995762

research-article2021
ORG0010.1177/1350508421995762OrganizationMir and Toor

Acting Up

Organization

Racial capitalism and student

2023, Vol. 30(4) 754­–765
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
debt in the U.S. sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1350508421995762
https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508421995762
journals.sagepub.com/home/org

Ali Mir
William Paterson University, USA

Saadia Toor
City University of New York, USA

Abstract
This paper focuses on the current phase of Black resistance exemplified by the Black Lives Matter
(BLM) movement, which urges us to recognize and reckon with the differential racial impact of
student debt in the U.S. and calls for the cancelation of student debt as an explicit part of its
demand for reparations. Using the concept of racial capitalism, the paper examines the structure
of student debt and its consequences for Black borrowers, analyzes the structural reasons behind
the disproportionate debt burden borne by Black students, and highlights movements such as the
Debt Collective and BLM, which not only offer a critique of the debt regime but also suggest ways
of organizing against it.

Keywords
BLM, racial capitalism, student debt, student loans

Debt has become one of the central organizing principle of our times and functions as a mode of
discipline and governance. A variety of scholars have persuasively argued that the growth of indebt-
edness is but the inevitable outcome of an advancing neoliberal order (Debt Collective, 2020; Feher,
2018; Graeber, 2014; Lazzarato, 2013; Soederberg, 2015; Strike Debt, 2014). The process of the
“financialization” of the economy has resulted in indebted nations, indebted corporations, and
indebted citizens, all beholden to “financial markets, dominated by large universal banks and institu-
tional investors” (Feher, 2018: 17). As wages stagnate or fall, marginalized citizens are pushed further
into indebtedness through the hands of a rapacious poverty industry. One of the most pernicious

Corresponding author:
Ali Mir, Department of Management, William Paterson University, 1600 Valley Road, Wayne, NJ 07470, USA.
Email: mira@wpunj.edu
Mir and Toor 755

forms of debt today is student debt, which at more than $1.7 trillion has surpassed all other forms of
consumer debt even as it has been systematically stripped of consumer protections such as bank-
ruptcy (Cancel Student Debt, 2020; Center for Responsible Lending, 2019; Frederickson, 2016;
Frotman, 2018). Millions of young Americans graduate each year only to find themselves saddled
with enormous and unpayable debt as part of an “ideal initiation to the rites of capital” (Lazzarato,
2013: 66). However, the burden of this debt is unevenly distributed and is disproportionately borne
by African-American students (Federal Reserve of New York, 2019; Goldrick-Rab et al., 2014;
Huelsman, 2015), echoing an earlier period of Black indenture.
In this paper, we focus on a new phase of Black radical resistance exemplified by the Black
Lives Matter (BLM) movement, which urges us to recognize and reckon with the differential racial
impact of student debt in the U.S. and calls for the cancelation of student debt as an explicit part of
its demand for reparations. We begin by exploring the concept of “racial capitalism,” which high-
lights the fact that the wealth of the West was built on the backs of the unpaid labor of enslaved
Africans in the U.S. and their descendants and argues that “the construction of Black people as
racial inferiors was not incidental but integral to the historical development of capitalism” (Marez,
2014: 261). We show how the ongoing project of racial capitalism has subverted the emancipatory
potential of education for Black Americans to such an extent that the formal system of higher edu-
cation now serves as a mechanism for pushing far too many Black students into forms of debt
servitude. Using newly released data including a tranche from the Federal Reserve of New York
(2019) that finally allows researchers to make evidence-backed claims of racial discrimination in
the student loan process, we examine the nature of student debt and its differential impact on Black
borrowers. We offer a brief analysis of the structural reasons behind the disproportionate debt bur-
den borne by Black students, focusing specifically on the consequences of the racial wealth gap on
student debt. Finally, we highlight the activism of movements including the Debt Collective and
BLM, which seek not only to expose the perniciousness of the current regime of indebtedness but
suggest ways of organizing to address what is evidently a civil-rights issue of our times.

Racial capitalism, education, and the project of Black

emancipation
The last several years have served up an extraordinary amount of scholarship on the relationship
between slavery and capitalism. Prominent books such as Schermerhorn’s (2015) The Business of
Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism, 1815–1860, Baptist’s (2014) The Half Has Never
Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism; and Rosenthal’s (2018) Accounting
for Slavery: Masters and Management have forcefully demonstrated that American capitalism was
built on the backs of enslaved Africans and their descendants. This wealth of recent scholarship
draws upon earlier pioneering works of Black historians such as Williams (1944: vii) whose book
Capitalism and Slavery sought to “place in historical perspective the relationship between early
capitalism. . . and the Negro slave trade.” Further back, in his masterpiece Black Reconstruction,
the African American intellectual Du Bois (1935) had rooted the account of capitalism in the his-
tory of slavery in the United States, detailing the manner in which Black slave labor in the sugar,
rice, tobacco, and most importantly cotton fields laid the foundations of capitalism.
Later in the 20th century, the stage was set for a deeper discussion of racial capitalism with the
publication of Cedric Robinson’s groundbreaking book Black Marxism in which Robinson (1983:
2) points out that in “contradistinction to Marx’s and Engel’s expectations that bourgeois society
would rationalize social relations and demystify social consciousness, the obverse occurred. The
development, organization, and expansion of capitalist society pursued essentially racial direc-
tions, so did social ideology.” Using the insights of the Trinidadian-American radical sociologist
756 Organization 30(4)

