[Lace Watkins]

Everybody needs friends. 

One of the dangers of highlighting discrete individuals is that they are almost almost always considered as stand alone actors in a vacuum; there are no advisors, counselors, colleagues–there are no friends. 

When we talk about leaders in this way, we fail to see the community, the village around them. We fail to see who shaped them, and how. We fail to acknowledge and appreciate backstory and context. We fail to see their, and their associates, buddies, mentors as fully human.

Last month we talked about Martin Luther King, a giant in the area of civil and human and worker rights. But we rarely consider who he hung with. 

In the iconic picture on the balcony of the Lorriane Motel in Memphis, King is not alone. He stands with his friends, each a racial justice leader in their own right: Hosea Williams, Jessie Jackson, and Ralph Abernathy. The grouping of Black activists is important, not only because it chronicles the civil rights struggle, but also because it stands as a reminder to us that change work is best done in the Beloved Community, both in the aggregate and in very personal ways. 

King knew this. He surrounded himself with mentors, advisors, colleagues. There were stories of them men who literally changed the trajectory around King’s kitchen, and church halls. 

Abernathy, particularly, deserves mention. Often referred to as King’s right hand man (although I quietly disagree with that second-banana designation), Abernathy led both the Montgomery Improvement Association, and later the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. 

But he was not a man who carried King’s coat and hat as King agitated. They were more of a one-two punch: King the big picture visionary; Abernathy the bread-and-butter, boots on the ground encourager; exhorting the audiences where he often came after King, to pivot to ‘what that means for tomorrow morning’. This was no small thing. 

After King’s death, Abernathy went on to lead SCLC, as well as continued to lead his congregation as pastor of West Hunter Baptist Church. 

Queries:

*I am in no way comparing myself to MLK, but as a (painfully) minor semi-public figure, it is often thought that I work alone. I write alone, that’s true; but by no means am I a one woman operation; I have my staff and leadership team and advisors and my sister. It’s a big deal. 

But I do understand why people would like to think I am a solo operation. It goes to their idea of individualism, of lone rangers, and, in no small measure, it lets them off the hook. Why do you think I would say that?

*As said before, Abernathy was no second fiddle, but he has gone down in history as such. Why do you think the narrative shook out that way?

*As noted above, King was seen as the visionary, while Abernathy was considered more pedantic and plodding. But that is something of a distortion in that Abernathy was as engaging and inspiring, in his own way, as King. He led direct action, he took what was then considered to be controversial stands. Most of us will not be ‘the main ticket’ in racial justice work; we will be behind the scenes, and we may not get the approbation or notice or attention we think we deserve. Why is confronting this truth important? Is the work worth doing even if nobody ever knows your name? 

*I recently read a meme which said, ‘The story of Black people and Black Liberation in America didn’t begin with Emancipation, and it didn’t end with MLK’s death’. But for so many people, that is exactly how they see the civil rights movement. This means that Abernathy’s accomplishments after 1968 are often unmentioned. Consider this; also consider how you see various times in racial justice history. Are they discrete events? Are they part of the same cloth? Does it matter who a person was before they came to prominence, or who they became after their ‘moment’ had passed?

*Abernathy was often compared to King after MLK’s death, sometimes less than favorably. Those doing so often cited the decline of the SCLC under Abernathy’s leadership. What say you? Do you think it was his fault, or did other factors contribute?

Discussion

[Jessie Lee]

But I do understand why people would like to think I am a solo operation. It goes to their idea of individualism, of lone rangers, and, in no small measure, it lets them off the hook. Why do you think I would say that?

I think you would say that because it’s a lot easier on the conscience to dismiss or deny the truths that you say if you’re seen as “just” a lone ranger rather than the face of an entire community who has opted in to your prescription for racial justice work.

As said before, Abernathy was no second fiddle, but he has gone down in history as such. Why do you think the narrative shook out that way?

I think the narrative shook out this way because if he was the guy who followed King’s vision with “what that means for tomorrow morning,” he was probably even less popular than King was at the time because he was demanding that listeners and followers do more than just agree with King’s vision; he was demanding that they acted on that theoretical agreement in concrete, uncomfortable, sacrificial ways. This makes me think about the temptation here (which I fall into often) of waxing poetic on the *idea* of racial justice and the kind of world we want to live in without actually helping to build that world.

Why is confronting this truth important? Is the work worth doing even if nobody ever knows your name?

I think… to reality check expectations and maintain alignment to the goal of the work. If white people are expecting to be recognized, especially by anyone of color, then we have a lot of foundational internal work to do before we can be of any type of service. The work needs to be worth doing if nobody knows my name, particularly because if I’m concerned about people knowing my name, I’m probably not listening and following the people I say I’m there to serve. I need to lose my ego completely in order to work competently toward Dr. King’s and Abernathy’s vision of “Beloved Community.”

