Not Your Typical Mississippi Mayor?

Nathan Connolly: If you were looking for an elected Socialist mayor today, you probably wouldn’t start with the state of Mississippi, but Jackson, Mississippi is where the Lumumba family has worked to establish a radical vision of an American socialist future. I recently spoke to Chokwe Antar Lumumba, a self-described radical Socialist who’s been Jackson’s mayor since 2017. He’s followed in his father’s footsteps. From 2013 until he died in office, his father Chokwe Lumumba was Jackson’s mayor and worked to bring socialist policies to the heart of the deep South.

Chokwe L.: Well, first and foremost, I’m happy to join you in this conversation and this is a discussion which is near and dear to me. In order to give a proper framework of that history, it stretches further back than even my father’s election to the office of mayor in 2013. I come from a rich tradition and legacy of two parents that were activists and moved us to Mississippi for the purpose of community building and work.
My father was in Jackson, Mississippi in the early 70s doing work to help sustain and create self-determined communities. Out of that, he was at a crossroads, or a point in his life, where he was trying to determine whether he could pursue a legal career and still maintain that vision and that goal and he found his way to that. Later, gained a family after moving back to Detroit. Then, had a case that lasted for two years in New York and decided that they wanted to move to the South. It was my father who shared that we still had unfinished business in Mississippi and that’s why we moved here. Not because we have family members in Mississippi but because we wanted to be a part of some work that we felt was important.
My parents felt that giving their children a sense of community was as an important part of nurturing us as giving us food, water, and shelter. Whether the work we’ve been blessed to be a part of is categorized as socialist work, revolutionary work, it’s work that recognizes that conditions, as they exist, are not sufficient for our people and we have to dare to do something different.

Nathan Connolly: Now, Jackson in American history is a place that obviously has a number of different flashpoints. Perhaps none more prominent and poignant than the assassination of Medgar Evers there in 1963. So, I’m curious if your father’s sense of unfinished work is continuing a kind of militancy and anti-racism and economic justice of the kind that Medgar Evers helped to initiate or if you’re thinking more broadly about the black, radical South and building Jackson as a kind of launchpad for a broad, regional realignment around politics of self-determination.

Chokwe L.: We’re a part of a continuum of struggle that has had different iterations over time. Earlier on, my father and many of his comrades were somewhat antagonistic towards the idea of electoral politics as many people still find themselves today. You find people who are disheartened. There’s apathy. You find people who have just lost total faith in the electoral structure.
We pursued a number of community efforts and grassroots efforts that had sustained, while limited success in what it was accomplishing at that moment. I think that where my father and many of his comrades graduated to in their thinking was the idea of how we can pursue other means of meeting people where they are and even recognizing the limitations in electoral politics, that it is a mere means to an end and not the end itself.
So, people have to be organized on multiple fronts in order to create a better condition. When we see a society where there’s a growing inequity, there are many contributions to that discussion of how we’ve come to this point. I was a part of a conversation with a number of mayors sometime ago about this and so there were meaningful contributions of innovation versus workforce, minimum wage, and education, and all these things were important, but I had a problem with the premise of the discussion in seeing that we have gone wrong. I think that the system is operating in the way that it was always intended to, and, if anything, it’s probably over performing. We’re merely finding out that the system as designed, doesn’t work for us.

Nathan Connolly: Right. You’ve been on record as saying that you’d like to see Jackson become, “the most radical city on the planet.” I’m curious as to what you imagine that might look like in say five years or 15 years, if this vision moves as you describe from the ground up and from pothole to pothole to community to community.

Chokwe L.: Well, I think it’s a city that makes a drastic shift from what is traditionally taking place, waiting on someone to act on our behalf, being at the bottom of receiving so many resources, to a city that demands control of their governance, demands control of how we develop, and understanding that the future isn’t coming, the future is here. It’s just not evenly distributed. And, demanding that they get their fair share and that we look at unity and equity in the process of what we build, understanding that development is more than just great edifices and structures that we build, but being intentional about the souls that reside in a space and how we take care of them.
That idea of being the most radical city on the planet surfaced out of what was initially a critique. It was a critique of myself, and prior to taking office, it was a critique of my father, suggesting that possibly we were too radical to bring people together. I tell people I looked up the word radical and I find that a radical is a person who seeks change. If we look into communities who are in need of change, then the reality is that we should be as radical as the circumstances dictate we should be. When we look across history at the people that we revere most, you mentioned Medgar Evers, he was a radical.
Fannie Lou Hamer, who organized poor farmers in the Mississippi Delta, was a radical. Ida B. Wells, who dares to disseminate a message that was dangerous but necessary, was a radical. Jesus Christ was a radical. So, I see it as a badge of honor. I don’t even know if I’m deserving of it, right? But, we should see it as an opportunity to be a model, more than just accomplish our ends and correct our problems as a city, but take a space that has been known for so much negativity historically, and turn it into a space that serves as a model for the rest of the world to build off.

