DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Redneck Revolt

The “Redneck Revolt” Is Showing Up at Gun Shows and KKK Rallies to End White Supremacy

Last year, following the presidential election, I wrote a column suggesting that people who identify as White consider working in their own families and communities to address the racism and bigotry that helped to put Donald Trump in office. I asked what if the well-intentioned White allies who have moved to urban centers to “help” communities of color had instead remained in their own communities—however racially regressive and intolerable—and worked to make them better at engaging in race relations.

I later discussed two communities doing this kind of work. In Maine, a Truth & Reconciliation Commission investigated how generations of Native children had been taken from their homes, against the wishes of their families, and placed in foster care with White families. From that process came the organization Maine Wabanaki REACH, a cross-cultural group that worked to implement suggestions that came out of the commission to help heal that community. And the Truth-Telling Project, founded in Ferguson, Missouri, following the police-killing of Michael Brown, is not only working within its community to address police violence enacted on the mostly Black community, but also with White communities in other states. The TTP is helping them with their approach to truth-telling in their local areas, and unlearning racism.

My thinking is this: Our best hope for changing deep-rooted attitudes that perpetuate racism and White supremacy is for people from similar backgrounds to work together toward that end. Conversations between people with shared life experiences could perhaps more effectively change minds and, ultimately, behaviors. This is a strategy of Redneck Revolt.

The self-described anti-capitalist, anti-racist, anti-fascist group was founded in the summer of 2016 to challenge working-class White people to stand against White supremacy.

In an open letter called “To Other Working Americans,” Redneck Revolt put out a call for its fellow working-class rural White people to “reject the idea of whiteness.” That is, they wrote, “to reject the idea that our allegiance is somehow determined by what skin we have, even when our real living situations are so different.”

Media and some progressives want to lay blame for the Trump presidency at the feet of working-class White people, yet it is this demographic that makes up Redneck Revolt. The organization recruits working-class and poor Whites in rural areas—the target of far-right and White nationalist groups.

This is intentional.

They are rural White people challenging other rural White people to connect to their local communities so that they can build the kind of relationships that defend each other against the divisions caused by right-wing politics. They do this by sharing the history of struggle experienced by all working-class Americans and immigrants: people of color, White people, and LGBTQ communities.

“Race affects us all differently,” co-founder Tyler said in a Redneck Revolt podcast, “but what unites us is our shared struggle to survive—the working-class folks, poor folks.

“And there are people who systematically benefit from our struggle.”

To be clear, that’s the wealthy.

With about 40 chapters nationwide, Redneck Revolt members can be found “counter recruiting” at gun shows, country music concerts, and White nationalist/Ku Klux Klan demonstrations around the country.

Modeled after the Rainbow Coalition, the group builds alliances with non-White organizations. It’s not uncommon to see them show up at a Black Lives Matter protest in support of that movement’s efforts.

Redneck Revolt’s immediate work is organizing White working-class people to attend to the needs of their local communities. This includes food programs, community gardens, clothing programs, and needle exchanges (in addition to their armed self-defense programs, which comes from the organization’s roots in the John Brown Gun Club). All this organizing is done as a coalition with organizations of color.

This is what it looks like when White folks exercise self-determination in their own communities—naming for themselves who are their allies, what is their real enemy, what needs to be done to heal and build community on all sides of the color line.

Getting more serious about that sort of work is Scalawag Magazine, which on Nov. 2 announced an in-depth reporting initiative on how Southerners are challenging White supremacy. In a recent New York Times article, Alysia Nicole Harris, the editor of Scalawag, said: “Ultimately, we believe that the South is going to be the voice that emerges to lead this conversation about trauma and healing, because here is where the trauma was the thickest.”

This is hopeful news. For decades, Whites have worked alongside communities of color for civil rights. It is reassuring to know there are White allies bold enough to hold their own people accountable to disrupt racism and White supremacy.

https://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power...remacy-20171117

I can't think of anything as appropriate as "Redneck Revolt" to show the smug attitudes of these guilty whites.

Ohh lets come together and dismantle racism....YOU REDNECKS. You have got to be kidding me.

"Hey I can hear what you're saying, it doesn't sound that bad, where can I find you?
".....Oh Redneck Revolt"
"Never mind"

You sound like you had your feelings hurt because some white people decided to stand up against racism instead of for it.

Nice try. Insulting people you claim to want to help is at minimum a dick move.

Oh really? I actually think most southern rural people consider being a redneck as a badge of honor. At least where I grew up it was.

I consider myself a redneck but it means different things to different people. The term actually originated with coal miners standing up for workers rights.

I don't live in the south and I don't know anyone who would take to being called a redneck well. Different perspective I guess.

Sounds like a very worthy effort to move the needle on the problem..

I do understand, however, why the name might be off-putting (or at least confusing) to some...

Is the message that we are rednecks too and we are revolting against rednecks who are racists?

Is it that all racists are rednecks?

I can see the confusion... but the effort itself sounds great.

Absolutely a worthy effort, but thumbing your nose at people does not work. This is WHY Trump got elected!

The problem is that in rural America, some folks embrace the label of redneck, to them it means hard working, close to the land, blue collar, even church going, etc... others despise it because for them it has a backwards, low class, racist connotation.... so using it in the name of a group like this is obviously going to get a mixed reaction even among those who like the effort..

It's really not all that different than starting a group in a black community with the "N" word in the title, even if the purpose of the group is noble, it's going to get a mixed reaction...

Yes it is a different perspective. But having lived in an area where being a redneck was far more a badge of honor than a put down, let me assure you that only people who attempt to use the phrase as a put down see it the other way.

I do believe they could have come up with a more appropriate name but when you're going up against people like the KKK it seems they felt the need to make a bold statement in return.

