they had and everybody was in opposition. The resistance under Biden will be split because many of the NGOs that were in opposition of Trump, they’re not going to be in opposition to Biden. So it will be a small core of radical left forces in the beginning in opposition, but that resistance will grow because the policies pursued by the Biden administration are going to be unable to address the material needs of the people and therefore there will be people looking for more radical solutions. That's how you resist it; resist it through organization and through concrete political opposition.
RIFT: I'm curious to hear your thoughts about what's happening with the Trump administration right now. Do you give any credence to the fact that people are worried that he may throw a coup?
AB: Well there's no question they’re pursuing all legal means and I know people are really upset because he has not conceded. Because when you concede then basically all the vote counting and everything else stops and the transition period begins. They have resisted that. They are taking up the the slogan that the Democrats were raising at first which was, ‘Count every vote’. So they want all the votes counted and they are well in their rights to in fact make that demand. We have to remember that in 2000, for example, that situation wasn’t resolved until well into December. So this isn’t that unusual. But of course the concerns are that he's getting ready to launch some type of coup, which I think is ridiculous. I mean people were saying at first that there’s going to be a military coup and my question was, ‘A military coup? What? Who's going to respond to orders from Donald Trump in the military? The ruling class?’ They cannot stand Donald Trump, so he'd be there in the White House giving orders and nobody would pay him any attention. It was absolutely ridiculous. Yet this was the line being pushed as a “get out the vote” weapon, to scare people to death to come out to vote. But this is the impoverished nature of discourse in the US — it’s absolutely childish, it's ridiculous, so I don't see anything happening. Basically once they’ve exhausted their legal means he will probably never concede because he doesn’t have to. But he’ll leave the White House in January and he will be even more dangerous outside of the state than sitting in the White House because now they really are going to consolidate a movement. The movement before was incoherent, but now they have 70 million people who feel aggrieved, and with plenty of resources, and so now they will in fact consolidate a movement that will be quite dangerous.
RIFT: Going off of that how do you see this playing out in the future for the Republican Party in general?
AB: The mythology that Biden’s going to reach across the aisle and the Republicans are going to cooperate with the Democrats is absolutely ridiculous because the Republicans are still going to be the party of Trump. You're not going to be able resist the program that the Trump forces will put in place. The Republican Party will continue to move to the right. It will consolidate itself even further on the right and so we see the future being either more as I said earlier more polarized and more politically dangerous because those right wing forces with Trump are aggressive, angry and now with organization you really will be seeing a situation that could be quite dangerous in terms of real neofascist movement in the US that is more in line with the kind of cartoonish understanding people have of fascism.
