Grand Rapids Power Structure: Part IX – Non-Profit Organizations as Buffers against systemic change
Over the past few months we have been investigating the Grand Rapids Power Structure, beginning with a discussion about its framework in Part I; the most powerful family in Grand Rapids, the DeVos Family, in Part II and in Part III we looked at other members of the most powerful members of the private sector. In Part IV, we looked at the private sector organizations that have power and which individuals sit on the boards of those organizations.
Four weeks ago, we looked at the next level of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, the local government, in Part V, and three weeks ago we investigated the role and function of the media, within Grand Rapids and how it serves power in Part VI.
Two weeks we began to look at how various institutions act as a buffer for systems of power against systemic change, first looking at institutions of higher learning in Part VII and in Part VIII we looked at how Religious Institutions act as a buffer against systemic change in Grand Rapids.
Today, we will look at how Non-Profits play a role in acting as a buffer for systems of power and against systemic change.
First, it is useful to state upfront that when critiquing non-profits, we are not saying that they do no good. There is no simple good/bad binaries when looking at non-profits. Instead, we need to think about how they function within a system, since non-profits rely heavily on outside funding sources, primarily from private foundations, which are essentially tax-havens for rich people who want to influence public policy. Therefore, it is more useful to think of non-profit organizations as being part of a system, which many have identified as the Non-Profit Industrial Complex.
The Non-Profit Industrial Complex is a relationship between the Private Power, the State, foundations, the non-profit/NGO, social service agencies and sometimes social justice organizations. These relationships often result in the surveillance, control, derailment, and everyday management of political movements. The feminist group INCITE!, has identified the following ways in which non-profits function as it relates to private and state power.
- Monitor and control social justice movements;
- Divert public monies into private hands through foundations;
- Manage and control dissent in order to make the world safe for capitalism;
- Redirect activist energies into career-based modes of organizing instead of mass-based organizing capable of actually transforming society;
- Allow corporations to mask their exploitative and colonial work practices through “philanthropic” work;
- Encourage social movements to model themselves after capitalist structures rather than to challenge them.
In looking at non-profits in Grand Rapids and their relationship to private power, it is easy to see that these organizations rely heavily on the very foundations run by the wealthiest families who make up the Grand Rapids Power Structure. The DeVos Family foundations, the Van Andel Foundation, the Secchia Foundation, the Cook Foundation, the Frey Foundation and the John & Nancy Kennedy Foundation. These foundations channel millions of dollars to local non-profits, which results in; 1) the non-profits will not speak out about the power these families have in influencing public policy, and 2) the non-profits will not look at the root causes of the issues they are organized to respond to. In fact, the members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, through their efforts to influence public policy, are part of the root cause of the issues that non-profits are responding to.
For instance, look at the issue of poverty and economic inequality. Those in the sector of private power, spend a great deal of money to influence public policy to dismantle unions, end pensions & benefits, reduce public spending for social services and reap the benefits of taxpayer subsidies when they “develop” a new project. These dynamics are major contributors to lower wages, less of a safety net for people who are struggling economically, reducing or eliminating health benefits, plus an increase in housing costs that thousands in Grand Rapids can no longer afford. These same private sector individuals and families, then turn around and contribute funds to local non-profits to provide some services to the very people they have been undermining, except with non-profits they are encouraged to only look at the individual behavior of those experiencing poverty – managing their money better, getting more job training, starting their own business, etc., instead of developing a critique of how these systems function to oppress and exploit them in the first place.
This is fundamentally the difference between non-profit organizations and social movements. Non-profits put bandaids on social problems and never really challenge the systems of power and oppression that cause the problems in the first place. Social Movements, on the other hand, seek to build the capacity of people to take power back into their own hands, to dismantle the systems of power and oppression that caused the injustices and to engage in collective, radical imagination to create a better world.
People can go to www.guidestar.org to look up the 990s that foundations must submit to find out which non-profits are recipients of their funding. Below is a sampling from a 2016 990 of the Doug and Maria DeVos Foundation. This sampling demonstrates that foundations from wealthy people are both designed to fund directly projects that these members of the power structure have helped to create (Grand Rapids Initiative for Leaders) and those which they know will not challenge their power (Grand Rapids Urban League or Hispanic Center of Western Michigan).
Other ways to secure the buffer role of non-profits is to have representatives of the Grand Rapids Power Structure sit on the board of directors of these organizations. For instance, the board of directors for the Hispanic Center of Western Michigan or Kids Food Basket, both have representatives of the local power structure. These relationships will guarantee that those non-profits will not do anything to threaten the system of power that exists. Again, they can provide some important relief to people who are suffering, but they offer no long-term solutions that ultimately challenges the systems and structures which caused the harm in the first place.
Take, for example, the difference in how a non-profit like the Hispanic Center of Western Michigan engages the Latino/Latinx community compared to Movimiento Cosecha.
The Hispanic Center offers programs and services that will benefit individuals or families. These services and programs do provide relief to people who are struggling financially, who need translation services or who are working to gain certain legal status. The Hispanic Center has professional staff to assist these individuals and families to achieve certain goals and they rely heavily on grant money, which is provided by foundations. The Hispanic Center does not address the root causes of the problems that people who utilize their services are dealing with.
