Solidarity and Responsibility: Fighting to win against capitalism and
oppression.
By Gary Kinsman
Many activists involved in fighting racism, sexism, heterosexism, and
other forms of oppression have been told by other leftists (often but
not always white, heterosexual men) that these are not as important as
the "central" class struggles they support. They may even view our
struggles as diversionary or divisive. I remember being told this many
times in the 1970s and 1980s as a gay liberation and socialist
activist.
By "class struggle" they seem to mean only the unions and the
point of production -- offices and factories. While this is a very
important front of struggle, it is only one arena of working class life
and even here race, gender and sexuality are central aspects of the
organization of workplaces and of exploitation. For some who argue this
narrow view of class it is as if there is a working class that does not
have a home, community and sexual life – as if working class experience
does not centrally include the relations of domestic labour, the
reproduction of our capacities to labour, poverty, unemployment,
immigration, race and racism, sexuality and pleasure. As many have
pointed out, you cannot possibly think and act politically about class
relations in Canada without seeing their racialized and gendered
character. The narrow notion of "class politics" still common in some
parts of the left is not an adequate "class politics" at all.
This view abstracts the working class away from the racism, gender and
sexual oppression that are actually key to defining what class relations and
struggles are all about. This empty abstraction is then used to
construct a "false universal" image of the working class as white and
mostly male and heterosexual. This false image of the working class can
foster divisions in working class struggles when racism, sexism and
heterosexism are not centrally addressed. The experience of class is
never an abstraction – it is a social relation between people. It is
always lived in relation to gender, race, sexuality, age, ability,
language, nation and other relations.
Successful struggles to undo these forms of oppression and
exploitation must recognize their intertwined character. This is why an
anti-racist, feminist, class politics that addresses all forms of
oppression is needed in today's organizing.
I examine these questions in the context of the Fighting to Win
perspective developed by the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP)
which is about moving beyond token or symbolic forms of protest to developing
our own forms of power and wining victories through our own struggles. As a queer
liberation and socialist activist, I experience oppression in a society
dominated by heterosexual hegemony but I am also simultaneously located
in practices of social privilege in relation to class (as a
university professor), as white in a racist society, as a man in a
patriarchal society, and as able-bodied in a society that systematically
marginalizes people living with disabilities. While I address questions
of oppression in relation to anti-capitalism, I do not wish to suggest
that these various forms of oppression all have the same social character.
Autonomy and Interdependence
When it comes to oppression and capitalism we need to recognize the
specificity of each form of oppression which creates the basis for
autonomous struggles against racism, sexism, heterosexism and other
forms of oppression. Oppressed people need to build their own power
against the forms of oppression they face. At the same time autonomy on
its own is not enough.
This is because all of these forms of oppression are constructed
in and through each other and in and through the relations of
capitalism. This is why we need to bring our various struggles together
to build a broader counter-power to that of the capitalists and their
state relations. Capitalism in a concrete historical sense is racism, and is sexism.
Fighting racism can be fighting capitalism and fighting sexism can be
fighting capitalism. The fight against capitalism is thereby enriched by
seeing how central fighting gender and racial oppression, for instance,
is to developing a radical anti-capitalist politics. So we need to
recognize both the need for autonomy and for
united struggles and for building a solidarity that learns from and
builds upon the autonomy of the various struggles of the oppressed and
exploited.
Solidarity yes, but solidarity on whose terms?
In recent years, given the growth of our movements against
oppression, some of the arguments against taking up the struggles of the
oppressed are made in a more subtle fashion. One variant is that in the
name of solidarity against a common enemy – whether it be the Harris
government in Ontario or the struggle against the Free Trade Area of the
Americas (FTAA) – we should not raise our specific concerns and demands
around racism, sexism, sexuality and other struggles. We should instead,
it is argued, unite against our common enemy with the hope that after
this enemy is defeated that somehow our needs will get addressed. This
boils down to an unacceptable argument for the postponement of our
struggles against oppression, as well as not seeing how central
oppressed people's needs are to battles against the Harris government
and capitalist globalization. This raises important questions about
solidarity in our struggles.
Solidarity is central to a fighting to win as OCAP has stressed.
But we always need to ask whose solidarity, and solidarity on whose
terms? Does this solidarity take all of our diverse needs into account.
Solidarity when fighting to win only makes sense when it is defined by
the needs of all the exploited and oppressed. Solidarity cannot simply
be on the terms defined by the leaderships of union or non-governmental
organizations but must be centrally defined by those who adopt radical
positions and forms of struggle and are trying to get to the social
roots of the problems people face.
Solidarity must be based not only on unity in struggle but also
on learning from other people about the forms of oppression and
exploitation that they face. A solidarity that is defined only by the
needs of the more socially powerful and privileged is actually a source
of division in our struggles. Many times, for instance, we have seen the
union movement receive the support of other oppressed groups only not to
have that solidarity returned when it is urgently needed. While OCAP has
been a strong supporter of many union struggles for some sections of the
union leadership solidarity with OCAP has been undermined since the June
eviction of James Flaherty, Minister of Finance from his constituency
office.
[This article will be continued in the next issue of New Socialist]
Gary Kinsman is a queer and global justice activist in Sudbury. He is a
member of the New Socialist Group, the author of The Regulation of
Desire and co-author of the forthcoming Canadian War of 'Queers':
National Security as Sexual Regulation.