Cox (1959, 1964), Robinson rejects the Marxist notion that capitalism was “a revolutionary nega-
tion of feudalism” arguing instead that capitalism and racism “did not break from the old order but
rather evolved from it to produce a modern world system of racial capitalism dependent on slavery,
violence, imperialism, and genocide” (Kelley, 2000: xii–xiii).
The term “racial capitalism” seeks to draw attention to the persuasive claim that racism has not
been incidental to capitalism but has been constitutive of it starting with the period of chattel slavery
and continuing till today, notwithstanding the historic struggles and gains of the Black community
(Kelley, 2000). Robinson’s insight—that race is built into the very structure of the capitalist system,
and that the domestic nation-state project in the U.S. has long been animated by this racial capital-
ism—continues to energize the discussion among African American race scholars and activists (see,
for instance, the Winter 2017 special issue of Boston Review on the theme of “Race Capitalism
Justice,” especially Robin D.G. Kelley’s introductory essay titled “What Did Cedric Robinson Mean
by Racial Capitalism?”). Radical Black public intellectuals of the early 20th century like Du Bois
(1903) and Wells (1892) recognized that within the project of racial capitalism, African Americans
remained positioned as raced and colonized subjects long after Emancipation. In his 1903 book The
Souls of Black Folk, Du Bois famously declared that “The problem of the Twentieth Century is the
problem of the color-line” (a phrase that bookends his essay titled “Of the Dawn of Freedom”),
where the color-line refers both to systems of deeply embedded racism in general and to racial seg-
regation in particular. This color-line denies African-Americans equal access to economic opportu-
nities and helps maintain not only a racial wage gap, but also—and more crucially—a racial wealth
gap: today, Blacks with college degrees earn less than whites with high school diplomas, and the
median wealth of a Black family is a tiny fraction of a white one (Economic Policy Institute, 2019).
Additionally, Black Americans are half as likely as whites to have a college degree, have an unem-
ployment rate twice that of whites, are two and a half times more likely to be in poverty than whites,
make up a disproportionate number of the country’s ballooning prison population, and have a lower
life expectancy than whites (Economic Policy Institute, 2019).
It is in this context that Black student activists demand that their indebtedness today be under-
stood as a new form of indenture, one that troublingly resonates with the racialized form of debt
servitude experienced by African Americans in the wake of Emancipation. The BLM movement,
with young Black women in its core leadership, sees itself as the most recent iteration of the long
tradition of Black radicalism in the US, and draws consciously from the histories of the Student
Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, the Students for a Democratic Society, the black lesbian
feminist politics of the Combahee River Collective, and the speeches of Sojourner Truth. The list
of demands issued by the BLM range from economic justice to community control of laws, institu-
tions, and policies which impact African Americans. One of BLM’s most important demands is for
reparations, and tellingly, the access to free higher education is seen as a crucial form of repara-
tions, as is the cancelation of student loans:

We demand reparations for past and continuing harms. . . This includes: Reparations for the systemic
denial of access to high quality educational opportunities in the form of full and free access for all Black
people (including undocumented and currently and formerly incarcerated people) to lifetime education
including: free access and open admissions to public community colleges and universities, technical
education (technology, trade and agricultural), educational support programs, retroactive forgiveness of
student loans, and support for lifetime learning programs (The Movement for Black Lives, 2019).

BLM’s emphasis on education comes from a specific history. Enslaved Blacks in the U.S. had
been denied any access to education and were therefore largely illiterate at the time of Emancipation.
Reformers from within the Black community understood the importance of education for their
Mir and Toor 757

people, especially the ones that had been newly freed. As Balfour (2003: 36) argues, for someone
like Du Bois, democratic citizenship entailed “at least a basic education and the economic where-
withal to live a relatively comfortable life free from unearned debt.” However, racist public poli-
cies as well as de facto forms of racism have not only left the emancipatory potential of education
unmet but have actually turned the project of higher education into a debt trap for African
Americans. It is precisely because of the connection made by Du Bois between education and
Black emancipation, and the actual perversion of the promise of public education—both as the
guarantor of social mobility and as the means for achieving racial equality—that the BLM move-
ment seeks to draw our attention to the racial aspects of the current crisis of student debt.