In contrast, Movimiento Cosecha GR is a social movement that has a much broader goal of winning dignity, respect and permanent protection for all immigrants. This movement utilizes trained organizers who will then train other people in the same skills. Those involved with Movimiento Cosecha GR are not paid and the fundraising they do is grassroots that relies on general community members to contribute. Cosecha GR has a power analysis and a theory of change to help them achieve their goals, along with the use of tactics and strategies that not only challenges the systems of power and oppression, they provide people with an opportunity to engage in collective liberation. Movimiento Cosecha GR is a horizontal organizations, where no one person is in charge and they do not have a board of directors to answer to. Cosecha GR is committed to addressing the root causes of the current immigration crisis in order to achieve immigrant justice.
In Part X of this series we will look at some of the organizations and movements in Grand Rapids that have the potential to achieve transformative justice, along with some ideas of how we dismantle the Grand Rapids Power Structure and create grassroots, autonomous movements for radical change.
Candidates, endorsements and Social Movements
Last week I received a rather strange Facebook message, one that included a request.
I will not name the person who sent me the message, but for me it is an instructive commentary on electoral politics and social movements.
The message I received is the following:
Not sure I have your nerve, when it comes to civil disobedience (I did see you sitting down last week, right?) but I need folks like you to ‘like’ my campaign page and keep aspiring electeds close to the human costs of bad policy.
First, the candidate in question is not someone I have a relationship with. I only know them because of their involvement in the community, but we do not travel in the same circles.
Second, I was taken back right away when they said, “Not sure I have your nerve, when it comes to civil disobedience.” Since I have no relationship with this individual, it was rather puzzling to me that they were not sure if I was indeed one of the 7 people arrested on June 28th for engaging in civil disobedience against Kent County’s contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Third, in my mind I thought to myself, why would you not have the nerve to engage in civil disobedience. This person is a white male, with some class privilege, so why not be willing to risk arrest in order to draw attention to the fact that ICE is currently terrorizing immigrant families in Kent County? The risk to white men with class privilege, is not much of a risk to engage in civil disobedience. Those of us arrested only spent 6 hours in the Kent County Jail, since we had people bond us out, who also waited for us with refreshments and rides. It was more of an inconvenience, but not much of a risk, especially since it was only a misdemeanor charge.
For me, someone running for office would gain all kinds of credibility by joining in the struggle for immigrant justice and be willing to get arrested in order to resist the state repression being carried out by ICE in Kent County.
Civil disobedience has a long history, with millions participating in such as of resistance, whether it is for immigrant justice, anti-war resistance, worker justice, gender justice or engaging in actions against institutional racism and white supremacy. In fact, every major social movement in US history has used civil disobedience and civil resistance as a tactic to achieve their strategic goals. Using civil disobedience and civil resistance was integral in the abolitionist movement, the labor movement, the suffrage movement, the Civil Rights Movement, the Disability Justice movement, the farmworker movement, the environmental justice movement and many other social movements in the past of the present. More importantly, I would argue that civil resistance and civil disobedience as a strategy has been historically more effective than voting in terms of gaining the demands that these movement sought to win. This is essentially the theme of Howard Zinn’s book, A People’s History of the United States and it is a theme in numerous other books on US history, such as Frances Fox Piven’s and Richard Cloward’s book, Poor People’s Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail.
Remember that this candidate expressed that they were not willing to participate in civil resistance, and yet they wanted my support. The candidate went on to say, but I need folks like you to ‘like’ my campaign page. To this request, I simply ask, why? Why does this candidate need me to like their Facebook page? How will that further the cause of justice for immigrants and why are they unwilling to reciprocate any support for the cause to which I chose to get arrested for?
Political Endorsements are Backward
It is standard practice for people who run for office to seek endorsements from individuals and organizations that operate outside of the 501c3 world. Virtually everyone does it, from those running for local office all the way up to those seeking a seat in the federal government. But let me suggest that the notion of political endorsement is backward.
What if individuals and organizations got candidates to endorse their political vision? In fact, as a strategy, it would be even more effective, if groups of people and autonomous groups would come together to create a platform that candidates would endorse. Imagine of individuals and organizations would say, we will not vote for you unless you embrace this vision:
- Single Payer Health Care
- Free College Education for anyone
- An end to US Imperialism and a significant reduction to the US military budget
- An end to Corporate Welfare
- A Living Wage – $20 an hour as the new minimum wage
- Abolish ICE and the Prison Industrial Complex
- A 90% reduction of carbon emissions by 2050
- An End to Institutionalized Racism and White Supremacy
- Food Justice
- Permanent Protect for all Immigrants
- Safe, Affordable Housing for All
This list could be longer, but the point here is, when are we going to start creating a platform and a vision for what we want instead of just continuing to give our vote away to candidates who have rather vague commitments to progressive politics? If they want our votes, then the should have to earn them by standing for what it is that we collectively want to see happen in the world. Of course, maybe a system of representative democracy is not really suited to bring about the kind of radical, transformative politics we need.
Let us all develop the nerve to engage in civil resistance, since the future depends on our collective ability to take risks.
Betsy DeVos Watch: A Corporate Education Appointment and Students as Workforce Development
In April, we reported on the Department of Education adding another anti-civil rights lawyer, Carlos G. Muñiz. In late June, Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, announced yet another confirmation to the Department of Education, Frank Brogan.
