Black Grief, White Grievance: Power, Loss, and Political Mobilization in America

Adam  00:00

Democracy itself a paradox. Hello and welcome to This Anthro life the podcast that explores what it means to be human and asks what it takes to make the world safe for human differences. I'm your host, Adam Gamewell. Today's guest is none other than Juliet Hooker, a provocative thinker, author and political analyst from Brown University who's dived into the heart of racial politics, and reemerged with some compelling discoveries brought up in Nicaragua during its civil war. She doesn't just understand political struggle, she's lived it. And in a life that began in upheaval, she's navigated her way across the globe, looking at what democracy means and what crucially, how it fails. She's a distinguished political scientist and author whose groundbreaking work addresses themes of racial politics, justice, and more. Now, as you may be aware, the United States is headed into an election season in 2020. For the doctor hookers, research explores our collective ability to navigate political loss, and its impact on current racial politics. That is, when it comes to democracy, some side will always lose. And what does that mean for how we think about what democracy is for a more equal society. Now join us as we traverse the patches, a political landscape, unknown to many, that is the unexpected nooks and corners of grievances and grief of black and white communities in America. And in our quest for systemic change. The road is full of blind spots, and directly addressing this paradox can be well, paradoxical. So stick around as we explore the hidden facets of democratic loss and how it shapes the very world that we inhabit. I love to just say, you know, first Welcome to the program. And then what they like to do is kind of dive into your kind of superhero origin story, as it were. Your journey into political science? What inspired you to focus on the intersection of race and politics in the US in the world?

Juliet  01:38

Yeah, so I, I'm originally from Nicaragua, and I grew up there during the 1980s, during the Civil War, and I came to the US to go to college. And when they came to the US, I wanted to understand why my country had just gone through this massive conflict that you know, involved on support from the United States, US and mark all these things. And so I took a class on Latin American politics initially, and that's what got me interested in, in political science. And then later, I took a class in feminist theory. That's when I felt like I found this language to describe a lot of things that I had noticed in my life, but I didn't have the terms for and move on, I decided to focus on political theory and to major in political science. And, and that's how I started, really, I think I was drawn to the kind of normative questions that political theory allows you to ask. And, you know, I guess, growing up at the time that I did, being interested in politics was, you know, it's not something you could you could avoid. And I also come from a part of the country that is historically black and indigenous, and that had been really folks through the region were really denied self government and treated as second class citizens for much of the country's history. So I think that was sort of, from early on attuning to questions of race, and, and that ended up becoming a central theme in my, in my research, looking at race and politics in the, in the US and in Latin America.

Adam  03:17

Like, thanks for that. And it is it is interesting, you know, as we think about the subjects that we that we engage in, that we're kind of attuned to, and focusing on, you know, both how our own stories, kind of filter into those, I think that that's a really important piece, especially gives me an even as opposed to thinking about what they may want to study in school, or risky, what work they're drawn to, before or after. Also, you know, it's, uh, it's interesting to, I don't know, if there's something that you noticed, too, with your students today, but it's like, especially in the social sciences, like, there's always this interesting connection between, you know, MOOCs or questions that we've been attuned to, or thinking about throughout our lives, like that kind of shapes a bit of a bit about how we study and oftentimes interesting that, like, there's, there's a desire, I think that, you know, I was, kind of remember the adage, right, that another world is possible, right? And that there's so much about, we recognize that the challenges of social life, especially, you know, in, if we're looking at, you know, government regimes and like international kind of coalition things and like, even, you know, through a lot of challenges between United States and Latin America, for the past 70 plus years, in the short of changing of guards as a word like in like the kind of communism scare in the US in the 50s. And like, how that changed governmental moves, and like, then a lot of repression that went into place with the two, I think it's such an interesting and challenging point, because it's, it seems like on some level, we're at a moment of both national but even international kind of reckoning, you're asking ourselves these bigger questions of like, what are we attempting to accomplish with democracy with what it means to build and hold the nation together? Right, and what you know, you know, the kind of hinted your work to like, you know, what kind of unequal labor has gone into making that happen. And so I think it's really interesting to that, you know, so you have you have a really, really compelling book that I'm excited for us to dive into in this edit for listeners to know A viewer to kind of get to think through with us around black grief and white grievance around the politics of loss. And this is I think, even this idea of a subtitle to me, actually, it's a super intriguing title, because there's, there's so many pieces here that we get to we to dig into. But as we begin, I think there is a central theme around loss, right, in that, that I found an interesting kind of intellectual challenge to kind of put together right away that democracy always entails a kind of form of loss, you know, so for folks that are not familiar with this idea, can you kind of walk us through, like how you define political loss? And how we're thinking about that in the US context? Like why It's significant to kind of race and politics in the US?