The manufactured crisis of student debt

In his paper “Seeing in the red: Looking at student debt” Marez (2014: 262) argues that “the con-
temporary regime of university debt constitutes a form of racialized and gendered settler colonial
capitalism based on the incorporation of disposable low-wage workers and complicity in the occu-
pation of indigenous lands.” As Lazzarato (2013: 64) points out, the American university is a
model of the debt economy of our times. On the one hand, it is “the ideal realization of the creditor-
debtor relationship” while on the other “the American student perfectly embodies the condition of
the indebted man [sic] by serving as a paradigm for the conditions of subjectification of the debt
economy one finds throughout society.”
Before we look at the data on student loans, a brief context is in order. Fifty years ago, students
graduated from college with few outstanding loans, if any. In the wake of WW2, the GI Bill offered
returning soldiers free access to higher education, and millions of predominantly white military
personnel took advantage of this opportunity. In the 1960s, President Johnson’s Great Society ini-
tiative included legislation such as the Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963, which expanded
college aid dramatically, and the Higher Education Act of 1965, which created scholarships, estab-
lished low-interest student loans, and increased federal funds for universities; both generated a
spike in college enrollment and graduation. Tuition was low, and grants covered much of the
expense of going to college. The mid-60s to early 70s proved to be the zenith of the dream of an
equal educational opportunity for all Americans. It is worth keeping in mind that this was a time
when a college degree was not a necessary pre-condition for a decent job that could underwrite a
middle class lifestyle. However, this dream of an affordable higher education for all Americans
was to prove short-lived. The Higher Education Act was amended several times in subsequent
years with each amendment either stripping away a right from students and/or handing over a privi-
lege to a lending institution.
The welfare state, with its social subsidies and safety nets, had strong support during the 25 years
after the Second World War while the war-ravaged economies and societies of Europe and Japan
were being reconstructed (Harvey, 2007). Decolonization, along with the desires of newly inde-
pendent third world countries to build their national economies and societies, affirmed the hegem-
ony of the welfare state and state regulated capitalism. The oil shock of the 1970s provided the
opening for neoliberal forces to overturn the historic compromise between capital and labor repre-
sented by the welfare state, which was now deemed costly and inefficient, while the “free market”
was pitched as the best allocator of social resources (Klein, 2008). Higher education was no excep-
tion, and the subsequent neoliberal policies that were enacted resulted in the steady diminishing of
state support, the rise of tuition even among public universities, and the easy availability of student
loans to make up the difference.
As unionized manufacturing jobs with decent wages and benefits were being eliminated while
the US economy underwent a restructuring, high school graduates could no longer count on finding
758 Organization 30(4)

employment that could afford them a middle-class lifestyle. Over time, getting a college degree has
increasingly become an imperative. Even by the late 1970s, the college earnings premium (the
amount college graduates make over those with high school diplomas) had gone up to a robust
40%. A report by the Federal Reserve of New York (Abel and Deitz, 2019) shows that “a typical
college graduate earns a premium of. . .nearly 75 percent.”
As a college education gained in importance, more students borrowed money to get a degree,
and as tuition increased, the amount of borrowing grew. The student debt servicing and debt col-
lection industries were passed into private hands, which created a perverse incentive on their part
to steer students toward default since there were huge profits to be made from penalties and fees.
Unsurprisingly, student debt exploded and has been growing at an alarming rate. Even a cursory
look is enough to indicate that the problem is of significant proportions: 45 million borrowers in the
US hold student debt which totals over $1.7 trillion and is growing at a rapid rate, annual student
borrowing has increased five-fold over the last 30 years and is up to $100 billion per year, 71% of
students who graduate from 4-year colleges are indebted, and debt levels have been rising steadily
over time (see Chamber of Commerce, 2019; Debt Collective, 2020). Student debt surpassed credit
card debt in 2010 and only trails mortgage debt in terms of outstanding loans. According to the
Student Borrower Protection Center (2018), the year 2018 saw a growth of $83.5 billion in out-
standing student debt. Over 8.5 million new student borrowers accounted for over $100 billion in
new loans. Further, a full 13 million borrowers defaulted on a federal student loan in 2018 alone.
Even that number conceals the real level of distress because unlike other loans, student loans are
considered to be in default only 270 days after a borrower fails to make payments. A study that
examined the data of 35,000 debtors from the credit bureau Experian found that around 40% of
students who had borrowed money for college were either in default or in long-term delinquency
(Hiltonsmith, 2017).
As one might expect in an uneven society, the impact of the debt burden is uneven. For students
from top or middle-income families, debt is a helping hand during their education and the repay-
ments represent a minor outflow relative to their income. Students who come from lower income
families experience debt very differently. For them, debt is the only means to a college education,
which in turn is often the only way for them to advance up the socio-economic ladder. However,
high school graduates from low-income families—those who come from school districts that are
not well funded and thus fail to train students to be successful in college—have a very poor gradu-
ation rate. Data on graduation rates by income is not easily available but estimates show that only
around 20% students from the bottom income quartile graduate with a bachelor’s degree (see
Chingos and Dynarski, 2015). Data on race indicates a similar story. African-American and Latin-
American students are disproportionately represented among those who fail to graduate and those
who struggle to repay their college loans (Hiltonsmith, 2017).

