Linda Martín Alcoff,
Cinzia Arruzza, Tithi Bhattacharya, Nancy Fraser, Barbara Ransby, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Rasmea Yousef Odeh, and Angela Davis are the organizers. I have never seen such a collection of Marxists, Socialists, Racists, and Terrorists organizing a protest that so many will participate in who don't share values with the organizers.
Cinzia Arruzza, Tithi Bhattacharya, Nancy Fraser, Barbara Ransby, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Rasmea Yousef Odeh, and Angela Davis are the organizers. I have never seen such a collection of Marxists, Socialists, Racists, and Terrorists organizing a protest that so many will participate in who don't share values with the organizers.
If you want to protest that is fine. It is an American tradition. Shouldn't you take the time to research the organizers? Make sure you really want the same things?
Linda Martin Alcoff:
Linda Martín Alcoff (born July 25, 1955 in Panama) is a philosopher at the City University of New York who specializes in epistemology, feminism, race theory and existentialism. From 2012 to 2013, she served as president of the American Philosophical Association (APA), Eastern Division.[1] Alcoff has called for greater inclusion of historically under represented groups in philosophy and notes that philosophers from these groups have created new fields of inquiry, including feminist philosophy, critical race theory, and LGBTQ philosophy.[2][3] To help address these issues, with Paul Taylor and William Wilkerson, she started the Pluralist Guide to Philosophy.[4] She earned her PhD in Philosophy from Brown University. She was recognized as the distinguished Woman Philosopher of 2005 by the Society for Women in Philosophy and the APA.[5] She began teaching at Hunter College and the City University of New York Graduate Center in early 2009, after teaching for many years at Syracuse University.[5]
It only takes a glance at the excerpts from the below article to see what a radical she is.
What Should White People Do?
LINDA MARTÍN ALCOFF
In this paper I explore white attempts to move toward a proactive position against racism that will amount to more than self-criticism in the following three ways: by assessing the debate within feminism over white women's relation to whiteness; by exploring "white awareness training" methods developed by Judith Katz and the "race traitor" politics developed by Ignatiev and Garvey, and; a case study of white revisionism being currently attempted at the University of Mississippi.
WHITE WOMEN AND WHITE IDENTITY
Whiteness is both homogeneous and fractured. Unlike Latino identity, which is understood to be mixed, and unlike African American identity under the strictures of the one-drop rule, whiteness is accorded only to those who are (supposedly) "pure" white. In the recent historical past this was not so clear-cut, as Jews, Irish, Italians, and other southern Europeans were sometimes excluded from whiteness and at other times enjoyed a halfway status as almost white, but not quite (unlike those with partial African heritage, no matter how light). But today, in mainstream white bread America, the borders around whiteness are assumed to be clear.In another sense, whiteness has always been fractured by class, gender, sex, ethnicity, age, and able-bodiedness. The privileges whiteness bestowed were differentially distributed and were also simply different (for example, the privilege to get the job for a man, the privilege not to work for women, and so on). In much feminist literature the normative, dominant subject position is described in detail as a white, heterosexual, middle-class, able-bodied male. This normative figure carries the weight as well in the cultural narrative of reconfiguring black-white relations; there have been far more "buddy" movies about white men and black men than films exploring wom en's relationships.4 In Dances with Wolves, the revision of the Manifest Destiny narrative centers on a white, normative male to carry the story; this seems to assume that if whiteness is to be recast, it must be recast from the center out. Anything else--any revision that centered on a woman, for example--would not have the cultural force, the felt significance, of a white man relearning his place. This situation must raise the question, what is white women's relation to whiteness?
Feminist theory has given various answers to this question, and much of the debate has centered on the question of whether white women benefit on the whole from whiteness, or whether whiteness is a ruse to divide women and to keep white women from understanding their true interests. Some feminists have argued that sexism is more fundamental than racism, in the sense that sexual identity is more important in determining social status than racial identity. For example, Shulamith Firestone (1970) argues that the racism that exists among white women is a form of inauthenticity or false consciousness that does not represent their true interests. Mary Daly (1978) similarly argues that charges of racism against feminists serve patriarchal ends by promoting divisiveness among women. According to Daly, feminists should disengage from male-created identifications with race, nation, or ethnicity.
