Social activism today is rather segmented in nature. Thousands of groups and organizations exist which work on a thousand different issues – those working on the same or similar issues employ different approaches. There exist groups which work on environmental issues, others concerned with homelessness and drug abuse in inner cities, others still who work on issues of poverty and development in distant countries. It could be said that there is a huge diversity in interests, as well as diversity in tactics, among those working for progress in the world. Put in this way, the segmented nature of activism appears a wholly positive feature. There are, however, problems with segmentation in activism to be concerned with.
Martin Luther King, Jr is remembered foremost for his role in the 1960’s civil rights movement for African American people in the United States. King understood that the issues that concerned African Americans in the United States were inextricably linked with other issues of social justice. This is why he decided to speak out against the Vietnam War. Many of his allies, King reported, were not pleased: “Peace and civil rights don’t mix, they say”. For King, there were very clear connections between them. He pointed out that poor African Americans , and the poor in general, were disproportionately represented in the military; they would fight and die in the war in disproportionately high numbers. King also noted that while an estimated $500,000 was spent to kill each enemy soldier in the war, only $53 dollars were provided for social services for each person in poverty at home. If he did not raise his voice against the war, he would not be able to tell himself that he was sincerely fighting to obtain equality and justice for his race.
King went farther than criticizing the Vietnam War by pointing out that the general nature of existing society as flawed: “We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society”. Recognizing the structural roots of the oppression thrust upon his people, he characterized the struggle for racial equality as a lever for change on a larger level:
“The [African American] revolt is evolving into more than a quest for desegregation and equality. It is a challenge to a system that has created miracles of production and technology to create justice. If humanism is locked outside the system, [African Americans] will have revealed its inner core of despotism and a far greater struggle for liberation will unfold.”
Such an outlook is not often found among modern-day activists. The idea that the various social justice struggles could be related is not given much attention. As a result the structural roots of the various social problems that confront us are kept hidden and the structures continue to exist. Also, the various synergies that could be built to push for progress remain unconstructed.
This happens, at least in part, because activists fear censure-ship. As long as we do not broach a particularly sensitive topic such as war, and especially if we keep quiet about the structural nature of injustice, we can expect to have little trouble while calling for progress in some specific area of social life; we can even expect to win laudations for doing our work. King expressed consternation at the fact that the “nation and… press… will praise you when you say, ‘Be non-violent toward [segregationist Alabama sheriff] Jim Clark,’ but will curse and damn you when you say, ‘Be non-violent toward little brown Vietnamese children'”.
It is imperative that we fight for progress with an understanding of the links between the different problems that concern society. Out of necessity, it may only be possible to work on a particular issue at any given time, but this work should be done with an understanding of the context which surrounds the issue. Nothing exists in a vacuum and not accounting for context while advocating for change can create more problems than existed to begin with.
Moreover, properly addressing social problems requires the reshaping of the structures which produce them. The task of understanding the structures which produce any particular problem becomes easier when we understand the context within which it exists and we link together the various problems produced by the misshaped structures of our society.
Leave a Reply