Stop Being Short Sighted about the Golden Globe Awards

Last Sunday a bunch of Hollywood celebrities converted an annual awards show into a direct action event against sexual assault.  The concept of Hollywood embracing a human rights struggle is not unprecedented.  In 1964, multi-skilled entertainer Harry Belafonte helped facilitate a delegation of Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) members into taking an official trip to the Revolutionary Republic of Guinea, West Africa.  The SNCC group, which included current Congressperson John Lewis, and the legendary Ms. Fannie Lou Hamer, were received as diplomatic guests by President Sekou Ture and the Democratic Party of Guinea, one of Africa's most impressive representatives of dignity and self-determination.  Hollywood personalities like Jane Fonda and Donald Sutherland raised money for the Black Panther Party in the late 60s and early 70s.  Actress Jean Seberg even became a target of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter intelligence program because of her close ties to the Black Panther Party.  In 1972, Marlon Brando permitted an Indigenous Activist to accept his Academy Award.  She used the time to denounce settler colonialism against the Native people's of the Western Hemisphere.  And, in 2016, Colin Kaepernick, a professional football player, helped bring additional international attention to state sanctioned police terror against African people.

So, what happened last Sunday in Los Angeles is not a new thing and contrary to what many so-called revolutionaries and progressive activists are saying about it, its not a completely bad thing either.  And, please, I don't need people who just woke up three hours ago lecturing me about the contradictions of Oprah Winfrey having previous relationships with Harvey Weinstein and Donald Trump.  I'll get to Oprah in a minute, but what I want you to focus on is hundreds of people wore black as a strong symbol against oppression against women.  Actresses like Kerry Washington and Reese Witherspoon lent their names to this movement while actress Laura Dern, as well as Oprah, and others, gave speeches that said in clear voices that stopping assault against women must be our first priority.  

Since most of you watch the movies these people play in (I very rarely do if at all) and participate regularly in the capitalist electoral scam that poses as a democratic process, please don't irritate me by lecturing about the contradictions of rich people talking about oppression.  I understand that contradiction better than you do.  What I also understand better than you is any movement is a broad movement.  Its a movement that includes people from all walks of life and all class statuses.  If you know anything about mass movements, this isn't a bad thing.  Its a great thing because the process of mass movement provides space for everyone, including revolutionary organizers who typically don't have the opportunity to spread our messages.  Plus, I realize that its not the Hollywood people who are moving this movement.  Its the masses of nameless, faceless, women who stand up against oppression who initiate and are the foundation of this movement.  Its those women who pushed these Hollywood women to stand up around this issue.  I know this because I know that it is the masses of people who make history.  Many of you believe the capitalist model that individuals make history.  Since the masses make history, despite the fact the working class women who define this movement were not the faces of it on Sunday, they are the ones who moved this struggle into the forefront so that it caught the attention of celebrities.  

If you are seeing this phenomenon as a problem, you don't understand movement building.  The problem isn't the Hollywood types and what they are doing.  The problem is that our grassroots organizations are so weak, so unsupported, that we do not maintain the ability to continue to define the message of the movement.  You see, we should be engaging in strategic work to continue to push the celebrities.  Since their voices can reach a whole lot more people than we have capacity to reach, we should be positioning our organizations and movements to benefit from the exposure these celebrities are providing to us.  Instead of doing that, some of us are throwing darts.

A true revolutionary propagandist understands that political education strengthens the movement like concrete fortifies the bricks.  Of course we know that Oprah Winfrey is a token member of the elite bourgeois in the U.S.  I've said it before and I'll say it again.  A purple, one eyed alien could one day be elected to become president of the capitalist U.S. empire if that being agreed to uphold the values and principles of capitalism and imperialism.  So, we understand clearly that Oprah Winfrey never was, and never will be, the answer for African people, women, or any oppressed people.  Still, if we can build strong enough movements that push people like her to educate millions about an African woman like the late Rece Taylor in two minutes, why wouldn't we use that as a part of our tactics to spread our messaging?  Oprah's been on television for decades and she's never mentioned Rece Taylor or anyone like her before so the fact she did it Sunday I credit to those women who are pushing, pushing, pushing.  There is nothing wrong with any of that.  The problem again is most of us don't know how to organize that pushing process so that its institutionalized.  I've been talking about women like Ms. Taylor and Rosa Parks for years, but I'm no fool.  I can't talk to as many people about them in the next 20 years that heard it from Winfrey Sunday night.

The more people hear the ideas, the more they begin to imbue them in their behavior.  The more that happens, the more it becomes institutionalized.  If our objective is to create a climate and culture where sexual assault is unacceptable, why wouldn't we be working to figure out ways to use any and every resource available to promote that message?  That wouldn't mean Hollywood would control the message.  Those people are entertainers.  That means they will do whatever we the people demand from them.  Today, that is speaking out against the movement.  Tomorrow that could be something completely reactionary.  This is the science of propaganda and movement building, but in order to understand this, you must understand that the masses make history, not individuals.  And, in order to understand that, you must be engaged in a regular political education process.  The fact most of you aren't is the reason you are missing the point on this.

In 1990, hip/hop artist KRS-1 was courted by some of our All African People's Revolutionary Party cadre in an effort to grow his consciousness.  The results of this work were KRS-1 placing snippets of Kwame Ture's speeches on his 1990 ablum "Edutainment."  This action on his part made our work, especially booking Kwame Ture to speak, which at that time was our strongest recruitment tool, so, so, much easier.  Just like the rappers promoting the African medallions that were popular during that time made my job easy.  How could you refute or refuse to talk about Africa when you were wearing Africa around your neck?  We knew KRS-1's commitment to our work was fleeting.  And the fact he today is doing Sprite commercials is proof of that.  But, for that period in the early 90s, we didn't criticize his interest in our politics.  We used it to advance our political work.  This is what serious activists need to be doing today, but this will take getting off social media and doing some actual on the ground organizing work.  Maybe once you do that, you will start to understand what I'm talking about here.