Other feminists have criticized this view. Margaret A. Simons (1979) argues that the claim that sexism is primary trivializes racist oppression and implausibly assumes that sexism alone can provide an adequate explanation for genocide and war (for example, that white men "feminized" nonwhite or Jewish men). The existence of some form of sexist oppression in every society does not justify a conception of patriarchy that generalizes the relations between all men and all women in one undifferentiated analysis. According to Simons, white women's identity must be understood both as white and as female. Gloria Joseph (1981) also argues that white women are both tools and benefactors of racism, and that feminists must recognize and address white women's social position as both oppressors and oppressed. In fact, Joseph contends that given the extensive privileges of whiteness, white women's immediate self-interest is to maintain racism. She suggests that we need to explore the concept of "white female supremacy" as well as white male supremacy.
Adrienne Rich's "Disloyal to Civilization: Feminism, Racism, Gynephobia" (1979), a paper that has been very widely used in women's studies courses, takes up these issues in a way that mainly addresses a white feminist audience. In this paper, Rich develops the concept of "white solipsism" to describe a perceptual practice that implicitly takes a white perspective as universal. She argues that "colorblindness," or the ideal of ignoring racial identities, falls into white solipsism because a racist society has no truly accessible colorblind perspective. The claim to a colorblind perspective by whites works just to conceal the partiality of their perceptions.
Rich provides a very perceptive critique of colorblindness and, unlike other radical feminists, she acknowledges the significance of white women's racism. However, Rich continues to put sexism at the center of all women's lives and to portray white women as primarily victims of racism rather than agents who help to sustain it. Rich claims that white women did not create racism but have been forced to serve racist institutions, and that those who think they benefit from racism are deluded. In her view, white women's racism is actually a misdirected outlet for their rage over their own powerlessness, a view that only slightly revises Firestone's. In Rich's account, slavery is more accurately described as an institution of patriarchy than one of white supremacy; to blame white women is to impede the process of forging political and emotional connections between white and nonwhite women. The apparent protection some white women receive from patriarchy degrades them by enforcing childishness and helplessness. Therefore, white women's true interests lie in making alliances with other women, not with men. This analysis suggests that the "whiteness" of white women is not in any sense the same as the "whiteness" of white men.
In contrast, Marilyn Frye (1983, 1992) has suggested that despite the severity of sexism, white women do not escape race privilege. It is a feature of this race privilege that white women have a choice to hear or not to hear--and to respond or not to respond--to the demands and criticisms of women of color. Racism differentially distributes general epistemic authority to make judgments and determinations, such that, for example, whites often assume the right to decide the true or accurate racial identity of everyone. When white feminists proclaim that white women are primarily women, this is an extension of an essentially white privilege.
In Frye's view, white feminists should be disloyal to whiteness. Because white women understandably want to be treated as human beings, their feminism often takes the form of pursuit of the full entitlements of "whiteliness," which Frye defines as a socially constructed status that confers entitlements and authority. For example, the demand for equality has implicitly and practically meant the demand for equality with white men (a demand for equality with, say, puertorriqueños would hardly mean liberation). But the demand to be equal to white men is necessarily a demand to achieve "whiteliness," a status that depends on racist structures of social relations for its power and autonomy. Like Rich and Firestone, Frye argues that solidarity with white men is not in white women's ultimate interest. Racism has motivated white men to oppress and constrain white women's sexuality and reproductive powers in order to secure the regeneration of a "pure" white population. Thus, we must become disloyal to whiteness and unlearn our "whiteliness" assumptions of entitlement and authority.
What does "becoming disloyal" mean in practice? For Frye and Rich, it clearly cannot mean upholding some form of colorblindness or individualism, which would only conceal white privilege and implicit white perspectives. So how can whites be disloyal to whiteness while acknowledging the significance of their own racial identity?
Read the full eye-opening article here:
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/alcoffwhitepeople.html
Cinzia Arruzza
Cinzia Arruzza (C.V. 2015) is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the New School for Social Research. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Rome Tor Vergata and subsequently studied at the universities of Fribourg (Switzerland), and Bonn (Germany), where she was the recipient of an Alexander von Humboldt postdoctoral fellowship.
Another very radical Ph.D. Take a look at the link provided to read some of her works. See if you really share her values.
https://philpapers.org/s/Cinzia%20Arruzza
Tithi Bhattacharya.
Specialization
Modern South Asia, Subaltern Studies, Marxism, histories of fear and superstition
Tithi Bhattacharya received her Ph.D. from the School of Oriental and African Studies (University of London) in 2000. Her dissertation on the English-educated middle class of nineteenth-century Calcutta became the basis of her first book, The Sentinels of Culture: Class, Education, and the Colonial Intellectual in Bengal (Oxford, 2005). In this she focused on a very specific aspect of the middle class’s social history: their obsessive preoccupation with culture and education. The book starts from a rooted definition of education and demonstrates how education and culture were frequently aligned to social and economic power. Bhattacharya uses class as an analytic category to argue that the commentaries about education and being educated in colonial Bengal ought to be seen as key arguments in staking out the territory of a new emergent middle class.
