Every movement for social justice, as a rule, should
frequently and emphatically layout their program to amend the
existing social order. The most dangerous time for many organic
movements is at the beginning. Movements that lack a hierarchical structure
often suffer from knowing where they want to go, but not being able to come to
a consensus on how to get there. Imagine activists at a train station with four
independent engines and four sets of tracks to choose from; if every conductor
wants to get to the same place, but their trains are taking off in different directions
what happens to their movement? A once strong unified front ends up splintered with factions that
have diminished voices and reduced power. I'm not sure how to rectify this
problem, but several movements have suffered this fate. Restructuring any society's thought process is hard work.
We need more cure and less diagnosis. People who share
similar struggles don't need to be constantly reminded about their plight.
Wanting justice and writing about justice isn't enough to produce justice. If
my generation (self included) dedicated as much time actively pursuing
justice as we do writing about it we might get somewhere. It's hard to cause
mild shifts in a society: once an idea becomes entrenched in the psyche of a
nation it can take decades, or even centuries for it to be repudiated. As a
rule radical shifts in any society are almost impossible achieve over a short
period of time. Most people look at the 1960's as the pivotal moment where
agency and social conscious collided to force change in America. That's
somewhat accurate, but it's a reductionist view that negates the generations of
men and women tied to the fight for equality. In truth, the 1960's started in
the early 1830's. What happened for Blacks, women, and people with mental and
physical disabilities was facilitated by the failures and successes of those
who created the space for new normal.
The end of the 20th century and the first part of the
21st century have spoiled us with a gift called instant gratification. The
technology that makes it easier to connect with each other has led some to
believe that everything in life should happen in an expedited way. We have kids
in their early 20's who've never waited on the mailman to bring them a letter.
I worry about this next generation of activists. I worry that some may lack the
necessary perseverance to see large scale projects through. Change is hard.
Often the tangible signs of progress don't materialize as quickly as we would
like. It's easy to get support for an issue that penetrates social media. Once
something goes viral or trends public support jumps on the bandwagon. People
will change their avatars, or shade their profile pictures to support the
current cause, but too few make the next step of engaging in the civic and
political process.
Everyone who identifies with and supports a particular
front in the battle for social justice and equality has a moral obligation to
find your place in the arena. For some it might be a small town helping to
organize like minded people. Everyone can't be center stage, but that doesn't
absolve us from our responsibilities to our movements. If you find yourself in
a position to engage the public face(s) of your movement hold them accountable
if and when they get off message. Leadership isn't a quality that someone can
take from you. We need to avoid the trap of associating status and positioning
with leadership. If we're serious about social justice we need to have the most
informed, most politically savvy, and the most determined people part of our
organization at the planning level. Theory is important because the only way to
get to a conception of the future is by understanding as much about the past
and present as possible. When the cameras are aimed at us we need to have a set
of demands, and a practical way to insure that every level of government can
start the process of implementing our policies.
The rhetoric we use is vital. This goes back to the point
of clearly defining ourselves and our intentions. Language is important. We
have to control our image. Black Lives Matter learned this the hard way when a
group in Minnesota was recorded reciting anti-police chants. Their lack of
judgment opened the door to a media cycle full of coverage that
attempted to delegitimize calls to hold cities and police departments
accountable for the actions of their officers. This is why competent leadership
at all levels is vital. We need to speak in a strong affirming manner that
leaves no doubt about our goals. However, we should avoid ultimatums that can cause
us to suspend commonsense in order to honor them. This may seem simple to
someone reading this, but the reality is: too many social and political
movements have adopted hard line positions that often make negotiating more
difficult. Fiery rhetoric can move crowds, but it can also hinder progress. The
majority of the people who read this probably have a better understanding of
what it means to be an activist than I do, but can we guarantee that everyone
marching or protesting with us can say the same?