Brogan has served in several different educational capacities and will serve as Assistant Secretary of Elementary and Secondary Education. Brogan is the former President of Florida Atlantic University and was later Lt. Governor of Florida in Jeb Bush’s administration. The last position that Brogan held was Chancellor of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education.
During Brogan’s tenure in Florida he supported redirecting public money to private schools and the downsizing of educators within the public school system. As the Washington Post reported recently, Brogan was part of Jeb Bush’, “corporate school reform movement that sought to operate public schools as if they were for-profit businesses.” Thus, adding Brogan to the Department of Education is consistent with the education privatization model that Betsy DeVos has been pushing since she became Secretary of Education in 2017.
Students as Workforce Talent
One of the trends in the attack on public education is recent decades has been the way that the business community has framed the role of students. Students are no longer thought of as developing critical thinking skills or as being engaged in the humanities, students are now seen as talent. For the business community, they see students primarily as future employees and they want students to have the skills needed in order to join the workforce.
In West Michigan, this narrative about students is embraced by the leading CEOs in the area, through a group known as Talent 2025. Talent 2025 is one of the organizations that is part of the Grand Rapids Power Structure.
Betsy DeVos has been promoting student development as talent development for the business community long before she became Secretary of Education. So, it’s no surprise that the Secretary of Education would attend and speak at the annual conference for SkillsUSA.
SkillsUSA is a national organization that promotes a relationship between students, teachers and businesses for the purpose of developing future employees. SkillsUSA has numerous corporate partners, such as 3M, General Electric, Lowes, Snap-On and State Farm.
Betsy DeVos spoke at the SkillsUSA annual conference and competition in late June. In her speech at SkillsUSA, DeVos uses this opportunity to not only talk about career development, the Secretary of Education also used this platform as an opportunity to talk about the “need” to fill jobs in the manufacturing sector.
In her speech, Secretary DeVos stated:
We’re fundamentally reevaluating what we do and how we do it. Washington’s bloated bureaucracies do not meet the needs of our global economy and labor market, and they create artificial barriers between education and workforce programs.
This statement makes it clear that what Betsy DeVos is ultimately interested in, as far as students are concerned, is the expansion of US markets. More specifically, the expansion of US markets, through the eyes of Betsy DeVos, really means increased corporate profits. This ethos of education as profit making was underscored by last week’s announcement that the Trump Administration wants to merge the US Department of Education with the Department of Labor.
There are many things that we are taught to believe about the United States of America. We grew up reciting the Pledge of Allegiance without understanding or critically investigating the words. We are taught to blindly accept that the Founding Fathers were great defenders of liberty, without knowing that many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were slave owners.
However, we can fight back against the nationalistic tendencies that most of us are raised with and we can begin to seek out deeper truths about the US. The great abolitionist Frederick Douglass said this about the Fourth Of July, in a speech he gave in 1852:
“What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are, to Him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy — a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages.There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour.”
The contradiction of the 4th of July is evident to people who dare to look closely at the history of the United States. Indeed, the contradictions are self-evident even today. While many people across the country gathered yesterday for a cook out, witnessed the spectacle of fireworks or attended one of the many parades that took place in West Michigan, there were people who were unwilling to accept the dominant narrative about the 4th of July.
About 50 people participated in an action yesterday organized through Movimiento Cosecha GR. The action took place in East Grand Rapids during the 4th of July parade that made its way on Wealthy Street for just a few blocks in downtown East Grand Rapids.
Movimiento Cosecha GR set up for mock cages of detained children and families, like what we have been seeing near the US/Mexican border in recent weeks. In additions to the mock detention cages, there were several banners that were held on both sides of the street, calling for an end of the contract that the government of Kent County currently has with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). 
The action yesterday, is a follow up to the larger action that took place last Thursday, where some 200 people came to the Kent County Commission meeting to demand that the county end their contract with ICE.
In addition to the mock cages and banners, people were chanting “End the Contract,” especially when politicians and candidates were walking past the crowd. As is the case for most fourth of July parades, the bulk of those participating in the parade were candidates or people currently holding office. Rep. Justin Amash walked in the parade, as did Winnie Brinks, who is running for a State Senate seat in Michigan. There were also current Kent County Board Commissioners, specifically Phil Skaggs and Robert Womack. Those taking part in the action were sending a loud message to both of these commissioners to End the Contract, as not one single Kent County Commissioner has come out against the contract since the commissioners were confronted at the June 28th meeting.
The only movement on the issue of the county’s contract with ICE, was a Facebook posting proposal from Commissioner Jim Talen on June 28, who stated:
At the end of today’s meeting, my colleague Dave Bulkowski and I both asked Chair Saalfeld to consider appointing a task force to take a look at what can be done to address the concerns that were shared.
Many have responded to this proposal to have a task force with swift criticism that it is only a way to distract or re-direct the people from demanding an end to the contract that Kent County has with ICE.
We know that ICE is arresting and detaining immigrants on a weekly basis in Kent County. ICE is separating families and terrorizing the immigrant community, which is exactly what the County Commissioners were told during the June 28th meeting.
Back to yesterday’s parade.
On a few occasions, those who participated in the action also sang songs. One song, a old labor song, included the lyrics, “which side are you on.” One strategy that Movimiento Cosecha uses is the strategy of polarization. Movimiento Cosecha will take a public stand on immigration, like the County’s contract with ICE, and see how the public responds to the issue. The public will be polarized to either join Movimiento Cosecha in their call for an end to the contract with ICE or they will reject it and side with those who support oppression.