Professor Bhattacharya’s work has been published in leading journals such as the Journal of Asian Studies, South Asia Research and New Left Review. Her next book project is titled “Uncanny Histories: Fear, Superstition and Reason in Colonial Bengal”. It is an attempt to write a material history of fear and to show how new historical processes -- rural to urban migration, English education, new funerary practices-- changed the very cultural inflections of fear as a colonial society negotiated its encounter with modernity.
Professor Bhattacharya teaches courses in South Asian history, Colonialism, Critical Theory, and Histories of the dead and the undead.
Despite her use of Marxism as a theoretical tool, and her commitment to complete human liberation, at home
Dr. Bhattacharya is forced to live a life of complete servitude to her cat, Cleveland the Valiant, who is sometimes kind enough to afford her certain minimal rights as guaranteed by the Geneva Convention.
Professor Bhattacharya’s work has been published in leading journals such as the Journal of Asian Studies, South Asia Research and New Left Review. Her next book project is titled “Uncanny Histories: Fear, Superstition and Reason in Colonial Bengal”. It is an attempt to write a material history of fear and to show how new historical processes -- rural to urban migration, English education, new funerary practices-- changed the very cultural inflections of fear as a colonial society negotiated its encounter with modernity.
Professor Bhattacharya teaches courses in South Asian history, Colonialism, Critical Theory, and Histories of the dead and the undead.
Despite her use of Marxism as a theoretical tool, and her commitment to complete human liberation, at home
Dr. Bhattacharya is forced to live a life of complete servitude to her cat, Cleveland the Valiant, who is sometimes kind enough to afford her certain minimal rights as guaranteed by the Geneva Convention.
Nancy Fraser.
Books
Fortunes of
Fortunes of Feminism: From State-Managed Capitalism to Neoliberal Crisis is a collection of essays written from 1985 to 2010[10] that aims at dissecting the “drama in three acts” that according to the author is the thread of second-wave feminism.[11] Act one represents the moment when the feminist movement joined radical movements to transform society through uncovering gender injustice and capitalism’s androcentrism, while act two, Fraser highlights with regret, is a switch from redistribution to recognition and difference and a shift to identity politics that risk to support neoliberalism through efforts to build a free market society.[10][11] Foreseeing act three as a revival of the movement, Fraser argues for a reinvigorated feminist radicalism able to address the global economic crisis.[12] Feminism must be a force working in concert with other egalitarian movements in the struggle to bring the economy under democratic control, while building on the visionary potential of the earlier waves of women’s liberation.[10][12]The work is considered an important contribution as it provides a clear frame to rethink issues related to labour, emancipation, identity, rights claims at the core of political demands of justice in the contemporary context of neoliberism.[11] Although a necessary incorporation of political economy into contemporary feminist discourse,[13] Fraser’s use theoretical schemas has been criticized as dense and baffling at times—it is unclear, for example, why there are three types of needs discourses, four registers of dependency, or seven principles of gender justice. M. E. Mitchell, writer for Marx & Philosophy, writes “This [complexity] is, perhaps, owing to her propensity to avail herself of whatever terms best encapsulate processes of institutionalized oppression. Thinking thus, from the ground up, gives her work a complexity that at times compromises the systematic quality and coherence of her theoretical categories.”[14]
Unruly
Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse, and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory is a collection of essays written between 1980 and 1989.[15] The book examines the theories of power and source in Foucault, the politics of French deconstruction and Richard Rorty, the politics of gender in Habermas, and the politics of need interpretation in two concluding essays which delineate her own position within contemporary socialist-feminist critical theory.[16] Contemporaries such as Douglas Kellner have praised Fraser’s writings as “seasoned with social hope”[16] and effectively synthesizing feminist commitment to political agency and social progress with several forms of modern and postmodern social scepticism; however, her goals of providing “the sort of big diagnostic picture necessary to orient [the current] political practice” of socialist feminism[15] have been criticized for being too ambitious and ultimately narrow in their execution. Patricia S. Mann summarizes the pitfalls of the text:I wish Fraser had made more of an effort to call upon the resources of analytic philosophy. It is true that analytic philosophers look all the way back to Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham for their paradigms of analytic philosophy. Unfazed because untouched by these notions of social constitution of individuals, or by the irrationalities of individual thought, philosophy offers an outmoded yet still seaworthy vessel for any seeking to ride out the storms of postmodern disillusionment with notions of agency and process. Had Fraser utilized the works of analytic political thinkers when she finally came to formulate her socialist-feminist theory of the welfare state she could have exploited the admittedly “thin” theories of political agency and political rights within political philosophy today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Fraser#Books
Angela Davis.
