activism and the politics of identity

this is an article that i wrote for a local student newspaper at boston college...




In my own limited experience as somebody who is concerned with "politics", I have quickly learned that "politics" is never just that. Political. At least political in the sense that what we do is entirely disassociated from our own identities. Many activists and scholars have put it best in saying that "the personal is political". Or alternately, the person is social. Social in the sense that our identities as "individuals" are directly related to how we are formed by society. This is a process shaped by politics. So to say that human beings are social animals is to also say that human beings are political animals as well. This argument has been made many times in the past.

My point, before it gets too confusing and abstract, is that all of these things are linked. How we project who we are (and how we are perceived) is intimately linked with the society in which we live and the roles we play in that society. A society, which historically, has privileged white folks, men, heterosexuals, and people who have access to money. If you want evidence of this... read about the Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) system in Massachusetts, or perhaps how people of color were and still are denied access to loans from banks through the process of "red lining", or maybe ask why isn't domestic work (performed mostly by women) included in GDP... etc etc etc. Or really, you can just look at the latest issue of the Observer and see a photo of the GOP debate and that the stage of presidential candidates is filled with white dudes (Alan Keyes entered the race 9 days later). It's not much different in the Democrats either. This is not a coincidence but is indicative of the society in which we live and how institutional and legal relationships (examples above) shape our personal lives.

To take it back to the beginning then... the politics we practice is influenced by the social privilege that society bestows on certain individuals.

Since I am a white man then my progressive political project- to be a part in creating and re-creating a more inclusive, loving, expressive and just society- becomes a project of challenging my privilege at an institutional, as well as personal level. Not to mention maintaining a critical vigilance of how my actions re-produce a white supremacist, male-dominated (patriarchal) society. For rich people, whites, men, hetero-folk, or people who rest at intersections of these socially privileged identities; maintaining this critical vigilance means re-framing the traditional liberal political agenda.

It's not enough to pursue a liberal or progressive politics of activism (an activism that is issue based) if this project does not push us to critically examine and continually re-examine who we are in society and how our actions re-enforce oppression. I say this because I believe we all must embody the change we hope to make.

Black Liberation Theologian James Cone makes very clear the effect of such non-critical actions in a passage of his book "A Black Theology of Liberation" where he offers a critical analysis of whites who do service in non-white communities...

"It seems whites forget about the necessary interrelatedness of love, justice, and power when they encounter black people. Love becomes emotional and sentimental. This sentimental condescending love accounts for their desire to "help" by relieving the physical pains of the suffering blacks so they can satisfy their own religious piety and keep the poor powerless. But the new blacks, redeemed in Christ must refuse their "help" and demand that blacks be confronted as persons. They must say to whites that authentic love is not "help," no giving Christmas baskets but working for political, social, and economic justice which always means a redistribution of power. It is a kind of power which enables the blacks to fight their own battles and thus keep their dignity. 'Powerlessness breeds a race of beggars.'"

I think the position I am trying to articulate is important because Boston College, as a historically white and male-dominated institution, pushes its students to be "men and women for others" often without pushing them to critically examine what the implications of this mission are. To come to a more informed conception of what that means for folks who are socially privileged (and that means all of us to a certain extent because we are in college in the first place), involves critically examining how our identities shape what we do on a very personal and intimate level. Greater social consciousness then prevents us from taking actions that re-produce historically oppressive dynamics in the way Cone argues above.

I am involved in activism and politics not because I want to do good (I do), but because politics for me involves exploring my own conception of myself and how I relate to others, as well as taking action that is informed by this consciousness. This critical self-reflection involves deepening friendships because it can almost never be taken on alone.

I say this because my own interrogation of maleness, whiteness and of the role that sexuality plays in my friendships has often pushed me to a psychological breaking point. Interrogating parts of my identity have inevitably led to new (and sometimes terrifying) avenues of understanding myself and ways in which my often personal history influences interactions with people today. I say this because I see personal formation as being closely linked to processes of social and historical formation. I believe that studies of these historical processes can inform critical self-reflection and vice versa. For example, I have discovered the role of my father in my life is very much tied to a historical (and patriarchal) construction of being a (white) male. I see my relationship with my father as analogous to one between colonizer and colonized that now reproduces itself in my life separate from my dad. Moving forward in exploring these new realms of consciousness is not easy and support from peers, who can both push me and offer support, is key. However, such personal interrogation can lead to a critical self-consciousness that informs understandings of academic concepts, making them more real to the individual and therefore more applicable to personal life and political activism. For example, I believe that deepening bonds of friendship can also help us realize how heteronormative constructions of sharing emotions in monogamous (heterosexual) relationships can sometimes limit other forms of friendships and bonding. From my own reading then, I am able to better conceptualize how social pressures to enter hetero-monogamous "relationships" exert themselves on me daily (if not hourly) and then that these "relationships" become a basis for gender oppression in society.

To put it more generally, this process constantly forces me to re-conceptualize how I frame my own politics and activism. The pursuit of "freedom" and "truth" then take on new and more real meanings that are very different from what we are taught by dominant (white, patriarchal, heteronormative and capitalist) tradition. See first issue of the Observer.

I see so much of the positive work that people at Boston College are doing but also believe that social privilege can destroy the change we hope to make. I have seen my own blatant ignorance get in the way (and continue to get in the way) all too often. That is why i believe that interrogating our identities as humans who are both privileged and oppressed by a gendered, racialized, sexualized and classed society is a project of liberation that not only brings us to a greater self-consciousness, but pushes our political project further than we could have imagined.