Are they discrete events? Are they part of the same cloth? Does it matter who a person was before they came to prominence, or who they became after their ‘moment’ had passed?

No, I don’t think they are discrete events and I do think they’re part of the same cloth. I’m reminded of a phrase we say often here, “Who you are here [online] is who you are.” Who Abernathy was after his moment can’t be divorced from who he was during and before his moment. Part of being new people doing new things in new ways, I think, is owning my whole self, seeing others’ whole selves, and seeing the larger context for events. I’m also thinking about how divorcing people and events from larger context is a tool of white supremacy. The survival of white supremacy depends on the failure of white people to connect the present to the past and vice versa. Seeing events as discrete is a requirement of believing lies like that we are living in a post racial society.

What say you? Do you think it was his fault, or did other factors contribute?

I say that other factors always contribute (while owning that I don’t know specifically what they were).

[Emily Holzknecht]

That’s a good point that it’s easier to dismiss a lone ranger than a whole community who feel the same way. I hadn’t thought of that.

[Lisa Dollar]

How do you post those quote boxes?

[Jessie Lee]

When you are commenting, tap/click the Aa next to the smiley face. Then tap/click the quotation marks.

[Clare Steward]

But I do understand why people would like to think I am a solo operation. It goes to their idea of individualism, of lone rangers, and, in no small measure, it lets them off the hook. Why do you think I would say that?

I think we do this for the same reason we “lone ranger” the anti- heros- so that we don’t have to take accountability and so that we can distance and other. If it is only one person asking us to deeply examine ourselves at the very core in an effort to identify and root out our racist behaviors and then act on making real changes to a system we benefit from….it is much easier for us to opt out guild free and if we aren’t feeling a 100% guilt free, we can demonize and label you as a charlatan cult leader and feel good about narrowly escaping.

*As said before, Abernathy was no second fiddle, but he has gone down in history as such. Why do you think the narrative shook out that way?

Looking at it through the lens of history and in the context of the discussions we had around MLK day, Dr. King has been lionized and his work and words taken out of context to fit a specific feel good narrative, a narrative that did not reflect his message and the amount of hate he received while he was alive. When we lionize someone, we single them out and put them up on a pedestal and usually there is only room for one. As you stated in the first question, looking at him as a solo act is part of how we view all things as being on an individual level vs in community or as part of an entire movement with multitudes of people involved. The same behavior was recently displayed by many, including me, when it comes to Stacey Abrams.

Most of us will not be ‘the main ticket’ in racial justice work; we will be behind the scenes, and we may not get the approbation or notice or attention we think we deserve. Why is confronting this truth important? Is the work worth doing even if nobody ever knows your name?

Confronting this is central to being able to do the work resiliently and reliably and de-centering ourselves is step #1. It is not about the cookie or the ally badge or the recognition or to sooth a guilty conscious. The work is about fighting for equity and justice for Black and Brown people in the name of humanity. It is about doing what is right and what is just and what is in line with my moral conscious. It is about fighting for the people I love.

Are they discrete events? Are they part of the same cloth? Does it matter who a person was before they came to prominence, or who they became after their ‘moment’ had passed?

We like to wrap things that cause us discomfort up into a nice neat little bow and put them on a shelf so we can look back at it and be so glad about how far we have come. We like to see the as isolated incidents that had a start and a firm end. I have to say that is the way I had thought about the Civil Rights Movement in the past and it is definitely how I thought about overt displays of racial violence. I definitely see now that it is all part of the same cloth. I have been sharing a lot of what I have learned throughout this month so far with my husband, specifically the information that is coming up as I research and dig in to the anti-heros story. He asked my why I am surprised or shocked and my initial reaction was to say I am not….but I am. I really truly am with each and every bit of information I did not know before. With kind candor, he told me that none of this is new, it has been going on for hundreds of years and that it is only new to me because I never cared to truly listen and learn before. So, I see that it is all part of the same cloth and know I must take a much closer look at each fiber that is woven into the fabric. For the 2nd part of this question, I think it is important to look at the whole person even when they were not in the spotlight.

*Abernathy was often compared to King after MLK’s death, sometimes less than favorably. Those doing so often cited the decline of the SCLC under Abernathy’s leadership. What say you? Do you think it was his fault, or did other factors contribute?

I do not know enough to answer this question. I will need to do some further reading and reflecting.

[Emily Holzknecht]

I am loving how each comment answers the first question differently. I am getting a much better picture through all the answers.