Nathan Connolly: Now, you’ve just outlined a pretty compelling genealogy of folks from Jesus Christ through Ida B. Wells to Fannie Lou Hamer and up, who have been espousing, through one form or another, a kind of radical vision. So, I’m curious, in terms of the bigger picture, what you make of current moment, specifically, this tension that seems to be animating national debates now around socialism, be it the Green New Deal, be it around prison abolition, ending surplus populations and the like of workers. What is it that you imagine to be the role of your administration and your city in shaping and bumping up against this national conversation, and do you pay any credence at all to the notion that somehow it’s possible to advance as a political and rhetorical strategy the notion that, say, socialism is actually quite American?

Chokwe L.: Well, and that comes up a lot when I talk about cooperative enterprise. In the context of that specifically, I would say that this isn’t something that’s coming, it’s something that’s here. If people in our nation knew how many businesses were ultimately cooperatives, then they would understand that it’s a necessary addition to how this economy develops. Land O’Lakes butter is a cooperative. Florida Orange Growers is a Cooperative. You’re a part of a credit union, you’re a part of nothing more than a cooperative.
Even though I’m originally from Detroit and it pains me to say this, one of the largest cooperatives we know today is the Green Bay Packers, right? That is owned by a community-

Nathan Connolly: You’re a Lions fan I take it.

Chokwe L.: Yeah, yeah, I am. I am. Let’s you know I can endure struggle, okay? Those are ideas of how communities see something that they find value in it and support it, and it works for the benefit of those communities. So, we can broaden that.
Now, in terms of this notion of this scary word, socialism, what I would say is that we have to find an opportunity to exploit operational unity because people have been conditioned or told to fear myself and other people who are speaking this way. I find here in Jackson that there are people that I now engage in conversations that they learn that I’m not such a scary guy. I’m actually pretty nice, right? I’m passionate and I’m concerned about people, and I’m not trying to work towards the detriment of anyone.
So, this notion or this discussion that tries to pushback that it’s trying to take away value or take away something from someone else, is something that we have to shift that dynamic and exploit operational unity which focuses more on our common ends and objectives than our differences. In doing so, you find a space or an opportunity to have a conversation that may not have previously been envisioned. When we shift the narrative and really explain to people how they have not been benefited from the system as it exists, then you find that a-ha moment where people see that this is really true.
If we go back to the roots slavery in Mississippi, we know who the obvious victims of slavery are, but we very rarely have a conversation in Mississippi about poor white families and the majority of families who did not own slaves and how they were exploited. It was a labor system that provided no opportunity for you.

Nathan Connolly: So, Mayor Lumumba, given your father’s electoral success and now your own, does it tell us anything about the viability of socialism in electoral politics specifically?

Chokwe L.: Yeah, well, I would share with you the very thing that my father stated after his election, is that the election, or his election, or the election of a progressive ideal says honestly less about the candidate, less about us, and more about the people. The selection of our leadership demonstrates the readiness of the people, and I think if we can find people ready for change in Mississippi, people who have been oppressed in so many ways … Honestly, oppression has the potential to be the greatest organizer of all time … then it suggests where we can build to in conversations that we are prepared to take on now throughout the nation and throughout the world.

Nathan Connolly: Just based on where you sit from your vantage point, are the conditions across the country such that could reflect the possibility of them pulling the lever in the Socialist direction?

Chokwe L.: I believe so. I think that the people are looking for big vision. People are looking for something different and that’s why you see so many new ideas being thrown out. We state that we have a booming economy. The reality is that, yeah, even if the pie is bigger, your slice in it hasn’t changed, right? Your slice of that pie has got no bigger and you’re still living in the same conditions you were before they told you that the economy was better.
So, we want people to start asking questions. How does that translate into my life? How do I see greater opportunities for my children? How do I secure safe and clean water? How do I ensure that the infrastructure around my community is built and supportive? If you don’t see those changes, then just looking at GDP as a measure of success, is insufficient. So, how do we look at socially sustainable goals as a new index for success in communities and whether we are thriving or failing to make the mark?

Brian Balogh: Nathan, our topic today is the history of socialism and I know that we focus on U.S. history, but I think on this topic, it’s almost impossible to talk about American socialism without looking over at the great socialist, indeed communist example, the Soviet Union. From the end of World War I up until arguably the 80s or the 90s, not clear when it ends, we have a nation that’s often defined as a mortal enemy that is seen as a minimum socialist and calls itself communist. So, my question for you is how does American socialism differ from that Soviet model, which is sitting over there and kind of a beacon to the world as to what communism is?

Nathan Connolly: It’s absolutely true that the specter of communism with state power behind it, with the Soviet Union, raised deep concerns for those who are thinking about American national security or foreign relations, diplomatic circles. The ideology of the 20th century has, in some ways, become so tilted by the Cold War frame that we have a very hard time now even appreciating or parsing the differences between, say, socialism or communism in the abstract or even as they are applied in American society.
It may surprise some listeners to know that different socialist practices including forming mutual aid societies or creating cooperatives, publicly owned lands, these kinds of things that are not driven by profit motive … which is basically what separates socialism from capitalism, that you take out the profit motive … those kinds of things are really predating the country itself. You can go back to Charleston, South Carolina in the 1730s and find mutual aid organizations, for example, that are basically keeping those colonies humming.
What we understand communism to be, which is workers owning the means of production, that doesn’t really have anything beyond a few small outfits or adherents who are trying to radicalize workers, but it never reaches the same kind of momentum as general practices of cooperative economics and such are existing in the United States.

