“Some Differences Emerged”: White Affinity Groups and the Complexities of Enduring Cross-Racial, Cross-Organizational Accountability

Abstract

Movements for racial justice have long identified the need to grow the base of antiracist White people even as White involvement has been renownedly fraught. This paper takes the case of three White antiracist groups that have built long-term alliances with Black and Latine-led organizations in order to examine what conditions and practices might allow White-involved racial justice coalitions not only to form but also to endure. Findings confirm that pre-existing interpersonal relationships between key leaders were crucial for coalition development and later maintenance in the face of conflict. At the same time, participants reported that these personal ties were not necessarily sufficient for building coalitions across socially structured power differences. In addition, coalition members expected that White-led groups demonstrate “accountability” to the coalition. Yet members hold at least two distinct understandings of accountability, each undergirded in part by unspoken ideas regarding the timescale that participants prioritize. That is, accountability during short-term protest actions necessitates a level of availability and responsiveness that becomes less feasible as groups invest increasing resources and time into a collectively envisioned, long-term organizing strategy. This study offers a unique empirical examination of what it is that leads Black and Latine organizations to collaborate with White-led groups over the long haul. In so doing, it also details some of the complexities that arise as coalition members navigate the different relational orientations required by short-term tactics versus those necessary for longer-term collaboration.