Juliet  05:33

Absolutely. So you know, we all suffer loss, right? Loss is a universal human experience, we've all lost a loved one or lost a promotion or a job that we wanted or had or preferred sports team lose or or preferred candidate lose an election. But political loss, I think about as certain forms of loss that are that are become political, one way in which we can, you know, one very obvious form of political loss is electoral loss, right? If you lose an election or your candidate loses, but individual losses are can also become political, when they're the result of state action or inaction, right. So so the state could have put in regulations to prevent some kind of catastrophe. And people suffer as a result, that's inaction or action, right. So the state takes measures that end up benefiting certain groups and hurting others, or, you know, or when you have state repression, for example, in authoritarian regimes, and also losses become political as a result of people mobilizing around that, right. So, you know, so it's not often clear that certain losses are really collective thinks that we all need to be concerned about and here, you know, you can think about the contrast between 911, which everybody understood as political loss, because it was foreign actors attacking on US soil versus meat to which as a kind of individual problem that women had suffered until there's this wave of activism. And it becomes this thing that institutions really need to pay attention to, and that we all need to be accountable for. So I think about political loss in those ways in the book. And in particular, one, you know, going back to your your first point, I think one of the things that the book is is saying is that we tend to think about democracy in terms of empowerment, right? Democracy is this thing where citizens get together and you organize, and you work for your policies that you want, and that did. And so we think about it in terms of this, this thing that makes you feel empowered, but actually, if your policy wins, that means somebody else's policy preference loss, right, there's always loss and democracy. So part of what the book is trying to to, to pay attention to is to this counterintuitive idea that democracy is just as much about loss as it is about empowerment. I think that's

Adam  08:06

such such an important point. And especially because, you know, in the contemporary moment, too, we, you know, at least in mainstream media, right, we see that the idea, like politics is really kind of talked about as a zero sum game, right? It's like one side wins, and one loses unequivocally, right? It's interesting, because it's like, even even politically in the in that, like in the blandest of senses, right? The idea of like, compromise is not even discussed, right? Like, it's barely, like, you know, we can fail. It's like old school phrases to say, oh, reaching across the aisle like wanting to hear that anymore. Right. So I think that that's such a powerful argument that you're putting together is that like, recognizing that loss is part of the democratic process, right? It's in that makes sense to in terms of if folks are voting, either individually or through representatives, right for their policy, or, you know, a program or something that they're looking for that necessarily that entails, then kind of some losses, something else will be given up elsewhere. Now, I think that's really powerful, because you know, something that you go into in the book that I want to dive into next year, is that okay, how did we think about that there are obviously the the other part of your title too, of course, is black grief and white grievance, and others the ideas of grief and grievance, and then race as part of this, that bringing to light really a lot of this unequivocal or unequal with labor that goes into, you know, participating in democracy and like what gets what becomes used out of things like grief and grievance when loss takes place. But then also getting a sense of how do we be real about that right? When we that there is actually this this kind of lost process. So let's let's divide the other side of the title now as part of that, too, so we have black grief and white grievance. And so how do we see these two dynamics come into play? You're around the politics of loss.