The whole point of the action yesterday, was to polarize people and see which side they are on with this issue. In addition, to the mock cages, the banners, the chanting and songs, there were people conducting interviews with those attending the parade, asking them what they thought about the issue of freedom on the 4th of July, while children and families are being detained by ICE at the border and in Kent County.
Lastly, people were handing out information about upcoming meetings and actions related to the Kent County contract with ICE. Activist were also asking people to sign a petition, demanding that Kent County end their contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which you can sign here.
In addition to signing the petition, Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE are inviting people to take part in several upcoming events and actions that challenge the legitimacy of ICE in Kent Count.
Movimiento Cosecha GR has an Ally Training on Monday, July 9th and GR Rapid Response to ICE has their next monthly training on Thursday, July 19th. There is also a Facebook group called, End the Contract, which people are encouraged to join and get regular updates on this campaign.
Grand Rapids Power Structure: Part VIII – Religious Institutions as Buffers against systemic change
Over the past several weeks we have been investigating the Grand Rapids Power Structure, beginning with a discussion about its framework in Part I; the most powerful family in Grand Rapids, the DeVos Family, in Part II and in Part III we looked at other members of the most powerful members of the private sector. In Part IV, we looked at the private sector organizations that have power and which individuals sit on the boards of those organizations.
Three weeks ago, we looked at the next level of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, the local government, in Part V, and two weeks ago we investigated the role and function of the media, within Grand Rapids and how it serves power in Part VI.
Last week we began to look at how various institutions act as a buffer for systems of power against systemic change, first looking at institutions of higher learning in Part VII. Today, in Part VIII, we will look at how Religious Institutions act as a buffer against systemic change in Grand Rapids.
Historically, the three monotheistic religions of Christianity, Islam and Judaism have caused more harm than good. Christianity, especially since the Roman Empire adopted it in the 4th Century, has been the religion of empires, colonialism and settler colonialism. Sure there have been small enclaves of Christians that have adhered to a radical form of love, justice and mercy, but religious historians often refer to these groups as the faithful remnant. Since Christianity is the dominant religion in Grand Rapids, we will limit our analysis to that religion.
Grand Rapids is built on settler colonialism, with indigenous populations inhabiting this area for centuries, only to be forced or coerced into submission in the early part of the 19th Century. Various Protestant denominations and Catholicism have played a critical role in the formation of Grand Rapids, since those who have made up and continue to make up the local power structure identify as Christians. However, for the purpose of this article is to focus on how religious institutions, specifically Christianity, acts as a buffer against systemic change.
Grand Rapids is sometimes referred to as the City of Churches, with an estimated 800 churches. Hundreds of thousands of people in Grand Rapids belong to churches, yet very few of them take an active role in promoting systemic change. There are the ultra-conservative churches, which embraces and supports the concentrated wealth of a few over the many, but they are not the focus of this article. We want to look at the mainstream churches that ultimately acts as a buffer for the Grand Rapids Power Structure, rarely calling into question the systems of power and oppression that exist in this city.
There are several ways that churches act as a buffer against systemic change in Grand Rapids. One of the most common ways, is to remain passive or distracted from the injustices that occur every day in this city. This is what Karl Marx meant by religion being the opiate of the people. In Grand Rapids, Christianity is certainly a distraction for thousands of Christians, so that they don’t have to even acknowledge the suffering, exploitation and oppression that exist in this community on a daily basis.
A Second way that churches act as a buffer against systemic change, are those churches that engage in various forums of charity. Now, I’m not saying that charity, in and of itself is a bad thing, but charity often doesn’t lead to people questioning the larger, systemic problems that lead to things like homelessness, hunger and poverty. Charity is also a easy way to make yourself feel good without having to take any kind of risk that usually accompanies the dismantling of systems of oppression.
For instance, there are food drives that happen all year round in this community. Many churches even have their own food pantry. However, there are only a few churches that practice food justice, where the entire food system is called into question and then challenged through a variety of strategies and tactics.
Churches also engage in charitable acts by visiting prisoners, visiting those that are sick, sponsoring a refugee family or serving fair trade coffee on Sunday mornings. These are all nice things to do and they can provide some temporary relief for those who are suffering, but they do not dismantle the root causes of the social injustices they claim to address.
A Third way that churches act as a buffer against systemic change is to take on causes, without ever taking the necessary risks involved to challenge systems of oppression. Churches might be gay-friendly, but they do not challenge hetero-patriarchy that permeates the Grand Rapids Power Structure. Churches might try to practice being good stewards of the earth by recycling, but they rarely confront the fossil fuel industry or the economic system of capitalism, which is incompatible with environmental justice. Churches might promote some vague notion of peace, without ever taking the hard risks necessary to end war or white supremacy. Churches might even say that immigrants are a blessing, but fail to declare themselves a sanctuary and actually practice the idea that all immigrants are truly welcome in their community.
A Fourth way that churches act as buffer against systemic change is to practice White Savior Politics. Churches often have good intentions in wanting to be good allies, but more often than not they still think that they know what’s best for people experiencing poverty, those in the immigrant community or those in the black community. Good intentions are not only not enough and they often lead to “good people” doing real harm to those they seek to “help.” This is often the case with churches that focus on diversity, instead of racial justice. Diversity proponents rarely have a power analysis and believe that if we just treat each other with respect then we can all get along. Those who practice racial justice are those that recognize historical inequities, are willing to look closely at how they contribute to racial oppression and then develop relationships with communities of color to find out how they can best be in solidarity with them.