[Rebecca McClinton]

Seeing racial justice leaders as individuals rather than in community isn’t something I’d considered previously. I can see how seeing racial justice leaders as silos is a way of decreasing impact and using exceptionalism to absolve personal responsibility. I would imagine it was exactly the exceptionalism of MLK that led to Abernathy’s struggle with leadership after the death of MLK.

It’s also more attractive to be inspired by a visionary than one who holds to account the work required to facilitate that. The thing is, though, there wouldn’t likely be an MLK without the likes of Abernathy, which is what makes this truth important.

If I imagine the stone of racial justice with a hundred thousand hands on it, it might seem like removing one doesn’t matter, but it does because it increases the burden on those remaining.

I wouldn’t have prior to coming to Lace on Race, but yes, now I see the tapestry of Black Liberation rather than the isolated events in history. Focusing on single events is a ploy I’ve used to skirt personal responsibility previously and I must remain vigilant of not doing that.

[Emily Holzknecht]

Thinking of Lace or any racial justice leader as a “one man operation” lets people off the hook because then racial justice is only up to a few exceptional charismatic leaders and those of us who don’t see ourselves as charismatic or main event leaders seem to have nothing to contribute. It’s important to know that racial justice leaders do not function alone because that means there is work for all of us to do. It is important to confront the truth that most of us will not be the “main ticket event” in racial justice work both so that we don’t think we’re off the hook, but also so that those who are main ticket events have the support they need to do what they need to do. Additionally we know that white people should not be the main ticket events in racial justice work and we know that white people also need to show up to racial justice work. Therefore white people, who come from white supremacy culture and idolize main ticket events, especially need to confront the idea of not being the main ticket event and showing up anyway. The work is worth doing because it is lessening and mitigating harm to Black and brown people perpetuated by white people like me and by white supremacy. The work is not “to be a main ticket event” or being famous, although for some nonwhite people, they will do the actual work by being a main ticket event.

The people who go down in history are those who fit best into the white supremacist ideals. White supremacy values individualism and main events, big spectacles. Abernathy did not fit into white supremacist ideals as well as MLK did, or at least as well as MLK did after declawing. The way Abernathy worked was not showy enough for white supremacy culture.

Civil rights “events” like the part of the Civil Rights Movement when MLK was active are not discrete events. They are separate showy parts of the same cloth, but the cloth continues between the showy parts. White supremacy culture values showiness so we see certain parts better and they can seem discrete. It is important to know who a person was before and after their “moment” so that we can see their three dimensionality, so we can see that we share humanness with them, so we can see that we are not off the hook when it comes to racial justice. We need to squint past out white supremacist love of shiny (insert Jermaine Clement as Tomatoa) to see the continuity both of the movement and of a human life including the “duller” parts of racial justice.

I am coming back to the last question after more reading.

[Emily Holzknecht]

Returning to the last question: I am thinking that comparing Abernathy to MLK in unfavorable ways after MLK’s death could be white supremacy beginning to process of cutting MLK’s ties to those who supported him and his work, beginning to create MLK as an exceptional charismatic leader who didn’t have people working in the background to make his leadership possible. I am also thinking about microwaves and slow cookers. If not everyone in the SCLC were slow cookers, then the SCLC was destined to decline no matter who was leading because a lack of headline worthy events would lead to microwaves checking out.

[Christina Sonas]

I think the isolation of Dr. King within the civil rights movement is a powerful tool. It sends the message that this “solitary leader” was so essential to the gains made that no further advancement can happen without a new icon. Which, of course, means that no change can happen until Black people produce another, and that let’s white people completely off the hook for the racism we create and the civil rights we destroy every single day.

Characterizing Rev. Abernathy as pedantic and plodding is a derogation of his contributions that consequently elevates Dr. King further. Was Dr. King, with no diminishment of his contributions, really “the main ticket”? Or was he presented by white government and media to be so? With all of the white opposition to and interference with the civil rights movement, I don’t think any difficulties with the SCLC can be charged solely to Rev. Abernathy.

These men did not seek racial justice for the accolades. It’s part of the white narrative, though, to separate, stratify, and make “others” within the “other” to disrupt and distract. Ethos requires that the work be done, because it is the right thing to do, and for no other reason.

About the chain of history, there is always some causative event that came before, and some consequent event that will come after, so the same cloth, yes. As to an individual’s before and after, I’m pretty sure I feel the same way. I need to contemplate that more…

[Lisa Dollar]

Query 1: I think it lets us off the hook because we don’t have to do more. If we think of you as solo, then you don’t want help or need help, and that means we don’t have to risk more or put more in. If you’ve got this, all on your own, then you don’t need me and that lets me off the hook. But, you do want us. You want us to keep walking, to do the work, to be better, to do better, so that we can continue to do the work when you aren’t there, kind of like what you said in your post about the by-laws.