Brian Balogh: Yeah, that’s a great point.

Nathan Connolly: So, Brian, just thinking about this in the present day and, say, Millennials who are really, in some cases, having no recollection of the Berlin Wall even coming down and certainly not invested at all in mid-20th century squabbles over socialism but they’re still, in many cases, feeling drawn to politicians who are advocating for different forms of socialist programming whether it’s different kinds of employment of healthcare or their concerns about ever owning a home. Is there any way to account for the arrival or the popularity or the cresting support for socialistic ideas that are rooted in contemporary concerns?

Brian Balogh: I think you just named all of them, Nathan. The fact that there is no external, literal, national security threat from nations that embrace communism is a huge factor. As you said, they don’t remember the fall of the Berlin Wall and they certainly don’t remember the high point of the Cold War. And, domestically, the fact that the social security system is skewed against them because of their age.

Nathan Connolly: That’s right.

Brian Balogh: I mean, let’s face it. One of the biggest redistributions of income in the 20th century was between young people and old people. I’m one of those old people. You’re one of those young people and you’re stuck with the bill, right?

Nathan Connolly: That’s right. We can settle up after the show, though, Brian. I’ll take a check.

Brian Balogh: So, these people are thinking about the kinds of mechanisms that are simply assumed in many of the societies that they look to. Universal healthcare, some kind of social provision that is equitable, not just for older people, but for younger people as well, and they’re looking towards that without the ultimate veto power of, “Oh, no. That’s like the Soviet Union. That’s like the People’s Republic of China.” There’s nothing to stop them logically from saying, “Hey, why not?”

Nathan Connolly: Right. Right. I got to tell you, Brian. One of the things that I think is very clear in just how politicized the terms are … Really, to my mind, just how empty these terms like socialism and capitalism are as vessels, right? They’re empty vessels into which people pour their political and economic interests … is the fact that for many African Americans, through the high point of prosperity in the 20th century and the booming consumer economy, they lived in what was, in effect, a socialist economy. Now, bear with me on this.
If you think about Jim Crow segregation as a regulation on the free market, and you look at what socialism’s textbook definition is, which is from each according to their skill, to each according to their need, many people who are in political power said, “Well, we don’t think that African Americans are very smart. We don’t think that they’re very industrious. We don’t think that they need, for example, nine months of school. We don’t think that they need the ability to organize in labor unions.” The exceptions that are written into the Wagner Act, the segregation under the Housing Act, the disparate school year funding that African Americans are experiencing, all of this is about an economy that is overtly regulated to their detriment.
Frankly, if you look at what the arguments were through the 20th century, there were, in many cases, what we could call a deregulatory argument. Saying, “Look, we just want the ability to participate in capitalism like everybody else.” You got Southern senators with all their Americanism and their red-blooded patriotism saying, “No, we’re going to regulate this economy in such a way where you won’t be able to participate in a free market system.”
It’s wonderful to point out the irony of the fact that, in many instances, the very people who are really railing against the government because its engaging in creeping socialism in the arenas of housing, education, employment and so forth, are also highly regulating it, again, frankly, overregulating African Americans in the spirit of racial segregation.

Brian Balogh: Well, Nathan, I didn’t think it was possible, but you now have convinced me why we should look for a Socialist mayor in Mississippi.

Nathan Connolly: Yeah, because, again, it’s not socialism in the abstract, but it’s the kind, right? If you have a kind of socialism in Jackson like Mayor Lumumba’s advocating for, it has baked into it at least, an anti-racist commitment. I think that has to be at least part of what any economic system, in this country anyway.

Brian Balogh: That’s going to do it for us today, but you can keep the conversation going online. Let us know what you thought of the episode or ask us your questions about history. You’ll find us at backstoryradio.org or send an email to backstory@virginia.edu. We’re also on Facebook and Twitter at backstoryradio. Whatever you do, don’t be a stranger.
Special thanks this week to the Johns Hopkins Studios in Baltimore.

Nathan Connolly: BackStory’s produced at Virginia Humanities. Major support is provided by an anonymous donor, the Joseph and Robert Cornell Memorial Foundation, the Johns Hopkins University, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Any views, findings, conclusion, or recommendations expressed in this podcast do not necessarily represent those of the National Endowment for the Humanities. Additional support is provided by the Tomato Fund, cultivating fresh ideas in the arts, the humanities, and the environment.

Speaker 12: Brian Balogh is Professor of History at the University of Virginia. Ed Ayers is Professor of the Humanities and President Emeritus at the University of Richmond. Joanne Freeman is a Professor of History and American Studies at Yale University. Nathan Connolly is the Herbert Baxter Adams Associate Professor of History at the Johns Hopkins University. BackStory was created by Andrew Windham from Virginia Humanities.