Angela Yvonne Davis (born January 26, 1944) is an American political activist, academic scholar, and author. She emerged as a prominent counterculture activist and radical in the 1960s as a leader of the Communist Party USA, and had close relations with the Black Panther Party through her involvement in the Civil Rights Movement. Her interests include prisoner rights; she co-founded Critical Resistance, an organization working to abolish the prison-industrial complex. She was a professor (now retired) at the University of California, Santa Cruz, in its History of Consciousness Department and a former director of the university's Feminist Studies department.[4]
Davis was prosecuted for conspiracy involving the 1970 armed take-over of a Marin County, California, courtroom, in which four persons were killed. She was acquitted in a federal trial.[5]
Her research interests are feminism, African-American studies, critical theory, Marxism, popular music, social consciousness, and the philosophy and history of punishment and prisons. Her membership in the Communist Party led to California Governor Ronald Reagan's request in 1969 to have her barred from teaching at any university in the State of California. During the 1980s, she was twice a candidate for Vice President on the Communist Party USA ticket.
Angela Davis was born in Birmingham, Alabama. Her family lived in the "Dynamite Hill" neighborhood, which was marked in the 1950s by the bombings of houses of middle-class blacks who had moved into the area, in an attempt to intimidate them and drive them out. Davis occasionally spent time on her uncle's farm and with friends in New York City.[7] Her family included brothers Ben and Reginald and sister Fania. Ben played defensive back for the Cleveland Browns and Detroit Lions in the late 1960s and early 1970s.[8]
Davis attended Carrie A. Tuggle School, a segregated black elementary school; later she attended Parker Annex, a middle-school branch of Parker High School in Birmingham. During this time Davis' mother, Sallye Bell Davis, was a national officer and leading organizer of the Southern Negro Youth Congress, an organization influenced by the Communist Party. It was trying to build alliances among African Americans in the South. Consequently, Davis grew up surrounded by communist organizers and thinkers who significantly influenced her intellectual development.[9]
Davis was involved in her church as a child; she was an active member in her church youth group and attended Sunday school regularly. Davis attributes much of her political involvement to her involvement as a young girl in Birmingham with the Girl Scouts of the United States of America. She earned many badges and certificates; she also participated in Girl Scouts 1959 national roundup in Colorado. As a Girl Scout she marched and picketed to protest racial segregation in Birmingham.[10]
By her junior year in high school, Davis had applied to and was accepted at an American Friends Service Committee (Quaker) program that placed black students from the South in integrated schools in the North. She chose Elisabeth Irwin High School in Greenwich Village. There she was introduced to socialism and communism, and recruited by a Communist youth group, Advance
This evil woman is in a league of her own among this group of Radicals.
Odeh was convicted in 1970 by an Israeli military court of involvement in fatal terrorist bombings, and in 2014 by a US federal jury of immigration fraud. She was sentenced to life in prison in Israel for her involvement in two terrorist bombings in Jerusalem in 1969, one of which killed two people, and involvement in an illegal organization, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). She spent 10 years in prison before she was released in a prisoner exchange with the PFLP in 1980.[8]
Odeh was convicted of immigration fraud on November 10, 2014, by a jury in federal court in Detroit, Michigan, for concealing her arrest, conviction, and imprisonment for the 1969 bombings.[9][10] On December 11, 2014, she was released on bond pending sentencing.[10][11][12] Odeh's counsel maintains she did not receive a "full and fair trial" because the judge ruled as irrelevant her testimony that her confession to the crimes had been extracted by torture while she was in the custody of Israeli police in 1969.[11] On February 13, 2015, federal Judge Gershwin A. Drain denied Odeh's request that he either overturn the federal jury’s conviction of her or grant her a new trial. He ruled that her argument lacked legal merit, as evidence showed that Odeh illegally obtained U.S. citizenship, the jurors "clearly did not believe [her] explanation", and that "the evidence was more than sufficient to support the jury’s verdict."[13][14]
Odeh was sentenced to 18 months in federal prison on March 12, 2015, stripped of her US citizenship, and will be deported from the United States to Jordan once she is done serving her time.[15][16][17][17][18] She is free on bail while she appeals.[15] Her conviction was unanimously vacated by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals and sent back to the District Court in February 2016.