If churches in Grand Rapids were not acting as a buffer for the local power structure, what might that look like?
- Churches would demand the elimination of the wealth gap and practice economic justice, which cannot exist within capitalism.
- Churches would acknowledge that this community was founded on settler colonialism and ask the Native community what is required of them to undo settler colonialism.
- Churches would acknowledge that this city was built on and continues to practice White Supremacy. The churches would then ask communities of color what they need to do to not participate in White Supremacy, which is related to the wealth inequality and the need to pay reparations.
- Churches would stop practicing and condoning violence against women, violence against the LGBTQ community and practice inclusive and horizontal ways of sharing power.
- Churches would declare themselves a sanctuary and take in members of the immigrant community that are being targeted by ICE.
- Churches would not support the Prison Industrial Complex, would use their wealth to bail people out, would start seeing the police and the courts as instruments of oppression and work to end the criminalization of poverty and the war on drugs.
- Churches would stop defending US Imperialism and militarism, by demanding their members to not work for weapons manufacturers, to fight against the Military Industrial Complex, to not send their young members to war and to denounce nationalism.
These are just a few things that churches could do, which would surely scare the shit out of those who are part of the Grand Rapids Power Structure. Unfortunately, it is not likely that churches would even consider practicing justice to end systems of oppression. It is far easier for churches to act as a buffer in service of the power structure.
The narrative we create about events that happen is important, as narratives can help inform us about what we need to in certain circumstances or how to navigate power dynamics.
Last week Thursday, several hundred people came to the Kent County Commission meeting to demand that they end the contract they have with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
After effectively shutting down the commission meeting, we decided to go to the ICE office on Ottawa, just north of the 196 overpass. We remained there for only 15 minutes as ICE had their doors locked. Afterwards, the demonstration moved back down Ottawa towards Michigan Street. It was at this point that seven of us decided to walk out onto the Ottawa/Michigan intersection, at the crosswalk, going east crossing Ottawa.
The seven of us were carrying a banner that read, Kent County Separates Families, End the Contract with ICE. The traffic at that intersection had been shut down by police, but the GRPD officers told us as we began to leave the sidewalk and go east up Michigan in front of Ottawa, that we could not walk that way and if we didn’t leave we would be arrested.
Here is the narrative created by the Grand Rapids Police Department, posted on their Facebook page a few hours after the arrested had taken place on June 28th:
The Grand Rapids Police Department was forced to affect 7 arrests this morning after protesters sat down in the intersection of Michigan St NW and Ottawa Av NW.
This morning at approximately 9:45 a.m. a group of 100 protesters left the County Commission chambers and began to march through the 400-600 blocks of Ottawa Av NW. Patrol officers monitored the crowd and were able to block traffic at intersections to allow for safe passage of the pedestrians.
At 10:00 a.m., the crowd began to gather near and within the intersection of Michigan St NW and Ottawa Av NW. The marchers were advised to move to the sidewalk to allow for the passage of motor vehicles. 7 adult marchers, all holding the groups banner, disregarded the officers repeated commands and proceeded to the middle of the intersection completely blocking traffic. When warned that their actions were putting themselves, motorists, and those seeking medical treatment in harms way and that they would be arrested if they did not move, all of them sat down further failing to comply with instructions. Those 7 individuals were all arrested for “Failing to Comply With a Lawful Order” as well as “Resisting and Obstructing Police”, both city misdemeanors. There was no force used in the arrests, and the remainder of the group complied by remaining on the sidewalk until the march moved back to Calder Plaza at 10:45 a.m.
“The Grand Rapids Police Department has great respect and admiration for the Constitutional expression that is a basis for our American freedoms,” Chief Rahinsky stated. “However, when demonstrators block a road that leads to facilities which provide emergency medical treatment for the City of Grand Rapids residents and West Michigan, they endanger the health, safety, and welfare of the community. At that point we are obligated to act in the community’s best interest.”
Deconstructing the GRPD Narrative
First, the very fact that the statement from the GRPD begins with the notion that those arrested “forced them” to do so is a manipulative way of reversing the power dynamics between police and members of the community. We didn’t force them to do anything. They chose to arrest us.
Second, the GRPD statement in paragraph fails to mention that they had blocked the on ramp for 196 off of Ionia, even though the demonstration never went in that direction. Motorists wanting to get on to 196 at Michigan and Ionia, we unable to because of a decision made by the GRPD.
Third, the cops stated they, “were able to block traffic at intersections to allow for safe passage of the pedestrians.” The demonstration had safety marshals who were directing traffic and keeping people safe. We didn’t need cops to keep us safe as they suggest.
Fourth, the police narrative states, “When warned that their actions were putting themselves, motorists, and those seeking medical treatment in harms way and that they would be arrested if they did not move, all of them sat down further failing to comply with instructions.” The fact is that the police never said anything about putting motorists and those seeking medical treatment in harms way. We were simply told that if we continued to walk across Ottawa that we would be arrested.
Fifth, the GRPD state, “There was no force used in the arrests.” Again, a slight manipulation in the narrative. You can see in the picture above that the cops was pushing into my chest, which was not painful, but it the cop did use force. Had I put my had on the chest of the cop, I would have been charged with assault. In addition, cops are heavily armed, with tasers, guns, clubs, pepper spray, etc, which naturally determines a power dynamic in their favor.