[Lisa Dollar]

As said before, Abernathy was no second fiddle, but he has gone down in history as such. Why do you think the narrative shook out that way?

I think it goes to what you said in the first query, we like to think of leaders as loners, it goes to some idealization we have of “doing it all.” I also think that it white supremacy has a big part to play–if King was just himself, then it’s easier to make it go away. If we give value to others, then it’s still happening. And it’s important to white supremacy that the civil rights movement is done.

*As noted above, King was seen as the visionary, while Abernathy was considered more pedantic and plodding. But that is something of a distortion in that Abernathy was as engaging and inspiring, in his own way, as King. He led direct action, he took what was then considered to be controversial stands. Most of us will not be ‘the main ticket’ in racial justice work; we will be behind the scenes, and we may not get the approbation or notice or attention we think we deserve. Why is confronting this truth important? Is the work worth doing even if nobody ever knows your name?

Confronting this is important because the behind the scenes work is just as important and often more important than the speeches and the public time. It’s all the behind the scenes work that makes the visible stuff possible. So it is absolutely worth doing the work even if no one knows your name.

*I recently read a meme which said, ‘The story of Black people and Black Liberation in America didn’t begin with Emancipation, and it didn’t end with MLK’s death’. But for so many people, that is exactly how they see the civil rights movement. This means that Abernathy’s accomplishments after 1968 are often unmentioned. Consider this; also consider how you see various times in racial justice history. Are they discrete events? Are they part of the same cloth? Does it matter who a person was before they came to prominence, or who they became after their ‘moment’ had passed? I

As I said above, I think it’s important to white supremacy to continue to put forward the narrative that the Civil Rights movement has ended. It promotes the false belief that many have that everything is hunky dory now and we live in a post racist society and Black people can vote and drink from the same water fountain and even be president, why do they think they need more? I think it’s all part of the same cloth, but to see it as discrete events helps white supremacy keep its power and hold over everyone including Black people who are not immune to its lies. If we pretend that each thing is separate, it’s both easier to ignore or “forget” the smaller, important events like what Abernathy did after MLK died.

[Kelsi Watters]

ininWhy would you say it lets people off the hook to think you are working alone?

I guess you would be easier to discount if people think you’re working alone and you are the only one carrying out the vision – but if they find out you have a whole staff behind you, you are a semi-public figure who has opened the doors to your own café and you founded a Center for Racial Equity (whaaat?!) – now your vision doesn’t sound so far-fetched. It seems like the more people you have behind your vision, the more your credibility increases. The more visibility you have, the more people are confronted with your vision and have to at least consider that there is value behind your method and praxis.

ininWhy did Abernathy go down in history as “second fiddle”?

I wonder if perhaps Abernathy’s method and praxis was more quiet, nitty-gritty, nuts and bolts. I suppose the visionary attracts more attention than the practical, nuts and bolts type of leader. MLK became a moral icon of sorts, but maybe Abernathy was not in a position to be iconaclized – so then of course the white supremacist erased him which is what has happened with many of the other black Americans who made significant contributions.

ininWhy is it important to confront the truth that most of us who do this work will not be known by name? Is it worth doing the work even if nobody knows your name?

Honestly, I think many white people who initially start doing this work are doing it for recognition. If they recognize the hard truth that racial justice work is not the greatest avenue for popularity, they will have to do some discernment as to whether they want to stay in the car. I absolutely think it is worth it to do this work even if my name is not known – because ultimately, I want to do my part to lessen and mitigage harm, to deconstruct white supremacy and journey with others. Perhaps the seeds I plant will not surface from beneath the soil during my lifetime, but one day I pray they will bear fruit. I am not looking for recognition, but here are some questions I constantly ask myself: Am I okay with the fact that I will lose some friends if I am committed to doing this work? Am I willing to challenge those in my inner circle? At the same time, I think it is important that people who know me are aware of my commitment to racial justice work; because who I am with those I know is who I am everywhere. I want to be covert’ and out spoken about this journey but at the same time, I am not looking for recognition.

[Kelsi Watters]

ininAre times in racial justice history discrete events? Are they part of the same cloth?