Odeh was arrested in March 1969, and in 1970 was convicted and sentenced by an Israeli military court to life in prison for her involvement in two terrorist bombings in Jerusalem and involvement in an illegal organization, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP).[5][6][7][20][21][22] Odeh's legal representation disputes the veracity of her confession to these crimes, based on her allegation that it was obtained after torture by the Israeli military.[11] American federal prosecutors in a later case said that the Israeli investigators had found "extensive bomb-making materials and explosives" and "explosive bricks in her room".[23]
One of the bombings killed 21-year-old Leon Kanner of Netanya and 22-year-old Eddie Joffe of a Tel Aviv suburb, on February 21, 1969. The two were killed by a bomb that was placed in a crowded Jerusalem SuperSol supermarket which the two students stopped in at to buy groceries for a field trip.[5][6][7][20][21][22][24][25] The same bomb wounded nine others.[22] A second bomb found at the supermarket was defused.[24] Odeh was also convicted of bombing and damaging the British Consulate four days later.[4][21][26][27] Israeli authorities said the bombings were the work of the PFLP, which claimed credit for the bombings.[24][28]
In 1980, Odeh was among 78 prisoners released by Israel in an exchange with the PFLP for one Israeli soldier captured in Lebanon.[6][7][28] Odeh's lawyer stated she testified at the United Nations about allegedly being tortured.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmea_Odeh
Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor.
Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor is the author of From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation (Haymarket Books, 2016). Fellow Princeton professor Dr. Cornel West describes Taylor as “the most sophisticated and courageous radical intellectual of her generation.” Ahead of the women’s march on Washington, Taylor spoke with The Indypendent about working class feminism, identity politics, Obama and how social movements can take on Trump.
This speech by Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor was part of a panel called No Justice, No Peace: Families of Police Brutality Victims Speak Out at the 2012 Socialism Conference.
Over 1,000 people gathered for this June 30 panel discussion from the Socialism 2012 Conference in Chicago, featuring family members of Alan Blueford, James Earl Rivera, Jr, and Ramarley Graham, all victims of police murder. How can we win justice for these families, and how can we continue to build a movement against the New Jim Crow?
In the eyes of the U.S. justice system, if you kill a Black teenager, you’re innocent until proven guilty. But if you are a Black teenager, you’re already guilty when you get up in the morning.
These are two faces of the U.S. criminal justice system, where the priority is anything but justice and where racism infects every inch of it – what Michelle Alexander has rightly called The New Jim Crow.
Anger at this system is brewing in cities across the country. At the forefront of this growing movement are the families of the victims of police murder who are bravely taking a stand for justice and fighting for a world where these atrocities are a thing of the past.
For more: http://aas.princeton.edu/blog/publication/keeanga-yamahtta-taylor-the-fight-against-the-new-jim-crow/
Barbara Ransby.
Over 1,000 people gathered for this June 30 panel discussion from the Socialism 2012 Conference in Chicago, featuring family members of Alan Blueford, James Earl Rivera, Jr, and Ramarley Graham, all victims of police murder. How can we win justice for these families, and how can we continue to build a movement against the New Jim Crow?
In the eyes of the U.S. justice system, if you kill a Black teenager, you’re innocent until proven guilty. But if you are a Black teenager, you’re already guilty when you get up in the morning.
These are two faces of the U.S. criminal justice system, where the priority is anything but justice and where racism infects every inch of it – what Michelle Alexander has rightly called The New Jim Crow.
Anger at this system is brewing in cities across the country. At the forefront of this growing movement are the families of the victims of police murder who are bravely taking a stand for justice and fighting for a world where these atrocities are a thing of the past.
For more: http://aas.princeton.edu/blog/publication/keeanga-yamahtta-taylor-the-fight-against-the-new-jim-crow/
Barbara Ransby.
Barbara Ransby is an associate professor of History and African American Studies at University of Illinois at Chicago. She is a writer, historian and longtime activist and author of a biography of Ella J. Baker. She has worked with the Black Radical Congress, Progressive Media Project, Crossroads Fund, Public Square, African American Women in Defense of Ourselves and other activist organizations[1].
She is closely associated with Freedom Road Socialist Organization.