Juliet  09:38

Right? So in the book, I'm looking at contemporary racial politics in the United States, and particularly thinking about how is it that people respond and mobilize in response to these experiences of loss? And so one of the arguments in the book is that black grief and white grievance are to have The key drivers of contemporary racial politics United States and there are two of the key ways in which people are mobilizing around loss real or perceived in the United States right now, right. And by black grief, I mean, this, you know, long tradition going back to the 19 century, really, when you have these moments of, you know, spectacular violence against black people to which they respond really heroically by taking, that those losses and, and mourning in these really political ways that then become these catalysts for black political mobilization. But then also, like, you know, these these moments when people can come together to see injustice against black people, and mobilize and in response to it to change some of those structures. And so the movement for black wives, right in response to police killings, is the latest example of this kind of mobilization that comes, you know, in response to, to Black Death and, and trying to, in order to gain some kind of justice for the dead, and the living. And on the other side of that is, is white grievance, which, you know, is also a long standing pattern in US history, it's not new, and which we we saw, I think very clearly in the January 6 insurrection, absolutely refuse to lose, and thought about their losses, I think in racialized ways. So often, you know, that the claim about cheating or or manipulation of the election was focus on these mostly black or multiracial, urban spaces, right cities, Philadelphia, have cities in Michigan, etc, where people felt like there was the election was stolen from from them, right. Or it was focused on on sort of myths about, you know, people who weren't legally allowed to vote, being able to vote and sort of all of these ideas of, you know, the will of not real Americans prevailing right, a phrase from a few years ago. And so I think that white grievance, you know, if grief is is a response to loss, you know, grievance is also you know, they have the same etymological origin but grievance is, uh, you know, is our response to a perceived or real harm or injustice, right. So often, you know, when you have, you know, when somebody is the victim of an injustice, they move right to grievance. And so, but the real the really key thing there is this real or perceived, right, and I think in thinking about white grievous, one of the things that I argue is that it's often a form of anticipatory loss, right? Whites in general, are still the dominant group politically, socially, economically in the United States. But yet there is this sense of displacement, this fear of displacement that we see in these arguments, like the the fear of an immigrant invasion, or the fear of, you know, the US becoming a much more multiracial country, and what is that going to mean? And so I think in response to that, you get this mobilization, white grievous the sense of a white displacement and victimhood. Yeah,

Adam  13:19

and I think that this is such such an interesting and challenging way that we, you know, to begin to kind of wrap our heads around these ideas in terms of recognizing that, you know, in the sense that when we see loss as a piece or a part of democracy, right, and we see that its loss happens differently, right? across racial groups, and this is in relationship, you know, as it always is to power right, in terms of like, where is power kept? Where is it held? And then like, what does winning mean, in one area? What does it mean losing in another in this interesting idea, you know, in the white grievance context of this idea of anticipatory loss, that, you know, this is something that we see very commonly, right, oftentimes, on the political right, in terms of there's like the, you know, on the, in the more white supremacist side, the concern of, you know, the great replacement theory that, you know, whites will be replaced by people of color communities of color, also mean that power is going to shift, typically, but then also, you know, these these ideas that immigrants also counted as kind of a danger in that category, too. So there's this interesting idea, right, indisputably loss is, it was a helpful term for me to think about this, because, you know, we see this rhetoric all the time, you know, in online debates, and, you know, again, a lot of media Carter's and even with some members of community, and so, this idea of this concern, that loss will take place, but then also, there's the kind of reaction here of like, that we refuse to lose, I think is interesting. And an important way to help make sense of why we're seeing this kind of sense of grief is, I think, also, the the Terms of Use, I think are so pointed to grief versus grievance here in terms of this, like perception of some kind of harm or displacement, you know, whether real or imagined, right, but just this perception of that idea, but noting obviously, that's a very politically potent tool. And so I think that's another kind of key piece. Press to kinda think about here too is that, you know, how and when is grief or, or grievance mobilized politically? Right? When does it when does it become kind of activated? And what did it do? Because I think it's also a really, really important piece that that you dive into in your work also, is this idea of, are we attending to the politics of how this actually happened? But why are we seeing grievance or grief activated and in certain moments, and that difference, you know, especially between black and white communities is important to understand why that happens differently, right? So, like, maybe let's, let's talk a little bit on, I don't wanna put it on sides, but just on this side, like you did like the history of black grief and how we're seeing that happened in serving as a catalyst for kind of mobilization change. And like, let's, let's dig into that. But then obviously, I want to also then, bookmark the caveat that like, why that's a challenge, right? Why do we need to think about, you know, grief does not always need to become activism, or mobilization. So anyway, so let's start with like, let's talk about how we've seen kind of black grief, serve as a catalyst for a political kind of mobility, mobilization and change.

Juliet  15:57

Yeah, absolutely. So you know, so one of the, you know, the things that I, you know, I argue in the book is that, of course, if the, if loss is central to democracy, because of white supremacy, throughout the history of the United States loss hasn't been distributed equally. It's been unequally distributed because blacks have had to, and other communities of color have had to share disproportionate amount of loss. And in general, as right whites, as a group have had to lose less, you know, they've been the dominant group. And so I think one of the patterns that we see, and I talk about this, again, earlier moments in, you know, in the 19th, and early 20th century is one that the fact that you have this pattern of black communities, black people becoming, you know, turning their grief into grievance, right. So if you look at the example of mainly toe Bradley, the mother Emmett Till, right, who holds this open casket funeral, that shows the the mutilated body of her son, and that that becomes a real a moment that's really credited with with really galvanizing the civil rights movement. So there are these ways and she talked about her activism, she talked about feeling called by God, to do this work, to make some sense out of the death of her son and, and to put it to use something like this would happen to anyone else. Right. And I think we see this over and over in terms of, you know, so many relatives of people who have been the victims of anti black violence, who then become activist and that carries its own burdens, right. So I also write about Erica Gardner in the book, right, will becomes an activist in the wake of the death of her father, Eric, but who herself dies at such an early age, and is carrying her own burdens. And, you know, we often tend to see people like that, and an Erica Garner was described in this way as as a warrior for social justice. Right, but at the same time, she was grieving. Right, she's grieving daughter. And, and that part of her I think, is, is overshadowed. So part of what I'm trying to also pay attention to is as we laud and we celebrate this kind of activism to think about the cost of that activism are for the people who do that work, and, and how we need to think about distributing those earnings more equally.

Adam  18:32

I think that's such such an important point to that. You know, because it's like, it's, I guess, I can think about this, like getting real about American political talk, right? They get, you know, because it's like, what does it actually mean to attend to the lived realities of activists? Right. And so it's like, we, we celebrate activism, but do we celebrate the lives of activists? Right? And how can we provide space for that? So yeah, tell me tell me a little bit more about this, this idea that like, because obviously, one of the big challenges too, is that when grief gets transmuted into grievance as a political motivation, and action, like good things can come from it. But you know, as you as you know, to that there's a there's a major cost that can be to the individuals and their families and our communities. Right. And Africana is a is a tragic case of this race. She died, she died at 27. Right? Yeah. And that's so young, right, from a heart attack. And so even even this idea, right, that, you know, when we want to step up and stand up for for injustice has to stand up for justice that like, you know, what happens to our own bodies that still get put on the lines, too. So, so part of this too, is like, you know, how do we how can we begin to think about this and like, provide that that space? So we don't feel the rush to go into kind of a galvanized sense from grief into into agreements right away, like, you know, you kind of have asked us to put some space for pause in there. So tell me a little bit about how we can think about that. Yeah.

Juliet  19:48

So part of what I'm trying to say is, you know how that is, you know, that we need to give Black people the ability to be fully human. And and that will happen when they don't have to become activists in order to get justice for their debt. Right. And it's not to say, and, you know, this is not a critique of this kind of activism at all. But it's about what the obligations are on the rest of us, because we owe so much of, you know, social change the work of activists who take on these roles. And I think one of the things that I say in the book is, is that, you know, this pattern in black politics has almost created this expectation that black people will be these kinds of sacrificial political heroes, and that this is an evil and people take up this role, right? Because because they're trying to get justice for their loved ones, that that still doesn't take away the problem with that expectation that you should always be doing this work to make us democracy better. And, you know, there is a moment that I write about in the book, which happened after the Derek shop and trial, you know, the police officer who killed George Floyd. And, you know, that guilty verdict, which required so much work, it required the kids who are traumatized and who filmed the encounter, to to be on the witness stand it required community mobilization required the family to be advocates, so much labor went into that. And then after the verdict, you know, there were these these kind of tone deaf statements by the mayor of Minneapolis and Nancy Pelosi, thanking George Floyd for his sacrifice. That feels that to me, was just so amazing. And of course, they immediately get pushed back. And I think, you know, Pelosi issued a, some sort of a retraction or whatever. But the point is that we're so attuned to understanding black activism, or black death and or black pain and suffering in this frame, right. Floyd wasn't an activist, he was just trying to have an ordinary day in his life. And so I think that's part of what I'm, I'm saying, we need to need to challenge as we think about the role of activism and black activism in US democracy. It's

Adam  22:20

like that idea that, I mean, it brings to life the, the notion that right that, that political labor is unequal, right, it's that, you know, there's both suffering on a personal and a community level, but then also, then it's like, there's a kind of expectation that, you know, if someone was killed that then that are going to be essentially, you know, a democratic sacrifice, right, in essence, right, that they like, have done something for the nation, you know, when in fact, they are the victim of, you know, racism, right, in essence in like in racist killing. And so it's like this, this interesting challenge of like, yes, while we can lot. And we do need political mobilization to move things in the in a more humane direction, the expectation that that will take place, at every moment, I guess, and kind of at the I've tried to get is it at the expense of grief, it's more like there's an expectation that it will become something else, you know, and it can't itself be the experience of grief, only like that somehow not viable, right, in this like model of thinking right? And that that's one of the challenge points there to where it's like, we're not saying don't, don't grieve, right, don't feel grief, but we have to interrogate the expectation that this is going to become some kind of political movement piece as well. Right. Is that kind of am I understanding that correctly? Yeah.

Juliet  23:32

I mean, part of what I say is that we, you know, we need to resist this expectation that people will move quickly, or immediately from Greenie grievance, right. So, and I talk about this as a you know, as much as there's, there's a lot that has been accomplished by grieving activism right by this, this activism that people will have suffered loss engage in, but there are costs to it. And so, one of the things that I think I you know, have a chapter in the book, where I look at the work of Harriet Jacobs, and Ida B Wells, and, you know, Jacobs was an enslaved woman who freed herself and wells, of course, was anti lynching activist among many other things, and one of the things that I look at them as doing is looking at how they, in their work, I think, try to balance grief and grievance. And by that, I mean right there. They're, of course, trying to mobilize the public in response to to get them to denounce metapost, slavery and lynching. But they're also paying attention to what's happening in black families and black communities and, and creating space for people to mourn and to to really record the losses that they're that are being suffered and not simply saying, Okay, well, let's shift into this, you know, this mode of, of activism, and and trying to make us democracy better without sort of paying attention to, to the pain and suffering that people are are trying to come to terms with. It's

Adam  25:14

like this notion that you could have you said, you said their two words like it's not the expectation that like, it's actually like, either black lives or black sacrifice is like moves or responds to the idea of resistance, right towards these like these challenges in sport like, as lived human beings, as all of us, right? We are here to live with community and family, and we need to mourn our losses. And also recognizing that, like, the black community has the, like experience much deeper senses of loss often than like, my political standpoint, you know, from a human standpoint, that white communities in the United States, because power has been so unequally distributed, right, and that there has been, you know, slavery and lynchings and challenges and ongoing civil rights challenges, even even today, obviously, that's what we're thinking because this Flipside challenged point of white grievance in terms of this refusal to lose, or like experienced loss, in some sense, also then filters into this ignoring of actual lived experience lived pain amongst by communities. And so it's, it's, it's tough. I mean, I think that, you know, again, I think why your work is so powerful, too, is because, you know, we are at this moment that United States needs to be having these conversations, we should have had these conversations long time ago, but you know, they're beginning to happen a little bit more, in a little bit more in wider circles, we might say, it's like, at this exact moment, like, we have to think about that, because I remember something else that you've written about in the book as well, that kind of helps bring the story to life as we think about especially like mothers and family members grieving, like when their sons were killed, and providing space like recognizing the challenge between like grieving for, for one son, their child, and then also like becoming more of an activist, right, in Emmett Till's mother is a great example there, too, as we're trying to think about this idea has as mommy is kind of saying, I both need to mourn my son, and I'm choosing to show images of his body because I know it will galvanize things in certain ways. But at the same time, I need to also mourn my son, right? And what is like, how do I how can I have that space to do those two pieces? And so it's like, everything like good, like good social science, too. It's like showing what people's lives are actually like, or at least is like I'm wrestling with this idea of like, how do I both live in mourn, and not make this just about death? Also, right, this is also about like, how to make a better world through. So I think that's something else that, you know, I'd love to get your take on too, is that pushing the conversation away from this idea that we're kind of always leaning towards death? Right, or leaning towards the kind of like, the extreme or the McCobb? Right as the thing that we're paying attention to? versus black life? Right? Yeah. I guess Yeah. Help me break that down a little bit. And think about how can we kind of shift that conversation in a more more, I think, useful or real direction?

Juliet  27:37

Yeah, no, thanks for bringing that up. Because I do think that one of the things that happens because of this focus on these kind of these moments of spectacular violence, right, that then become the sights of globalization that we lose, we lose sight of the sort of war, quotidian, violence or suffering that people are are dealing with. And so, you know, going back to, you know, to Eric Garner, right, who dies of a heart attack, and, and who, you know, suffered from some of the problems with complications after giving birth to a child. And we know that disparities and things like return are more mortality and infant mortality in the United States. But somehow, those kind of, you know, less visible, if you will, losses, right, it's not an, a person killed by a police officer, we sort of don't pay attention to. And then I think the other side of it is, is also thinking about black life as, as more than suffering and, and more than death, and how people find ways to, to, to live and to be in community, right. And one of the things that, you know, I have in the book, I cite some poetry and some images to help make sense of some of this. And, and one of the, the poems that I really love, and there is this poem by Ross gay about Eric Gardner. And he talks about how Eric Garner used to work for the Parks and Recreation Department in New York City. And so he planted flowers in parks in New York City, that people are still enjoying, and I, you know, and I love that image of, of Eric Garner with his large hand planting flowers, because I think it gives us a different image than the sort of viral image of his death. Right, that was a person will live this life and that these things, he wasn't just this person who was killed.

Adam  29:30

Yeah, I think that that's a great point, too, because it's recognizing, like, how do we, how can we and we need to tell those more quotidian stories, right, because that is also we live life, right? You know, and I would say none of us want to be defined by a singular moment in time, you know, even if that moment is a spectacular catalyst, you know, in a moment of violence for actual hopeful, you know, justice or reckoning, but at the same time, right, yes. If we're planting flowers, and that's it's a it's, you know, what I love to do, it's like, that's exactly the the, you know, those that knew that's probably how They experience time with them to write is that we're seeing what flowers are coming out the season that I want to go, I want to go put in the garden and like beautify my city, you know. And that's so important to both humanize and not make into a statute, right, one moment. And like, that's the entire form of one existence, because that isn't true. Right. And I think it's such, you know, and I hate to I hate to kind of go bigger to and it's like, it's still it's like the idea of like, that's, that's the challenge with like, a broader democracy story, right, is that you can think of Benedict Anderson's imagined community, like, what are the things that we tell us as a story about what makes a nation right? And it's like this, this notion of not not doing that, or not only doing that recognizing that, like, how do we how do we kind of continue to keep a core chain in the personal because that's on one level where violence can happen, that's also where life and love happens to? Right. And so it's like, and that's the more common stage that many of us experience, you know, kind of the in everyday life. And so there is this interesting scale question that I think your work does a great job of wrestling with, that we also as listeners and thinkers in this world have to have to think about to write is like, how do we understand and always remember that we are lived by the embodied beings, right? You know, as much as we may get into a theoretical discussion, it comes down to who's living where, when, and like, our power differentials shaping notions of fear in a community? Are they shaping notions of safety? Are they shaping? Like, what does it mean to be able to walk around outside with my family and feel? Okay, you know, do I feel like people have my back, you know, like, if something goes down, you know, whatever it is, like, be able to kind of have these notions of what it means to live. I do think there is like, there is the other question, I guess, I feel like I'm required to ask, though, because we're obviously heading into the year 2024, election year now in the United States. And as we're recording this early in the year, obviously, I think there's like a lot of important pieces for us to think about. So I guess just like, if we think about with with like an upcoming election season, you know, you know, how do you kind of see that the themes of black grief and white grievance shaping some of the either like, kind of strategies or other things that that we're going to see over the next year? You know, what, what do you kind of what are you kind of thinking, what do you think could be two lenses that's going to kind of play out that they'd help us think about?

Juliet  31:57

Yeah, so I think, you know, certainly, I think, you know, we're seeing sort of the white grievance on steroids, if you will, in the inland campaign, in terms of, as you noted, you know, great replacement theory, these arguments about immigrant invasions, this, this, this sort of heightened anti immigrant sentiment, and also, I think we're seeing it as well, in the, you know, this sort of use of these, the i panics and and, you know, critical, the critical race theory panic that was, you know, important in the last election, this idea that there has been this displacement and too much attention right, to, to these progressive social justice causes. And that, you know, we need to know who the we is in that, but certainly take their country back, so to speak. So, I think you're seeing that that is, is really animating a lot of people. And it's I think really becoming, you know, pretty, it seems pretty central to the to the whole rhetoric of the Republican Party right now. So I think with black grief, one of the things that we're seeing is, you know, if you will also and so the solution lead, I think, Matt, I a lot of black voters, and this is a cycle that that, you know, I think plays out, unfortunately, you know, every election where people come and they want the votes of black voters were some of the most reliable Democratic voters, but at the same time, the priorities of the party don't always address some of the interest of black communities. So this is always, I think, a recurring tension. And I think some of the, you know, the things that the administration tried his tried to do, like, you know, student loan relief, and other things, I think, have have run into have run into headwinds. And I think there's a real sense of, are the priorities of of black communities to really be attended to? Or are they simply getting some kind of lip service? Because we're in an election year, this is what happens. And so I think that's a real that's a real question. And I think there is a pattern to I mean, we saw this with with Stacey Abrams, right, who was one of the the people who did the amazing kind of work that allowed for Democratic victory in Georgia, but then she didn't win, right, she lost her race. And so we see this thing where I think, this pattern where, you know, we want black voters, we want them to save us democracy we want them to, but we don't necessarily want their leadership right. You don't necessarily want the issues that they care about to be the dominant policy preferences and that's an ongoing tension.

Adam  34:40

Yeah, I agree that I mean, that that's a hugely challenging point to that we we get it against still speaks to this idea of right at the kind of unequal political labor right that it's like we need like activists and folks willing to get into the fight right but then when it comes to questions, leadership or policy then then it's still kind of white grievance errs itself again, right are those the He's kind of concerned with like, what, what the challenge to the prevailing norms or like policies would be right and that like, so and again, I think just shows to like, why we are beginning this conversation, right. But we haven't actually gotten in a huge as a country like this, like, kind of broader direction in terms of, are we actually then following through with what does it mean to like, both act for and then begin to share that that kind of space a little bit more of what what leadership can look like, we know what more egalitarian power structure might look like, I kind of have to, to wrap up questions, I guess, are two things to think about. And, like, one of them, I, you know, towards the end of your book, you actually asked this interesting question of like, because, as this put this into this, this point, like, you know, I guess what I'm also saying here, too, is that like, white grievance, basically just like comes back in, even if we like, try to push it aside for a second. And so, it becomes basically white politics, you know, when asked like, what it was it was trying to look for, and so you actually ask the question of like, you know, some people are realizing this for the first time that like, you know, even as we are asking, in on one level kind of Making Moves, it feels it feels more like lip service that like, okay, like, especially much like communities is like, Great, okay, well, you said you're gonna do something before and you didn't do anything? Or like, you're asking us to stand up and have a voice. But then when I run for election, you know, vote for me, you know. So you ask a question at the end about like, like, what does that mean about the salvage ability of us democracy? Right. And that's an interesting word, right? You can break this down, like salvage versus repair. And so I'd love to get your thoughts about this, in terms of this idea of like, salvage is different from repair, like, we're not trying to, quote unquote, fix American democracy, the question is, salvage brings us to a different area of thought. Right? So for folks that don't know what this is, Tell me Tell me a little bit about this idea. Yeah,

Juliet  36:44

so I think we're seeing this right now with a lot of folks who are saying, for example, if we could just get back to normal, right, if we just get past Trump and get back to normal to the you know, and the problem is normal wasn't actually working for a lot of people are working well. And so this is, this is where I get into this question of the distinction between repair and salvaging. I mean, if you think about Repair, repair means that something is basically sound, but you have to sort of tinker around the edges, right? If you're doing home repairs, you're not, you know, tearing down your house and starting over here fixing you know, the leak, but that went wrong. But salvaging, you know, implies that you're you're taking something from a wreck, and you're making something out of it, something that has been refused, that you then recycle into into something, you know, different. So the fact that, you know, because of, for example, the electoral cat college, that so many people feel like their votes don't really matter. Because tiny group of people in small number of battleground states will ultimately decide elections. And so there's a lot of people who feel like, Oh, why should I even bother? Right? And, and we have these, you know, it has other problems, right, with the way it privileges, rural versus urban votes, et cetera, et cetera. But I think this is an example to me, the fact that there are all of these very key elements of us democracy that are not working well, and that if we're really trying to think about how to make this democracy better, we need to think big, we need to not simply be, oh, okay, we need to get back to a president that follows the rule of law and who doesn't, you know, try to overturn elections? But no, it's like, how do we actually do you? Think about the big changes that would actually make people feel like this democracy is working for them? No,

Adam  38:43

I love that question. That's so important to recognize, too. It's like, sometimes things would have gotten so wack that we're like, let's just get someone that follows the rules, you're like, that's the weakest step we could even think of, but, you know, like, you can see where the fatigue question comes in. And it's like, well, you know, what I pulled together from it. So I guess, I guess, with that, then just kind of as a kind of wrap question with that, too, is then, you know, in your perspective in from your work, too. It's like, you know, how, how can we actually think about some of those those bigger issues? Like, what could we do? What, what could that look like to either have actual useful dialogue, you know, amongst amongst groups and or, you know, how do we be bold and think big? What is your work kind of shown in that regard? Or are you hopeful for that we could, we could actually do. So,

Juliet  39:22

I actually think that we, we have seen people thinking pretty big, you know, recently if we look at some of the, you know, social movements in recent years, if you look, you know, look, for example, at Occupy Wall Street, which at the time people said, Oh, if there's little doubt, and nothing came of it, but we're, I think we're now seeing a lot of the, you know, the critiques of the the the enormous economic inequalities are is came out of the work that they did, or ran into, you know, thinking about economic inequality. And we see now I think, but the with the movement for black lives, we You know, people also say well, oh, you know, we're not seeing all these major protests, like we were seeing, you know, three years ago. But I think if you look at what happened during the pandemic, and the way in which there were all these programs, where the, you know, the, the machinery of the state was being mobilized, you know, to try to feed people to keep, you know, give people fun, so they could stay in their homes and not, you know, be evicted. And all the stuff like that these were examples of that came from, I think, a change that, that came out of the, the way in which the the movement for black lives was saying, let's stop thinking about the state as this, this carceral mechanism that's trying to police and monitor people and think about instead, what we should be doing, what kind of services we need to be providing, how do we take care of people's needs? And so I really think that there, there are examples of places where people are really trying to think about what they want the future to look like, I think you see that also in climate activism, right, particularly by young people where they're really saying, you know, how do we need to live differently in order to actually have a planet that survives? And so I think there are ways in which there are places where we're seeing people do that. I think, you know, the thing that's dispiriting I think, to a lot of people is that it seems like when you look at the sort of dominant institutions like Congress, you know, it seems like that's just gridlocked. And it's very difficult to get, like us democracy doesn't feel very agile, at the same time. You know, one last point of brightspot is the the ways in which people have mobilized around these direct democracy measures, constitutional amendments, and to preserve abortion rights or to reject right abortion bans, like we've seen people really mobilizing around around issues that they care about. And

Adam  41:59

shows us I think they right that there is also power in direct democracy, right? As much as like, it feels like the system is over there or not, for me that I think that those are all great examples to have us kind of come away thinking about that there is still and always has been Power to the People, right or in the people, but it does, you know, it's, as we've kind of seen across the conversation to that, like, it's it's work that we have to take seriously. And that means taking people's lives in their and their everyday lives seriously as part of that, right? And recognizing, like, when and how do we ask, you know, for political mobilization. So just want to say I appreciate your work and the conversations. And I think this is such such important areas for us to think about, especially as we are both reckoning with and asking for a better world, right? And how can we imagine that for ourselves. So I just wanted to thank you so much for joining me on the podcast today. I'm excited to get this out to the audience. Thanks for having me. As we close today's episode, I'd like to thank our wonderful guest, Dr. Julie hooker for shedding light on the complex dynamics of black grief and white grievance. Today, we've delved into concepts such as unequal political labor, anticipatory loss in the catalytic effect of grief and political mobilization, and the implications of these themes heading into the 2024 election year, our conversation highlighted the importance of attending to these narratives in our efforts to build a more inclusive and empathetic democracy. It's essential that we challenge ourselves to reflect on these profound points, not only in the context of politics, but also in relation to the communities and individuals with whom we interact with every day. So I pose this question to you. How does recognizing the interplay of grief and politics impacts your understanding of societal relations? Is this an area that you've thought about before, so I appreciate your ongoing support and thank you for journeying with me through these thought provoking conversations. And to deepen your understanding. I highly recommend that you check out Juliet's insightful book, black grief and white grievance the politics of loss. As always, I'd love to hear your thoughts and reflections and suggestions for future episodes as well. So feel free to reach out and share your insights with me. And also don't forget to check out the Epicurious substack blog for more anthropological explorations. Now, as we end for today, don't forget to subscribe to the podcast. If you haven't already. Go ahead and you can leave a review, leave a comment if you're on YouTube, and share the episode with someone who you think will appreciate it. This is one of the best ways to help the show. Find more folks and build more community. Every action of yours contributes to growing this intellectual community as we continue to explore these big questions about being human. So thank you once again, take care and remember, always stay curious. This is Adam Gamewell and you're listening or watching this afterlife. We'll see you next time.