WELL, ‘i ‘imagine the times in racial justice history like a multi-colored, multi-textured quilt. Some squares are large with striking patterns; others quilt squares are small, with modest but intricate patterns. Then there are the knots that hold the quilt together, but these sort of fade into the background. Most people’s eyes would go right to the larger, textured, more striking quilt squares, like MLK. These are the visionaries, the ones that are in danger of being made moral icons. Most people may glance once at the smaller, more intricate, modest quilt squares like Abernathy. Most people won’t even notice the knots even though they are holding the quilt together. I think the knots represent all black Americans everywhere who have made some sort of contribution, however large or small, but are not seen or recognized. My grandmother is a seamstress. I have had the pleasure of feeling a quilt countless times, running my fingers over the fabric, taking my time to feel the patterns. Of course, the more textured ones will be most noticeable under my fingers. Sometimes I am more intentional about noticing the smaller, more intricate squares too, but sometimes I’m not. Do I acknowledge the bump of a knot under my fingers? Well, that is a question I will be asking myself continually as I do this work, learning to celebrate and appreciate all the quilt squares of every design, and to acknowledge the knots, to recognize people whose tired hands have done more than we will ever know.

[Rhonda Freeman]

Other factors contributed. When researching the history, I found over and over again mention of Abernathy ‘betraying’ MLK in his 1989 book. When I looked further, it seems that this betrayal was four paragraphs based on information that was already known. The rest of the book is full of important information about his life and the civil rights movement in general. The systemic racism in this country holds black leaders to a different standard. This plays into the black men can’t control themselves sexually and that makes them less valid as humans. Frustrating. Disappointing. Not surprising.

[Grace Bannerman]

<font color=”#00aaad”>It goes to their idea of individualism, of lone rangers, and, in no small measure, it lets them off the hook. Why do you think I would say that? </font>

<font color=”#000000″>The “great person” view of things lets everyone else off the hook like lionizing does – if one person with unique skills or talents is doing racial justice work, then it’s easy to distance by saying “I don’t have those same talents,” or “I could never do what they do, so I don’t have to try with the skills I have.” The story of individual success is also more familiar in North American culture than partnerships or group success.
</font>

<font color=”#00aaad”>Abernathy was no second fiddle, but he has gone down in history as such. Why do you think the narrative shook out that way? </font>

<font color=”#000000″>Because of the benefits of painting racial justice accomplishments as the work of individuals as above, and less attention is required to learn about multiple people (I had never heard of Rev. Abernathy until this).
</font>

<font color=”#00aaad”>Most of us will not be ‘the main ticket’ in racial justice work; we will be behind the scenes, and we may not get the approbation or notice or attention we think we deserve. Why is confronting this truth important? Is the work worth doing even if nobody ever knows your name?</font>

<font color=”#000000″>This truth is important because it can show whether getting credit is a clench that needs to be addressed. The work is about lessening and mitigating harm to Black and brown people perpetuated by white people and white supremacy, not about individuals, especially not me, a white woman. That desired result is absolutely worth working toward because it’s important to achieve, regardless of credit.</font>

<font color=”#00aaad”>Consider this; also consider how you see various times in racial justice history. Are they discrete events? Are they part of the same cloth?</font>

<font color=”#000000″>It’s easy to focus on discrete events, and I think that’s still my immediate framing, but as I learn more I’m filling out a mental timeline. Seeing how each event led to the next can be useful, though I don’t want to give myself the impression of steady progress toward racial justice, or lose perspective on the fact that steps have been required but may not be the ideal (i.e. that the goal was already achieved years ago). Learning about historical and current events and looking for the white supremacist faction actively and passively sabotaging or delaying steps toward racial justice and clawing back power would make a more complete picture.
</font>

<font color=”#00aaad”>Does it matter who a person was before they came to prominence, or who they became after their ‘moment’ had passed? </font>

<font color=”#000000″>I think people’s pasts before they came to prominence are important if there are things they need to be accountable for that would affect others’ behaviour toward them. People can change, and can do both “good” and “bad” things, but those things don’t erase each other. Commitment to consistency and to upholding one’s values are personal choices, including before and after prominence, though the way that one lives out those values may change.</font>

<font color=”#00aaad”>Those doing so often cited the decline of the SCLC under Abernathy’s leadership. What say you? Do you think it was his fault, or did other factors contribute? </font>

<font color=”#000000″>My usual position is that one person rarely makes or breaks an organization, though that narrative is appealing (as above). That said, Dr. King had rare charisma and skills as a writer and orator, setting expectations that it would be hard for someone with different strengths, or simply a different person, to meet. Regardless of Rev. Abernathy’s individual performance, it sounds like there were other factors involved in the changing view of the SCLC (e.g. overall political leaning of the country, ongoing support of alternative civil rights organizations and tactics, the fact that SCLC was an umbrella of organizations rather than having direct members).</font>

[Author]

Replies