The impact of student debt on African Americans

In 2016, activist organizations sent a letter to the Department of Education asking it to “collect and
release the data necessary to learn the true extent of the impact of student loan debt communities
of color” (National Consumer Law Center, 2016). The NCLC was making the case for a closer
look at the data on student borrowing by race because of troubling results shown by preliminary
research. For instance, a study by Hiltonsmith (2017) had shown that 52.6% of Black and 43.7%
of Latino borrowers were either in default or “seriously delinquent” on their loans. The default rate
for Black borrowers (19.4%) was significantly higher than that of white ones (12.3%). Similarly,
33.2% of Black borrowers were in serious delinquency when compared to 24.3% of white
borrowers.
Mir and Toor 759

That race is a major predictor of default and delinquency is not surprising. Black borrowers find
it difficult to repay their loans because they often end up working in lower-paying jobs as a result
of job-market discrimination. For instance, in 2014, the median income of white workers with a
bachelor’s degree was $63,338; Black workers earned around $13,000 less than that (Hiltonsmith,
2017). Black borrowers thus find it much harder to pay off their student debts. Scott-Clayton and
Li (2016) summarize their findings in the executive summary of an insightful report published at
the Brookings Institution: “The moment they earn their bachelor’s degrees, Black college gradu-
ates owe $7,400 more on average than their white peers ($23,000 versus $16,000, including non-
borrowers in the averages). But over the next few years, the black-white debt gap more than triples
to a whopping $25,000. Differences in interest accrual and graduate school borrowing lead to
Black graduates holding nearly $53,000 in student loan debt four years after graduation – almost
twice as much as their white counterparts.” Scott-Clayton and Li (2016) go on to argue that “racial
gaps in total debt are far larger than even recent reports have recognized, far larger now in the past,
and correlated with troubling trends in the economy and in the for-profit sector.”
The findings of yet another report titled “The Debt Divide: The Racial and Class Bias Behind
the ‘New Normal’ of Student Borrowing” (Huelsman, 2015) reveal that (a) 81% of Black students
borrow money to go to public colleges for a bachelor’s degree as opposed to 63% of white stu-
dents; (b) greater numbers of Black students borrow money (and borrow more money) to obtain an
Associate’s degree than white students (the more compelling statistic is that this gap in borrowing
is growing over time); (c) 40% of Black students drop out of college compared to 29% of white
students; (d) two in three Black and Latino students at for-profit 4-year institutions drop out before
completing their degree; and (e) 47% of Black students drop out of for-profit 2-years-or-less
institutions.
In response to the pressure exerted by the advocacy groups, the Department of Education finally
released a report in October 2017, which for the first time offered a look at the impact of student
debt on borrowers broken down by race and ethnicity (National Center for Educational Statistics,
2017). The report looked at 12-year outcomes by race for the cohort that began college in 2003–
2004. If earlier studies had made a compelling case that student debt had become a public crisis of
enormous proportions in Black communities across the country, the Department of Education
report revealed that the depth of the crisis had been underestimated (see Miller, 2017). The data
showed that African Americans were forced to borrow at a higher rate than white, Latino, or other
categories of students. Seventy-eight percent of Black students who joined college in 2003–2004
borrowed money while only 57% of white students and 58% of Latino students did. This disparity
in borrowing rates holds true for public, private, for-profit, 4-year, and 2-year institutions. A full
12 years after starting college, far from having paid down the loan, a median African American
borrower owed 113% of the original loan amount. Almost half of all African American borrowers
had defaulted on loans. Nearly 25% of Black students who successfully graduated with a bache-
lor’s degree had defaulted (compared to 9% for the overall population). Even those Black students
who graduated from a 4-year public institution defaulted at a rate of almost one in four. The prob-
lem was the worst among those Black students who had to drop out of college. Two-thirds of these
dropouts had defaulted.
While examining the contents of the report, we must keep in mind that the data examines stu-
dent debt outcomes from 2003 to 2004 onwards, a period when the for-profit college industry
hadn’t yet started booming. The situation today is a lot worse, as underscored by another recent
report. In response to a query by Senator Cory Booker, the Federal Reserve of New York (2019)
released new data that shows the huge gap between the percentage of borrowers in default in
“majority-minority neighborhoods” and “majority-white neighborhoods” in the 10 most segre-
gated metropolitan areas in the U.S. While it is obvious that the student loan system fails all
760 Organization 30(4)

borrowers, it is equally obvious that it fails borrowers of color the most. To take just one example
from the report, student borrowers from minority-dominated neighborhoods in Milwaukee have a
default rate that is four times that of borrowers from predominantly white neighborhoods. It is
important to note here that these numbers precede the economic devastation caused by the corona-
virus crisis starting March 2020. As Brown and Zheng (2020) point out, the COVID-19 pandemic
has accelerated the profound and layered social crises of America’s working class. A McKinsey
report indicates that African-Americans will be disproportionately affected by the pandemic;
around 40% of jobs held by African Americans will be impacted by layoffs, furloughs, reduction
in working hours, or lowering of wages (Florant et al., 2020).
As universities struggle with their budgets and as Black incomes inevitably fall, the ability of
African-American students to finish college and have a reasonable chance of paying off their debt
will also be greatly diminished. Student debt already a critical civil-rights issue before the pan-
demic will become even more so over the next few years. Given the vital importance of education
in social mobility, burdening young people of color with crippling student debt amounts to “colo-
nizing their future” (Marez, 2014: 265).

The racial wealth gap and its consequences on student debt

While it is evident clear that the African American community bears a significantly larger burden
of student debt, we need to understand the process by which this racialized student debt has come
to exist and is sustained, and the role of the racial income gap and more importantly the racial
wealth gap—which is generated and perpetrated by the project of racial capitalism—in the dispro-
portionate rates of default for Black students (Darity, 2019). In its annual report on the State of
Working America, the Economic Policy Institute (2019) examined government data to show that
the regression-adjusted Black-white wage gap had gone up over the last year, exacerbating an
ongoing trend: while the gap had been recorded at 10.2% in 2000, it had widened to 16.2% by
2018. The data on the Black-white wealth gap is even more sobering. According to the U.S. Census
Bureau, the median net worth for an African American family was $12,920, compared with
$143,600 for a white family (see US Census Bureau, 2019; it is worth noting that most Black assets
are held in the form of home equity and other non-liquid resources). These income and wealth gaps
are reinforced due to structural racism and widespread discrimination in housing, lending, educa-
tion, policing, and employment, and not only forces African American families to borrow more and
at greater cost, but also makes it nearly impossible for them to use savings as a buffer in the face
of an emergency (Center for Responsible Lending, 2019).
Because of the unique nature of wealth, the racial wealth gap serves both as a way to encode the
history of past wrongs and to index in concrete, quantifiable terms, the extent of the damage
wrought on African Americans by racial capitalism as individuals and as a community. Unlike
income, wealth can be passed down, and possesses the capacity to grow exponentially over genera-
tions. Home ownership forms the bulk of middle class wealth in the US today, and as a report of
the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard points out, home equity enables families to buy
other assets, to pass on their wealth to future generations, and to send children to college (see
Marksjarvis, 2017). For middle class Americans, wealth also provides an important cushion in the
event of an unexpected financial crisis. The racial wealth gap is thus a very important factor behind
the racial differences in student debt and the higher default rates of Black students.
Racial discrimination has been an enduring feature of the housing market and continues to the
present day ensuring the perpetuation of the Black-white wealth gap even within the middle class.
The 2008 financial crisis wiped out much of the wealth which Black households had managed to
build for themselves. In the lead up to the crisis, during the period of the housing bubble, banks and
Mir and Toor 761

their subsidiaries used predatory lending practices such as reverse redlining to target minorities for
sub-prime loans, and the wave of evictions that followed devastated African American communi-
ties (Strike Debt, 2014). As a result, the racial wealth gap between Black and white households has
grown to proportions not seen since 1940.
This disparity in Black-white wealth, engineered and preserved through a variety of racist policies,
especially housing policies, plays a vital role in the disproportionate impact of student loans on
African Americans. Household wealth is strongly linked to educational outcomes. The probability
that a student will finish her degree is higher among higher-wealth households. Further, defaults
almost always occur among low-wealth families. Since the cost of defaulting is so enormously
high—huge penalties and additional collection agency fees can increase the value of the outstanding
loan by up to 50%—only those who have no other option will let their loan slide into a default. It is
no surprise therefore when the data shows that Black students, who are far more likely to borrow than
white students and who borrow more than white students to attend college, are several times more
likely to default on their student loans than white students (Federal Reserve of New York, 2019).

The resistance to the debt regime: From occupy wall street to

Black Lives Matter
The Movement for Black Lives, which emerged in 2013 partly in response to the acquittal of George
Zimmerman in the murder of 17-year old Trayvon Martin (Fulton and Martin, 2017), was bolstered
by increasingly visible evidence of contemporary police violence against Black bodies provided by
cell-phone cameras and disseminated via social media. The police killings of Michael Brown in
Ferguson and Eric Garner on Staten Island, both in 2014, generated widespread protests. In 2015,
the suspicious death in police custody of Sandra Bland resulted in the hashtag #SayHerName,
designed to bring attention to the fact that Black women too were targets of police violence (African
American Policy Forum, 2015). The movement erupted again in 2020 following the brutal killings
of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd, and “protestors could be heard demanding
that police be defunded, and regular people’s debt be canceled” (Debt Collective, 2020: 47).
In 2011, just 2 years before Black Lives Matter burst on the international scene, another youth-
led movement had sought to bring attention to the magnitude of the student loan crisis in the US.
On September 17, 2011, young activists responded to a call issued by Canadian-based youth
culture magazine Adbusters to “occupy wall street” (Gitlin, 2012). They were members of the
first generation of Americans to experience negative social mobility and the movement they
spawned, Occupy Wall Street (OWS), focused on the issue of severe and increasing inequality.
The idea behind the occupation of Wall Street was, of course, to highlight the role of global finan-
cial institutions in creating and maintaining this social apocalypse. For OWS, the 2008 crisis was
part of the neoliberal order and its creation of a society—in fact a world order—organized around
debt. Notwithstanding its inability to live up to its grand ambition (“This Changes Everything” in
the words of one chronicler of the movement, Van Gelder, 2011), OWS’s impact on the political
landscape has been underappreciated in the years following the end of the occupation of Zuccotti
Park. By projecting the battle for the nation’s soul as being between “the 99%” or the working
people and the 1% who owned the majority of the wealth in the US, OWS provided a powerful
meme around which a critique of capitalism, specifically of its contemporary neoliberal form,
could be articulated.
An offshoot of the OWS, the Occupy Student Debt Campaign (OSDC) organized a campaign in
April 2012 marking the day when student debt reached the astounding figure of 1 trillion dollars
and asked that public higher education be made free and outstanding student debt be canceled,
demands which seemed outlandish at that time. Soon after, a collective of intellectuals and activists
762 Organization 30(4)

called Strike Debt (2014) published the Debt Resisters’ Operation Manual which offered an
explainer of how various forms of debt traps worked and suggested ways in which they could be
collectively resisted. The two groups joined forces to crowdfund a project that purchased debt on
the market for pennies on the dollar; the Rolling Jubilee erased over $30 million of consumer debt.
In 2014, the Debt Collective was launched as a union of debtors in a radically different approach
which recognizes that while individual debtors are helpless, they can be powerful as a collective
force. In a book titled Can’t Pay Won’t Pay: The Case for Economic Disobedience and Debt
Abolition, the Debt Collective (2020) argues that just as the concept of “class” brought workers
together as a structural unit allowing industrial unions to focus on sites of production and exert
their collective power by withholding their labor, debtors’ unions can unite borrowers to exert their
collective power in the sites of capital circulation by withholding their payment (going on “debt
strike”) in coordinated campaigns of resistance. The movement has already made impressive gains:
activists have succeeded in the cancelation of over $1 billion in student loans, made free college
and student debt abolition a legitimate demand, and launched a campaign “Cancel Student Debt
Now” that is endorsed by many elected representatives and has actual traction within the Biden
administration.
In a recent essay, Astra Taylor (2020: 7) of the Debt Collective writes: “With huge numbers
of people recently out of work and vital social services being slashed, one thing is certain: many
households, disproportionately households of color will be forced to take on massive debts to
survive the next year. Life was already difficult before COVID-19 crashed the economy; things
are now becoming untenable. Racial capitalism is a centuries-long pandemic. We cannot afford
not to rebel.”
One such rebellion forcefully (re)announced itself in May 2020, when the Movement for Black
Lives persuaded millions of people across the country to take to the streets to protest police vio-
lence against Black bodies. As it has done since its inception, the BLM movement also sought to
draw attention to the connection between slavery, racial capitalism, police violence against Black
bodies, and the prevailing form of predatory capitalism which uses debt, especially student debt, as
a mode of discipline (Khan-Cullors and bandele, 2018). This is the reason why “full and free
access” to “high quality educational opportunities. . .for all Black people” and the “retroactive
forgiveness of student loans” are such an integral part of the BLM’s platform on reparations (The
Movement for Black Lives, 2019). By highlighting the impoverishment of Black America under
the regime of racial capitalism, and by showing how student debt serves this project, BLM under-
scores the fact that African Americans continue to be colonized subjects and that Black emancipa-
tion remains an unfinished anticolonial project.
A few weeks before he was assassinated, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote in “A Testament of
Hope”:

Today’s dissenters tell the complacent majority that the time has come when further evasion of social
responsibility in a turbulent world will court disaster and death. America has not yet changed cause so
many think it need not change, but that is the illusion of the damned. America must change because
twenty-three million black citizens will no longer live supinely in a wretched past. They have left the
valley of despair; they have found strength in struggle; and whether they live or die, they shall never crawl
or retreat again. Joined by white allies, they will shake the prison walls until they fall. America must
change (King, 1969).

King, celebrating the “magnificent fervent” among African Americans, was hopeful that this
“black revolution” would force the US “to face all its interrelated flaws—racism, poverty, milita-
rism, and materialism” and would expose “systematic rather than superficial flaws” and show that
Mir and Toor 763

“radical reconstruction of society itself is the real issue to be faced” (King, 1969). While his words
are painful reminders of how far the movement for racial justice still has to go, the recent mobiliza-
tions offer reason to hope that the long moral arc of the universe will continue to bend toward
justice (King, 1968).

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD
Ali Mir https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2211-7459

References
Abel, J. and Deitz, R. (2019) ‘Despite Rising Costs, College Is Still a Good Investment’. Report of the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York. Retrieved December 4, 2020, from https://libertystreeteconomics.newyo-
rkfed.org/2019/06/despite-rising-costs-college-is-still-a-good-investment.html
African American Policy Forum (2015) ‘#SayHerName: Resisting Police Brutality against Black Women’.
Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.aapf.org/sayhername
Baptist, E. E. (2014) The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Balfour, L. (2003) ‘W.E.B. Du Bois and the Case for Reparations’, American Political Science Review 97(1):
33–44.
Brown, K. and Zheng, R. (2020) ‘A COVID-19 Survival Guide’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://spec-
trejournal.com/a-covid-19-survival-guide/
Cancel Student Debt (2020) ‘Cancel Student Debt Now’. Retrieved December 1, 2020, from https://cancel-
studentdebtnow.com
Center for Responsible Lending (2019) ‘Borrowers of Color and the Student Debt Crisis’. Retrieved May 1,
2020, from https://www.responsiblelending.org/sites/default/files/nodes/files/research-publication/crl-
quicksand-student-debt-crisis-jul2019.pdf
Chamber of Commerce (2019) ‘Student Loan Statistics’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.chamber-
ofcommerce.org/student-loan-statistics/
Chingos, M. and Dynarski, S. (2015) ‘How Can We Track Trends in Educational Attainment by Parental
Income? Hint: Not With the Current Population Survey’. Brookings Institute. Retrieved May 1, 2020,
from https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-can-we-track-trends-in-educational-attainment-by-paren-
tal-income-hint-not-with-the-current-population-survey/#_end1
Cox, C. (1959) The Foundations of Capitalism. New York, NY: Philosophical Library.
Cox, C. (1964) Capitalism as a System. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.
Darity, W. (2019) ‘Running the Numbers on Closing the Racial Wealth Gap’. Report of the Samuel DuBois
Cook Center on Social Equity, Duke University. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://socialequity.duke.
edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Running-the-Numbers-8.4.19-FINAL.pdf
Debt Collective (2020) Can’t Pay Won’t Pay: The Case for Economic Disobedience and Debt Abolition.
Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903) The Souls of Black Folk. Chicago, IL: A. C. McClurg & Co.
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1935) Black Reconstruction. Rahway, NJ: Quinn & Boden Company Inc.
Economic Policy Institute (2019) ‘State of Working America’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.epi.
org/publication/state-of-american-wages-2018
Federal Reserve of New York (2019) ‘Booker Requested Report from NY Fed Detailing Racial Disparities
Student Loan Debt’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.scribd.com/document/428472893/
Booker-Requested-Report-from-NY-Fed-Detailing-Racial-Disparities-Student-Loan-Debt
Feher, M. (2018) Rated Agency: Investee Politics in a Speculative Age. New York, NY: Zone Books.
764 Organization 30(4)

Florant, A., Noel, N., Stewart, S. III., et al. (2020) ‘COVID-19: Investing in Black Lives and Livelihoods’.
A McKinsey and Company report. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/
public-sector/our-insights/covid-19-investing-in-black-lives-and-livelihoods
Frederickson, A. (2016) ‘Waiting for the Payoff: How Low Wages and Student Debt keep Prosperity Out of
Reach’. A report by the Peoples’ Action Institute. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://jobgap2013.files.
wordpress.com/2016/10/waiting-for-the-payoff-web.pdf
Frotman, S. (2018) A Year Without Action: An Analysis of Borrowers’ Complaints. Washington, DC: Student
Borrower Protection Center.
Fulton, S. and Martin, T. (2017) Rest in Power. New York, NY: Penguin Random House.
Gitlin, T. (2012) Occupy Nation: The Roots, the Spirit, and the Promise of Occupy Wall Street. New York,
NY: Harper Collins.
Goldrick-Rab, S., Kelchen, R. and Houle, J. (2014) ‘The Color of Student Debt: Implications of Federal
Loan Program Reforms for Black Students and Historically Black Colleges and Universities’. Wisconsin
Hope Lab Discussion Paper, Madison, WI. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://news.education.wisc.
edu/docs/WebDispenser/news-connections-pdf/thecolorofstudentdebt-draft.pdf
Graeber, D. (2014) Debt: The First 5000 Years. London: Melville House.
Harvey, D. (2017) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. London: Oxford University Press.
Hiltonsmith, R. (2017) Small Loans, Big Risks: Major Consequences for Student Debtors. Washington, DC:
Demos. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from http://www.demos.org/publication/small-loans-big-risks-major-
consequences-student-debtors
Huelsman, M. (2015) The Debt Divide: The Racial and Class Bias behind the “New Normal” of Student
Borrowing. Washington, DC: Demos. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.demos.org/research/
debt-divide-racial-and-class-bias-behind-new-normal-student-borrowing
Kelley, R. D. G. (2000) Foreword’, in C. Robinson’s (ed.) Black Marxism: The Making of The Black Radical
Tradition. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Khan-Cullors, P. and Bandele, A. (2018) When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir.
New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
King, M. L. K. Jr. (1968) ‘Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution’. Speech given at the National
Cathedral, March 31, 1968.
King, M. L. K. Jr. (1969) A Testament of Hope. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.
Klein, N. (2008) The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. New York, NY: Picador.
Lazzarato, M. (2013) Governing by Debt. South Pasadena, CA: Semiotext(e).
Marez, C. (2014) ‘Seeing in the Red: Looking at Student Debt’, American Quarterly 66(2): 261–81.
Marksjarvis, G. (2017) ‘Why Black Homeownership Rates Lag Even as the Housing Market Recovers’,
Chicago Tribune, 21 July 2017. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/
ct-black-homeownership-plunges-0723-biz-20170720-story.html
Miller, B. (2017) ‘New Federal Data Show a Student Loan Crisis for African American Borrowers’.
Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-postsecondary/
news/2017/10/16/440711/new-federal-data-show-student-loan-crisis-african-american-borrowers/
National Center for Educational Statistics (2017) ‘Repayment of Student Loans as of 2015 among 1995–96
and 2003–04 First-Time Beginning Students’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://nces.ed.gov/pub-
search/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2018410
National Consumer Law Center (2016) ‘A Letter to the Honorable John B. King Jr., Secretary of
Education’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.studentloanborrowerassistance.org/wp-content/
uploads/2013/05/ltr-sec-king-race-student-debt.pdf
Robinson, C. (1983) Black Marxism: The Making of the Black Radical Tradition. Chapel Hill, NC: University
of North Carolina Press.
Rosenthal, C. (2018) Accounting for Slavery: Masters and Management. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Schermerhorn, C. (2015) The Business of Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism, 1815–1860. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Scott-Clayton, J. and Li, J. (2016) Black-white disparity in student loan debt more than triples after gradua-
tion. Evidence Speaks Reports, Vol 2, #3, Economic Studies at Brookings.
Mir and Toor 765

Soederberg, S. (2015) ‘The Student Loan Crisis and the Debtfare State’, Dollars and Sense, May/June 2015.
Retrieved May 1, 2020, from http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2015/0515soederberg.html
Strike Debt (2014) The Debt Resister’s Operation Manual. Oakland, CA: PM Press.
Student Borrower Protection Center (2018) ‘A Year Without Action: An Analysis of Borrower Complaints’.
Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://protectborrowers.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/SBPC-A-Year-
Without-Action_2018.pdf
Taylor, A. (2020) ‘Foreword’, in Can’t Pay Won’t Pay: The Case for Economic Disobedience and Debt
Abolition, pp. 1–8. Debt Collective. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.
The Movement for Black Lives (2019) ‘Reparations’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://m4bl.org/policy-
platforms/reparations/
US Census Bureau (2019) ‘Wealth and Asset Ownership’. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.census.
gov/topics/income-poverty/wealth.html
Van Gelder, S. (2011) This Changes Everything: Occupy Wall Street and the 99% Movement. San Francisco,
CA: Berret-Koehler Publishers.
Wells, I. B. (1892). Southern Horrors: Lynch Law in All Its Phases. Gutenberg e-books. Retrieved May 1,
2020, from https://www.gutenberg.org/files/14975/14975-h/14975-h.htm
Williams, E. (1944) Capitalism and Slavery. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Author biographies
Ali Mir is a Professor of Management at the College of Business, William Paterson University, NJ.
Saadia Toor is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the College of Staten Island, City University of New
York, NY.