She received her B.A. from the Columbia University and her M.A. and Ph.D in History from the University of Michigan. Barbara Ransby is currently a Professor of African American Studies, Gender and Woman’s Studies (director, 2008-2013), and History at the University of Illinois at Chicago where she directs the campus-wide Social Justice Initiative. She previously served as Interim Vice Provost for Planning and Programs (2011-2012).
Her highly acclaimed biography, Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision received eight national awards and recognitions. Professor Ransby is also winner of the prestigious Catherine Prelinger Prize for her contributions for her contributions to women’s history. Her most recent book is Eslanda: The Large and Unconventional life of Mrs. Paul Robeson (Yale University Press, 2013). Ransby has also published in numerous scholarly and popular publications and lectures widely. She serves on the editorial boards of the Black Commentator, (an online journal); the London based journal, Race and Class; the Justice, Power and Politics Book Series at the University of North Carolina Press; and the Scholar’s Advisory Commitee of Ms. Magazine, as well as the National Advisory Board of “Imagining America”. In the summer of 2012 she became the second Editor in Chief of SOULS, a critical journal of Black Politics, Culture and Society published quarterly since 1999. In addition to her scholarship, Professor Ransby is a public historian who works with many community based and activist organizations.[
On April 18 2009 the Chicago branch of National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, a front first for the Communist Party USA, latterly for the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, awarded several local activists its highest honour.
According to a report from the Communist Party USA's People's Weekly World[20].
Patricia Hill, executive director of the African American Police League; Jane Raley, senior staff attorney with the Northwestern Law School; Judith Stuart, an anti-prison activist, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, retired Pastor with the Trinity United Church of Christ; and Karen Yarbrough, Illinois state representative.
Dr. Barbara Ransby, a professor in the African American Studies Department at the University of Illinois at Chicago, emceed the award ceremony.
You can read their manifesto here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/06/women-strike-trump-resistance-power
The question any American woman should ask themselves is does this group of admitted Marxists, Communists, Socialists, and at least one Terrorist represent me and the America I want to live in? If so go, wear red, make a donation etc. I suspect these women only represent a very small minority of women in America.
I believe if most women in America knew the history of these women they would not have anything to do with this organization.
She is closely associated with Freedom Road Socialist Organization.
She received her B.A. from the Columbia University and her M.A. and Ph.D in History from the University of Michigan. Barbara Ransby is currently a Professor of African American Studies, Gender and Woman’s Studies (director, 2008-2013), and History at the University of Illinois at Chicago where she directs the campus-wide Social Justice Initiative. She previously served as Interim Vice Provost for Planning and Programs (2011-2012).
Her highly acclaimed biography, Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision received eight national awards and recognitions. Professor Ransby is also winner of the prestigious Catherine Prelinger Prize for her contributions for her contributions to women’s history. Her most recent book is Eslanda: The Large and Unconventional life of Mrs. Paul Robeson (Yale University Press, 2013). Ransby has also published in numerous scholarly and popular publications and lectures widely. She serves on the editorial boards of the Black Commentator, (an online journal); the London based journal, Race and Class; the Justice, Power and Politics Book Series at the University of North Carolina Press; and the Scholar’s Advisory Commitee of Ms. Magazine, as well as the National Advisory Board of “Imagining America”. In the summer of 2012 she became the second Editor in Chief of SOULS, a critical journal of Black Politics, Culture and Society published quarterly since 1999. In addition to her scholarship, Professor Ransby is a public historian who works with many community based and activist organizations.[
On April 18 2009 the Chicago branch of National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, a front first for the Communist Party USA, latterly for the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, awarded several local activists its highest honour.
According to a report from the Communist Party USA's People's Weekly World[20].
- Human Rights awards were granted to honorees at the event whose work includes ending the death penalty, overturning wrongful convictions, the fight against racism and efforts to help victims of the prison industrial complex.
Patricia Hill, executive director of the African American Police League; Jane Raley, senior staff attorney with the Northwestern Law School; Judith Stuart, an anti-prison activist, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, retired Pastor with the Trinity United Church of Christ; and Karen Yarbrough, Illinois state representative.
Dr. Barbara Ransby, a professor in the African American Studies Department at the University of Illinois at Chicago, emceed the award ceremony.
You can read their manifesto here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/06/women-strike-trump-resistance-power
The question any American woman should ask themselves is does this group of admitted Marxists, Communists, Socialists, and at least one Terrorist represent me and the America I want to live in? If so go, wear red, make a donation etc. I suspect these women only represent a very small minority of women in America.
I believe if most women in America knew the history of these women they would not have anything to do with this organization.
