![]() I also thought that there was a mistaking of collectivity in local organizing projects with movement building. A distinction made within a lot of non-community organizing nonprofits–between a good use of nonprofits and a bad use of nonprofits–that seemed to me to be less of a clear distinction than we might have liked it to be. That was my work for a number of years, but I was increasingly disappointed with the limits of the nonprofit model, or the growing nonprofitization of organizing work. Specifically, in the ways that it was showing up both in kind of grassroots and vigilante ways and in more tolerated politics. So I moved into that network and was also very much part of and influenced by youth mobilizations around the country, but again, especially in California and those tied to fighting the racist right. I first pursued work with Center For Third World Organizing, which kind of comes out of an Alinsky tradition, but it attempted to really bring a race and gender analysis into that work. At the time, I was also really getting excited about histories of varying models of community organizing. But I was really radicalized in college in the mid-90s, especially around issues of welfare reform and the ways that those dovetailed with cuts to education and also the growth of right wing attacks on the ballot box in California. I grew up in a kind of left-liberal family so I had left impulses early on. I’ll go first in part because I’m older than Dan, although less published. William Saas: To get us going, could you tell us a little bit about your personal and professional backgrounds?Įmily Hobson: Sure, I can go ahead. William Saas: Emily Hobson and Dan Berger, welcome to Money on the Left. The following was transcribed by Richard Farrell and Libby Farrell and has been lightly edited for clarity Link to our Patreon: Link to our GoFundMe: Transcript We chat, too, about money and its place in the radical rhetorics recovered in the book.Ĭover Art: “A Boogie/Un Baile: Benefit for July 4th Coalition” (1976). We talk with Berger and Hobson about the history of this project and the ways that it alters common understandings of the political and cultural present. In all cases there is much to learn from and build upon. Against this inaccurate and self-defeating lapsarian story, Remaking Radicalism shows the period of 1973 to 2001 to be replete with radical thought, revolutionary action, and what Hobson and Berger call, after Stuart Hall, “usable pasts.” In most cases these pasts are inseparable from our present. ![]() ![]() Together, Hobson and Berger have compiled and thematically arranged a tremendous selection of key documents authored by radical organizers during a period commonly associated with the fall or disappearance of the left. Berger is associate professor of comparative ethnic studies at the University of Washington, Bothell, and author of Captive Nation: Black Prison Organizing in the Civil Rights Era. Hobson is associate professor of history and gender, race, & identity at the university of Nevada, reno, and author of Lavender and Red: Liberation and Solidarity in the Gay and Lesbian Left. Hobson and Dan Berger, coeditors and curators of the recently published collection Remaking Radicalism: A Grassroots Documentary Reader of the United States, 1973-2001.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |