Black Lives Matter power grab sets off internal revolt
At issue is whether grassroots energy can translate to influence inside the Beltway — and at what cost.
.jpg)
Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors, shown in 2018, has been the subject of pushback from local leaders. | Amy Harris/Invision/AP
By MAYA KING
12/10/2020 04:30 AM EST
Updated: 12/10/2020 01:11 PM EST
The Black Lives Matter movement is buckling under the strain of its own success, with tensions rising between local chapters and national leaders over the group’s goals, direction — and money.
From the beginning, Black Lives Matter was a grassroots effort, born in the streets with no central hierarchy. The idea: to keep power concentrated in the hands of its members, the people.
That’s changing. After a summer of protests that made Black Lives Matter a household name, those atop the movement are making a series of moves to alter its power structure: organizing a political action committee, forming corporate partnerships, adding a third organizing arm and demanding an audience with President-elect Joe Biden.
The moves have triggered mutiny in the ranks. Ten local chapters are severing ties with the Black Lives Matter Global Network, as the national leadership is known. They are furious that Patrisse Cullors, its remaining co-founder, assumed the role of executive director of the group and made these decisions without their input. That’s a move, that, to some, signaled a rebuke of its “leaderful” structure, which gave every member an equal say and kept anyone — including a founder — from overreaching.
The operations of Black Lives Matter have always been opaque, with thousands of members and dozens of affiliates. Two of its three co-founders are no longer affiliated with the movement — even as they continue to represent Black Lives Matter on TV. Local Black Lives Matter activists say national leaders cut them off from funding and decision-making, leaving them broke and taking the movement in a direction with which they fundamentally disagree. And as the Black Lives Matter movement grows in influence, with millions in donations and celebrity endorsements, local organizers argue they’re the ones in the streets pushing for change — and they’re not getting their due.
“There's been intentional erasure,” of local activists, said Sheri dikkerson, lead organizer with Black Lives Matter Oklahoma City. “People assume that that money is distributed to local chapters. That is not the case. People also assume that when actions are made, that national [leadership] has the support and agreement from this collective that what they're saying is representative of us. And that's certainly not the case.”
The fallout follows an all-too familiar trajectory of other grassroots movements. And how its leaders respond to the call for accountability could have major implications for Black Lives Matter’s long-term influence — just as an administration potentially more sympathetic to its goals comes into power.
POLITICS
Black Lives Matter co-founder pushes back on Democrats' criticism of 'defund the police'
BY MAYA KING
With Cullors at its helm, Black Lives Matter this year positioned itself as a new leader in activism and politics at the forefront of the national reckoning on race. After forming the PAC, which helped fund its ad campaigns to mobilize Black voters, it formalized its third arm, Black Lives Matter Grassroots, to focus entirely on activism.
But the spotlight on these changes is now exposing fractures in its operation and leadership structure as its ground troops go public with their complaints.
“We became chapters of Black Lives Matter as radical Black organizers embracing a collective vision for Black people engaging in the protracted struggle for our lives against police terrorism,” 10 local chapters wrote in an open letter last week. “With a willingness to do hard work that would put us at risk, we expected that the central organizational entity … would support us chapters in our efforts to build communally.”
The 10 chapters that signed the letter, the self-proclaimed #BLM10, laid out a half-dozen points of contention and long-standing grievances. Cullors is chief among their complaints, they said, arguing she made a power grab when she appointed herself executive director of the Black Lives Matter Global Network.
They also said there’s a lack of transparency over money the movement has raised and how chapters can access it. Since Black Lives Matter formed in 2013, the chapters complained they’ve received scant financial support, despite repeated promises.
Members have brought this up as early as 2016 and frustrated chapters planned to go public with their grievances months ago. But they were encouraged to wait and discuss the issues with Cullors privately. Those discussions were not productive, they say.
A man holds up a "Black Lives Matter" banner as thousands celebrate Joe Biden's win over President Donald Trump near the White House on Nov. 7. | Evan Semones/POLITICO
“We didn't have an opportunity to agree to discuss. Nothing,” said Yahné Ndgo, a lead organizer with Black Lives Matter Philadelphia. “So then we ask questions, and we are told no answers.”
Cullors declined comment. But representatives with the Black Lives Matter Global Network disputed the #BLM10’s complaints in an emailed statement, arguing most of the quarreling chapters are not formally affiliated with the global network. Instead, they say, the #BLM10 are using the Black Lives Matter name in a bid for credibility and money. And because of its funding structure, the network is limited by how much it can give local chapters.
“Chapters that are a part of BLM Grassroots joined a unity pledge that laid out a set of organizing principles,” the statement reads, adding that most of the #BLM10 declined to sign on. “Regardless of their affiliation, we know these groups will continue to do good and necessary work in their communities.”
Black Lives Matters co-founders Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi, who are no longer affiliated with the global network, and representatives from the Movement for Black Lives declined to comment for this story. Garza is now principal of the Black Futures Lab, a think tank that studies Black political power.
“It’s exceedingly hard to hold movements together”
Things came to a head this year when the confluence of several crises — the coronavirus, systemic racism and economic turmoil — highlighted both the gravity of the work that Black Lives Matter does and discrepancies in its execution. By the end of June, the Black Lives Matter Global Network had raised more than $13 million in donations and cemented its role as a political power and organizing force. But local organizers said they saw little or no money and were forced to crowdfund to stay afloat. Some organizers say they were barely able to afford gas or housing.
At issue is whether grassroots energy can translate to influence inside the Beltway — and at what cost.
Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors, shown in 2018, has been the subject of pushback from local leaders. | Amy Harris/Invision/AP
By MAYA KING
12/10/2020 04:30 AM EST
Updated: 12/10/2020 01:11 PM EST
The Black Lives Matter movement is buckling under the strain of its own success, with tensions rising between local chapters and national leaders over the group’s goals, direction — and money.
From the beginning, Black Lives Matter was a grassroots effort, born in the streets with no central hierarchy. The idea: to keep power concentrated in the hands of its members, the people.
That’s changing. After a summer of protests that made Black Lives Matter a household name, those atop the movement are making a series of moves to alter its power structure: organizing a political action committee, forming corporate partnerships, adding a third organizing arm and demanding an audience with President-elect Joe Biden.
The moves have triggered mutiny in the ranks. Ten local chapters are severing ties with the Black Lives Matter Global Network, as the national leadership is known. They are furious that Patrisse Cullors, its remaining co-founder, assumed the role of executive director of the group and made these decisions without their input. That’s a move, that, to some, signaled a rebuke of its “leaderful” structure, which gave every member an equal say and kept anyone — including a founder — from overreaching.
The operations of Black Lives Matter have always been opaque, with thousands of members and dozens of affiliates. Two of its three co-founders are no longer affiliated with the movement — even as they continue to represent Black Lives Matter on TV. Local Black Lives Matter activists say national leaders cut them off from funding and decision-making, leaving them broke and taking the movement in a direction with which they fundamentally disagree. And as the Black Lives Matter movement grows in influence, with millions in donations and celebrity endorsements, local organizers argue they’re the ones in the streets pushing for change — and they’re not getting their due.
“There's been intentional erasure,” of local activists, said Sheri dikkerson, lead organizer with Black Lives Matter Oklahoma City. “People assume that that money is distributed to local chapters. That is not the case. People also assume that when actions are made, that national [leadership] has the support and agreement from this collective that what they're saying is representative of us. And that's certainly not the case.”
The fallout follows an all-too familiar trajectory of other grassroots movements. And how its leaders respond to the call for accountability could have major implications for Black Lives Matter’s long-term influence — just as an administration potentially more sympathetic to its goals comes into power.
POLITICS
Black Lives Matter co-founder pushes back on Democrats' criticism of 'defund the police'
BY MAYA KING
With Cullors at its helm, Black Lives Matter this year positioned itself as a new leader in activism and politics at the forefront of the national reckoning on race. After forming the PAC, which helped fund its ad campaigns to mobilize Black voters, it formalized its third arm, Black Lives Matter Grassroots, to focus entirely on activism.
But the spotlight on these changes is now exposing fractures in its operation and leadership structure as its ground troops go public with their complaints.
“We became chapters of Black Lives Matter as radical Black organizers embracing a collective vision for Black people engaging in the protracted struggle for our lives against police terrorism,” 10 local chapters wrote in an open letter last week. “With a willingness to do hard work that would put us at risk, we expected that the central organizational entity … would support us chapters in our efforts to build communally.”
The 10 chapters that signed the letter, the self-proclaimed #BLM10, laid out a half-dozen points of contention and long-standing grievances. Cullors is chief among their complaints, they said, arguing she made a power grab when she appointed herself executive director of the Black Lives Matter Global Network.
They also said there’s a lack of transparency over money the movement has raised and how chapters can access it. Since Black Lives Matter formed in 2013, the chapters complained they’ve received scant financial support, despite repeated promises.
Members have brought this up as early as 2016 and frustrated chapters planned to go public with their grievances months ago. But they were encouraged to wait and discuss the issues with Cullors privately. Those discussions were not productive, they say.
A man holds up a "Black Lives Matter" banner as thousands celebrate Joe Biden's win over President Donald Trump near the White House on Nov. 7. | Evan Semones/POLITICO
“We didn't have an opportunity to agree to discuss. Nothing,” said Yahné Ndgo, a lead organizer with Black Lives Matter Philadelphia. “So then we ask questions, and we are told no answers.”
Cullors declined comment. But representatives with the Black Lives Matter Global Network disputed the #BLM10’s complaints in an emailed statement, arguing most of the quarreling chapters are not formally affiliated with the global network. Instead, they say, the #BLM10 are using the Black Lives Matter name in a bid for credibility and money. And because of its funding structure, the network is limited by how much it can give local chapters.
“Chapters that are a part of BLM Grassroots joined a unity pledge that laid out a set of organizing principles,” the statement reads, adding that most of the #BLM10 declined to sign on. “Regardless of their affiliation, we know these groups will continue to do good and necessary work in their communities.”
Black Lives Matters co-founders Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi, who are no longer affiliated with the global network, and representatives from the Movement for Black Lives declined to comment for this story. Garza is now principal of the Black Futures Lab, a think tank that studies Black political power.
“It’s exceedingly hard to hold movements together”
Things came to a head this year when the confluence of several crises — the coronavirus, systemic racism and economic turmoil — highlighted both the gravity of the work that Black Lives Matter does and discrepancies in its execution. By the end of June, the Black Lives Matter Global Network had raised more than $13 million in donations and cemented its role as a political power and organizing force. But local organizers said they saw little or no money and were forced to crowdfund to stay afloat. Some organizers say they were barely able to afford gas or housing.
. I'm honestly not surprised