Sixth, the GRPD narrative ends with a couple of quotes from Chief Rahinsky, both of which also presents a false narrative. The GRPD, like all law enforcement agencies, do not respect freedom of expression. Organizers will tell you that any time there is a demonstration, a march or a type of direct action, the police will try to intimidate you, silence you or tell you what you can and can’t do. If you bring a megaphone they can stop you from using it, citing a noise ordinance. If you try to hold a sign or try to hand out informational flyers (for example) near the entrance of the Ford Museum, the GRPD will tell you that you need to move far from the entrance in order to do so.
The second point that Rahinsky makes is the most offensive.
“However, when demonstrators block a road that leads to facilities which provide emergency medical treatment for the City of Grand Rapids residents and West Michigan, they endanger the health, safety, and welfare of the community. At that point we are obligated to act in the community’s best interest.”
This statement is just another attempt to twist the truth. When Rahinsky says that they have to act in the community’s best interest, we have to ask ourselves, which community is he referring to? People living in poverty, those living on the streets, African Americans, most in the immigrant community are not the people that Rahinsky has in mind when he says he is acting in the “community’s best interest.”
As a member of the GR Rapid Response to ICE group and an active participant in Movimiento Cosecha GR, we come in contact with immigrants every week who are being targeted by ICE agents, who arrest and detain them. We hear stories regularly of local cops stopping people in the immigrant community and arresting them for things like driving without a license, since they cannot obtain a drivers license in Michigan. While Rahinsky likes to say they his department wants to improve trust between the GRPD and the immigrant community, the fact is that he has stated on numerous occasions that if ICE asks his department to get involved with ICE cases, he is obligated to do so.
The way many of us see it, is that local cops are doing harm to the immigrant community on a regular basis, they are not looking out for their safety. Is it in the immigrant community’s best interest to have the GRPD stop them, arrest them and then hand them over to the Kent County Sheriff’s Department, which notifies ICE agents once they are processed in?
Movimiento Cosecha GR has a saying, We will disrupt you as long as you continue to disrupt the lives of our community. The very fact that the police cooperate in the arrest, detainment and eventual deportation of members of the immigrant community causes tremendous interruption of that community and those families. Therefore, when we engage in actions to block traffic for a few minutes, we do so to make the the following point: We are going to inconvenience your life for a short period of time so that we can communicate to you that the police (and your silence) is causing tremendous harm to the lives, to the families and to the immigrant community.
Therefore, which narrative do you think you can trust? The narrative put forth by an institution which is designed to protect power and punish communities of color or the narrative from members of affected communities struggling to survive and to achieve some form of liberation?
Ending the ICE contract with Kent County and yesterday’s action at the Kent County Commission meeting
( As a matter of transparency, I was part of the action at this meeting and one of those arrested yesterday for demanding that Kent County End their contract with ICE.)
For those of you who read this blog, you are well aware of the fact that yesterday, nearly 200 people came to the Kent County Commission meeting to demand that they end the county’s contract with ICE.
Yesterday, MLive ran an article where they interviewed Kent County Commission Chairman Jim Saalfeld. Here is what he said in that article:
“There were comments from the larger group that made me nervous this was going to turn into something more, which is why I suspended the meeting at that point,” chairman Jim Saalfeld said later in the meeting. “That was a discussion I had with the sheriff’s department and the leadership in advance that that is the type of approach we did in order to downplay the risk of violence.”
First, it seems that Saalfeld and other commissioners feel nervous when residents of Kent County decide to actively take part in policies that directly impact them and the people they care about. Second, there was never any risk of violence from the people who came to the commission meeting. The only people there who we now of who already engage in acts of violence were the members of the Sheriff’s Department and the Kent County Commissioners themselves. The Sheriff’s Department administers the contract with ICE and the Kent County Commission voted to approve it. This is the real violence and the reason why so many people came to demand that the county end the contract with ICE.
The MLive article also mention that Saalfeld had told the Sheriff’s deputies to remove a member of Movimiento Cosecha GR, Karla Barberi, because she asked someone at the podium to let immigrants speak about an urgent matter. Saalfeld said that Karla pushed the man at the podium, 
which was totally false. You can see from the video here that this never happened. What MLive did not report, was that the man who was at the podium, was John Kennedy. John Kennedy (pictured on the right) is the CEO of AutoCam, one of the wealthiest people in Kent County, a member of the Grand Rapids Power Structure and someone who actively supports far right policies, with both his money and his time. John Kennedy is on the board of the West Michigan Policy Forum, is active with the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce, sits on the Board of the Acton Institute, the Right Place Inc and is on the Board of Trustees at GVSU. He has publicly opposed the Affordable Health Care Act and always supports policies that hurt working people, especially unions. Kennedy also also contributed millions to federal, state and local Republican candidates in recent years, many of which have introduced legislation that promotes neo-liberal capitalism and the austerity measures that come with it.
One additional observation, since there have been numerous comments about what the Kent County Commissioners did during the meeting yesterday. The majority of commissioners left, which people noted was cowardly. There were some that stayed and others thanked them for staying to hear what people had to say. I understand people wanting to thank them. However, why are we thanking people who were elected to supposedly listen to public concerns in the first place? Why do we feel the need to affirm politicians who are paid through public tax dollars to sit and listen to members of the public? I for one am not going to thank any of them, until they take a public stance against the contract with ICE and then end the contract.
