Solidarity And Responsibility: Developing Anti-Oppression Politics

by Gary Kinsman
(Part one of this article appeared in the last issue of New Socialist)


Fighting To Win needs to be about deepening our various struggles, linking them together and learning from other oppressed and exploited people as we transform ourselves and our struggles. We need to move into action whether it is support for First Nations' struggles, for a refugee resisting deportation, for anti-poverty actions, a struggle for women's rights, a struggle for the needs of the disabled, or a strike. Fighting to win requires an approach to solidarity that views it as taking up and learning from all our struggles.

This also points to the problems with rather simplistic slogans like "Black and White Unite, Same Struggle, Same Fight." While this might work as a slogan for some occasions and the commitment to unity is admirable, it also carries with it a rather mistaken political perspective. By leaping over the very real social divides of white social privilege and racism, this slogan prevents us from seeing that racism impacts on people of colour and First Nations communities in very different ways than it does on white people.

In the end blacks and whites don't have exactly the same struggle even if from our different locations within the social relations of a racist capitalist society we can both fight racism and white privilege. White people have a special political responsibility to fight against the social practices of white privilege and to challenge racism from within our own participation and implication within these practices. The other side of our participation in the social practices of white privilege is the organization of racism in the lives of people of colour. We are involved in a common social relation that spans the social sites of profound racism and white privilege but we are positioned within it very differently and therefore our struggles will have a different social character.

Weakening our struggles - fighting to lose

The approaches that push narrow notions of "class," that call for solidarity on the terms of those who have social power and privilege, and that do not challenge forms of social privilege, profoundly weaken our struggles. They reproduce forms of marginalization and exclusion and produce disunity in our movements. They are not part of how we need to develop a fighting to win perspective which must be based on taking up the needs of the most oppressed and marginalized and developing forms of militant action that build working class and oppressed people's power. These limited approaches not only mean that groups whose forms of oppression are not addressed will not significantly participate in these struggles but also that the movement or struggle will not be able to learn about and challenge the forms of oppression that shape people's lives. The best forms of solidarity are those where people are transformed through addressing and dealing with various forms of oppression and exploitation as part of the organizing experiences. An occupation of an immigration office to defend the rights of people about to be deported, for instance, can allow white trade unionists to learn about some of the aspects of the racism that many people of colour face on a daily basis.

From the perspective of socialism from below solidarity that deals with class, race, gender, sexuality and others forms of oppression is the best form of solidarity because it helps to prepare us for the building of a new society in which exploitation and all forms of oppression are addressed. This requires that the anti-racist, feminist and queer liberation struggles (amongst others) need to be very much alive in the forms of solidarity and coalitions that we build. They are not something separate and apart from building solidarity. If we don't do this, whatever the success of the struggle it will not have transformed the participants - it will not have moved forward the struggle for profound social transformation. This is why a politics of solidarity is not simply a politics of defence against attack; it also needs to be developed more offensively as a politics of social transformation.

From a Politics of Representation to a Politics of Responsibility

One of the main ways that movements of the oppressed have been responded to both officially by state and social agencies and by parts of the left is to interpret these as struggles for representation rather than as struggles for social transformation. The politics of representation can take the form of a "multiculturalism" which deals with oppression as a question of representation and of culture and does not focus on the social and economic roots of oppression. It is crucial that diversity and the lack of representativeness of various organizations and struggles be noted and challenged. It is crucial not to exclude people who want to be involved. It is also crucial that white-dominated, or male-dominated, organizations recognize this and try to take steps to transform their social character and composition. The politics of representation, however, can lead organizations to focus on their lack of representativeness as the problem rather than actively fighting racism and sexism. This can actually demobilize struggles and lead to a politics of liberal pluralism that focuses on everyone being represented rather than on actively fighting oppression. Representation alone does not get rid of problems of oppression and marginalization.

This approach also does not recognize that various oppressed groups may have very valid reasons (say for instance past experiences of people of colour with white leftists) to not join a white-dominated group or coalition. They may be concentrating instead on developing their own autonomy and developing their own power. As mentioned before we have to recognize that different forms of oppression create the basis for autonomous struggle and organization. This autonomy includes the need for caucuses and autonomy for the oppressed within coalitions, and organization. It is only on the basis of this autonomy and the active addressing forms of oppression that a more profound solidarity and equality can be built.

For groups of activists positioned within relations of social privilege the politics of responsibility instead leads to recognizing that there are actions that can be taken from their social location to challenge racism and the social construction of whiteness, or to challenge sexism and the ways masculinity is practiced in our society. This is a politics that leads to intervening in and transforming social relations. If I am a member of a largely white group engaging in a politics of responsibility would lead to actively learning from black activists and respecting their leadership, but at the same time actively challenging racism and our own participation in sustaining the social practices of white privilege. By challenging the practices of white privilege and racism this could in turn create a better basis for cooperation with black activists and other anti-racist activists in the future. The politics of responsibility thereby facilitates the building of solidarity and addressing forms of oppression.

Just because there are no First Nations people in a particular social justice group for instance does not prevent that group from taking responsibility in fighting against racism towards First Nations people and in supporting First Nations struggles.

For Social Transformation

The struggle against oppression is not simply a fight for representation. It also needs to get at to the social roots of the forms of oppression we face and the transformation of social relations organizing oppression. This is what an anti-racist, feminist, class politics needs to be all about. This approach is about developing a broader sense of class struggle and anti-capitalism that is centrally defined by struggles against oppression. This is what fighting to win is all about.

Note: I have learned a lot on these questions from the writings of Himani Bannerji, including Thinking Through and The Dark Side of the Nation and from discussions on these topics with Andrew Thompson. I am, however, entirely responsible for what is written here.

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.