If you actually feel using the word redneck in any way or fashion even close to using the N word, that my friend is part of the problem.

It ain't just the south.. I know people all over PA, IN and other northern states who openly embrace the label of redneck... some just embrace it for different reasons than others.

If you actually don't understand the type of analogy I was making, then there is no need in proceeding...

You saw a reference to "the 'N' word' in a thread about rednecks and immediately got all triggered like every good little snowflake does and forgot to even consider the context in which it was used...

So really this name is poor regardless. Either their revolting against something you like or they are insinuating you're a racist/low class that needs revolted against. I know I am getting caught up in the semantics here, but I don't see how this was a wise choice either way.

j/c:

Labels are dangerous.

I wonder if the focus of the thread might be better served on the cause and purpose of this movement rather than the name and labels?

Just a question.

Nothing wrong with being a redneck and redneck doesn't mean racist.

Freddie Kitchens is a classic redneck.

Yes, I'm actually from southern Ohio but a lot of people who live there originated in the south. Like my family, many southerners joined in moving north for good jobs in the late 40's through the 70's. I had several uncles, cousins and other relatives who came from SE Kentucky who moved to SW Ohio for good jobs. Even my grandpa moved north for work.

Most all of them first joined the military before their move to Ohio.

Here is some information from the Redneck Revolt website that helps explain their reasoning for the use of the term.



It appears to me that they are actually embracing that they themselves are rednecks that are revolting against the norms. Not that they are targeting rednecks.

I agree 100%. It seems they are claiming pride in the fact they're rednecks not attempting to attack people they perceive as rednecks.

I'm not triggered but there is no real comparison. All you really need to do is read the thread to see who is triggered.

Of course.. it's a noble cause. Racist/bigots aren't going to change because blacks, latinos, and gays tell them to or because the media guilts them or because somebody passes legislation forcing them to love everybody..... they will only change when other whites, their neighbors and friends, engage them.

Most groups/beliefs don't change from outside pressure, they change from internal pressure, information, knowledge, and relationships.

There is an exact comparison.. some people who fit the description of redneck embrace the term, some hate it..

now replace redneck with the N word...

If we wish to ignore the origin of the word and how one was used in the process of owning and enslaving people while the other in no way resembles that, I guess you can. But I don't see how you can ignore history to make this fit.

That's because you don't want it to fit... you want to argue history and degree and read way beyond the scope of my little analogy..

I'm a redneck and proud of it

When you make your scope so narrow it's hard to contain it to fit an agenda.

Context actually means something.

I wasn't trying to fit an agenda..

Your second comment is interesting since you haven't put an ounce of thought to the context in which I made the analogy...

Nobody is just going to forget the history of a word to fit a debate.

But you've certainly managed to veer away from the message of the topic.

That graph makes no sense, or is misleading at best.

It states the results are % of each group.

Then under Black, its 52% followed by a 22, and the 52% is displayed more like at the 75% mark of the bar.
Then Hispanics, 31 and 28 .. 31%?? because the 31 marker is looks more like around 50% area, which would be 31ppl and 28 ppl.

The asian and the white follow the same style as the hispanic.

Then Scott Greer claim only 15% of white, well the bar is 5 and 10, if it's 5 of the 5 + 10 thats 33%.

He is correct, but it does give me pause that the graphic is inverted from this link...

https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/04/...-19_race-03-00/

5 of 15 was 33% when I went to school.

Confusing sure, but the pew website says those are percentages of respondents.

Redneck revolt. lol

I am still reading the "NET" as the total number of respondents.

Extremely Important + Very Important = Net Voters

5 + 10 = 15 ___ 5 of 10 = 33%
52 + 22 = 74 ___ 52 of 74 = 70%
31 + 28 = 59 ___ 31 of 59 = 52%
27 + 28 = 55 (not 54) ___ 27 of 55 = 49%

I think the bar represents %, but none of the stated figures do. It's misleading.

j/c:

Once again, the real issue has been avoided because one poster challenged the meaning or "redneck" in an apparent attempt to deflect what is really important in this story. Every one else fell for it hook, line, and sinker...although I will say that DC at least addressed the real issue.

I have a feeling I know what some of our minority posters are feeling when they read the comments on this thread. And while I may call y'all out at times, I still have your back and I do understand what you are dealing with.

There are false premises in the article. It is difficult at best for whites to understand the issues of non-whites. Ultimately the approach is seeking to increase division along economic lines, not racial lines. That is just re-assignment of the object of contention.

To really address the problem, you simply have to work with the understanding that people are people, set aside the race, economic, and educational differences, and treat people fairly and we would be better off. If a person is a jerk, it is because they are a jerk, not because of their race or wealth.

I have to work with a lot of people. In California it cannot be avoided. But I have found that it is counter productive to consider anything else but the character of a person as the primary indicator of their ability.

Right I am deflecting despite flat out saying it's a worthwhile cause. Get out of here with your sniping garbage. You're the VERY first one to cry about agendas but constantly carry them around.

What's my agenda on this topic?

That's the pettiest, lamest part, it has nothing to do with this topic.

You're pretty good w/insults and character attacks when you are questioned about something. I'll tell you what my "agenda" is on this thread. I think we should be spending more time discussing the actual intent of the movement and it's possible repercussions it can have on race relations instead of making a big deal about the word "redneck."

Thus, my "agenda" is far from petty. I think that race relations is a very important issue in our country and I don't like spending a lot of time discussing labels. I think that the goal should be to strive to improve relations between the races. And educating the masses--on all sides--is essential to making progress on such an important issue. Bickering about a label does absolutely nothing to help bridge the divide between us.

Now, it's your turn to go back to throwing out insults instead of actually speaking w/some semblance of intelligence on the real issue here.