Yesterday, the Detroit Chapter of the NAACP came to Grand Rapids to hold a rally in front of the offices of Bethany Christian Services, because of the current crisis surrounding the separation of immigrant families in detention.
The event also included a spokesperson from the Grand Rapids NAACP, members of the UAW from Detroit, La SED and several pastors who addressed the crowd of roughly 100 who stood across from the offices of Bethany, holding signs.
There was some important points that were made during the rally. First, one of the pastors who spoke made the point that the children who were brought to Bethany and other agencies in the state, were brought in between 11pm and 7am, “during the cover of night. What is it that the government was hiding that caused them to transport these children in the middle of the night?”
The representative from La SED (Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development) made the point that not only is separating children from their parents is an injustice, but keeping them together in detention facilities is also an injustice.
However, beyond these clear and relevant statements, the majority of the commentary used religious language and the quoting of Christian scriptures. None of the speakers offered any clear analysis of the current detention of immigrant families and the separation of children from their parents. There was no mention of the role and function of ICE and there was no critique of the role that Bethany Christian Services was playing in this process. In fact, those who organized the rally stated that they were not interested in “attacking” Bethany. So why hold the rally across from the agency?
While I respect the desire to respond the current immigration crisis, it is not enough to make proclamations without a strategy. There were several issues this writer had with what took place during this rally.
First, the voices and experiences of immigrants were not centered at this rally. The voices and experiences of immigrants should be central to the struggle to confront this injustice. Someone did reach out to Cosecha GR and asked if they could bring supporters, but when Cosecha GR asked to speak at the rally, they were told that there were already enough speakers.
Second, the signs that most people were holding up were provided by the organizers. One sign read, Stand Up for Families, call your Representative now. While I am not suggesting that people should not call their representatives, such an action will get the results that we want – meaning the 
end of immigrant families in detention. Another sign said, America is Better than this, children are not pawns. I agree with the sentiment that children are not pawns, but there is little historical evidence to suggest that America is better than the separation of children from their families. Whether it has been the forced separation of Indigenous children from their families and putting them in boarding schools, theft separation of black children from their parents during slavery and a more contemporary reality of the Prison Industrial Complex and how it separates children from their parents on a massive scale.
Third, there were several references to letters from Democratic politicians, plus there were numerous democratic politicians and candidates present for this rally. And during the rally, the NAACP Grand Rapids chapter president only offered up the strategy of voting, with no other discussion of how we resist what is happening to immigrant families. There could have been mention of divesting from private prison corporations, which is where a growing number of immigrants are being sent. There was no discussion of municipalities declaring themselves Sanctuary Cities or religious institutions becoming sanctuaries for those fleeing government oppression. It is ironic, that right now in Detroit that is an action outside the ICE headquarters. There was also no mention of the action taking place today in Grand Rapids, where Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE are demanding an end to contract that ICE has with Kent County.
We all need to engage in expanding our radical imagination about what we can do to achieve collective liberation.
Another attack against those on government assistance in Michigan and the people paying for this new state law
Yesterday, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder passed legislation known as the Medicaid Workforce Engagement Act.
The title of this legislation was designed to pacify people, since the real focus of this legislation is to make people who receive government assistance with Medicaid be required to work 80 hours a month in order to continue receiving this assistance.
There are several exceptions listed within the newly adopted legislation, but according to an estimate cited in the Detroit News, “540,000 able-bodied adults” would be required to fulfill the work requirements.
Organizations that are part of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, like the GR Chamber of Commerce and the West Michigan Policy Forum, endorsed the legislation. On their facebook page, the WMPF stated:
The West Michigan Policy Forum supports this plan, as it will help employers struggling to find workers fill open jobs, and put people in need of assistance on a path for success and improvement.
The narrative that groups like the WMPF are using is suggests that this state policy will help people find work and take charge of their lives. The reality is that this new state policy punishes those who receive government assistance and is part of a larger decades-long battle to undo any form of government assistance at the state and federal level. This push to undo any government safety net is part of the larger Neo-liberal capitalist plan that has been promoted initially by Republicans, but adopted by the leadership of the Democratic Party, especially since the Clinton administration, when that administration dismantled welfare as we know it.
The newly adopted policy signed by Gov. Snyder was passed by the Senate and the House, pretty much on partisan lines. The legislation was introduced in the state Senate by Mike Shirkey, with the following co-sponsors:
Phillip Pavlov, Dave Hildenbrand, Peter MacGregor, Joe Hune, Judy Emmons, Jack Brandenburg, Patrick Colbeck, John Proos, Wayne Schmidt, David Robertson.
As always, it is important to follow the money when it comes to politicians, with our emphasis on those from West Michigan who have financed those who co-sponsored this new state policy, which punishes those receiving Medicaid.
Sen. Mike Shirkey – $80,000 from John Kennedy and $59,000 from the DeVos Family
Sen. Phil Pavlov – $18,000 from the DeVos Family and $6,500 from Meijer
Sen. Dave Hildenbrand – $21,000 from the DeVos Family and $13,650 from Meijer
Sen. Peter MacGregor – $43,000 from the DeVos Family, $16,000 from Meijer and $12,000 from Michael Jandernoa
Sen. Joe Hune – $9,000 from the DeVos Family
Sen. Jack Brandenburg – $14,000 from the DeVos Family
Sen. Patrick Colbeck – $18,000 from the DeVos Family
Sen. John Proos – $9,000 from the DeVos Family
Sen. Wayne Schmidt – $18,000 from the DeVos Family
Sen. David Robertson – $7,000 from the DeVos Family
Once again, the Grand Rapids Power Structure plays a significant role in determining the outcome of state policy that punishes the most vulnerable residents of Michigan.
White Savior Politics and the current immigration crisis
The recent news that the US government, through the Department of Homeland Security, has been detaining children of immigrant families. The detention centers are cruel manifestations of the nation’s immigration policies, which are punishing immigrants, particularly undocumented immigrants.
The images that we have all been seeing of immigrant children being separated from their families are awful, traumatic and gruesome. Therefore, it is not surprising that people have been outraged. All one has to do is look at social media and these images of children in detention all everywhere.
In the past few weeks, there has also been a variety of responses to this revelation that families are being separated. People have been calling members of Congress, holding protests and attempting to raise awareness about what is happening at this moment. Wanting to do something is understandable, in fact it seems rather natural for many people, since humans will respond to tragedy.
However, it is crucial that we step back and think critically about what it is we are responding to and how we respond. This is particularly important for white people. Why, you might ask? Well, the reality is that we live in a society that is permeated by white supremacist ideology. Activist and organizer, Elizabeth Martinez, defines white supremacy as:
White Supremacy is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of exploitation and oppression of continents, nations, and peoples of color by white peoples and nations of the European continent, for the purpose of maintaining and defending a system of wealth, power, and privilege.
Within this system of white supremacy, white people are taught to take action and to fix things, even if doing so causes more harm or perpetuates inequality. Within white supremacy, this dynamic is called White Savior Politics. White Savior Politics is fundamentally about white people taking action because it makes us feel better, plus it has the benefit of not getting us to think about our privilege.
The current immigration crisis is a good example of how white savior politics can play out, so lets look at what this means in the context of how people are responding to the separation of immigrant families. The following talking points are important for all of us, but especially for white people, when we are moved to do something in the face of injustice.
First, white savior politics means that we do not recognize the agency of those who are being oppressed have. White people often assume that those being oppressed don’t have agency and can’t speak or act for themselves. What this means is that white people erase the voices and agency of people who are being oppressed at that moment, but it also erases a long history of resistance by the very same people who are being oppressed. In the current immigration crisis, white peoples actions often erase the voices & stories of those impacted by having their families torn apart, plus it erases a long history of how immigrant communities have been resisting the same kind of oppressive treatment they have been experiencing for centuries.
Second, white guilt is also part of the white savior dynamic, wherein we take action out of guilt, instead of taking action because those being oppressed have asked us to. White guilt doesn’t serve any purpose, except to limit our ability to engage in radical imagination. We shouldn’t take action because of guilt, but rather out of a sense of compassion and justice.
Third, white savior politics often is a result of our own historical amnesia. It is well documented that during the Obama administration, roughly 3 million people had been deported and ICE agents were arresting and detaining people, thus separating families. Where was the outcry then? People in the immigrant community were experiencing fear and separation at the hands of ICE then, so why is it now an issue? Part of the reason why the issue is front and center now, is because immigrants and immigration activists have made it an issue. However, another reason it is causing such an uproar, is due to the fact that the separation of families is taking place under a Republican administration. MoveOn.org is the primary entity that has been promoting the June 30th rallies across the country, but MoveOn.org was not challenging people at the grassroots level to resist the deportations during the Obama administration, thus demonstrating the absurdity of partisan politics. The separation, detention and deportation of immigrants and their families should always be opposed, not just when it is politically convenient.
Fourth, in order to counter white savior politics we have to recognize our own privilege, understand history and begin to develop relationships with the immigrant and undocumented community. Countering white savior politics means we must practice relational politics, which in turn should be based on solidarity. Solidarity is not just some lofty idea, but it is a commitment to being in relationship with those who are oppressed, listening to them, asking what they need and then working with them to fight against anti-immigrant policies and practices.
Fifth, we have to come to terms with larger US foreign policy dynamics, which is often the root cause of migration. We have to come to terms with the fact that US foreign policy towards Latin American countries are at the root of the immigration crisis. The US government support for dictatorships, providing military aid & training, drug policies and economic policies (like NAFTA) are the real reasons why so many people are coming to the US from Latin America. Fighting against US imperialism and white supremacy abroad would radically alter the realities of immigration to the US. We have to see the bigger picture in this struggle and cannot afford to simply say we are against the treatment of immigrants without also being against US Imperialism and White Supremacy.
Lastly, the current immigration crisis must always be about the affected communities of immigrants. We cannot make this issue about what white people are doing and how wonderful we think we are. Immigrant lives and voices must be centered in this struggle, not the lives of white people. We need to elevate and amplify the voices of those most impacted by ICE repression, not our own. We need to practice humility and stop trying to pat ourselves on the back doing things that are of no real consequence or cost to ourselves.
I recognize that people want to take action in the face of injustice. I get that. However, unless we begin to deal with our own privilege and recognize how white supremacy is embedded into our privilege, we will continue to practice and perpetuate white savior politics.
