Tag: autonomous organizing

Our Movements Should Not Make Demands: Breaking down Common Myths about Resistance

“I do not demand any right, therefore I need not recognize any either.”— Max Stirner

If we seek radical change, we need to set our agenda outside the discourses of those who hold power, outside the framework of what their institutions can do. Our movements need to stop presenting demands and start setting objectives. Our collective power must be assessed by our own effectiveness at being able to cause material change, not by what politicians believe is possible.

The main argument presented here is the following: making demands puts you in a weaker bargaining position!

Limiting a movement to specific demands results in:

– Stifling of diversity, setting it up for failure

– Undermining movement longevity

– Creating the false impression that there are easy solutions to problems that are actually extremely complex

In addition, making demands… 

– Presumes that you want things that your adversary can grant

– Legitimizes the power of the authorities you are demanding recognition from, which centralizes agency in their hands instead of ours

– Can prematurely limit the scope of a movement, shutting down the field of other possibilities

– Establishes some people as representatives of the movement, which creates an internal hierarchy and gives them an incentive to control other participants

Instead, our challenge is to create spaces where people can discuss and implement solutions directly on an ongoing and collective basis. Rather than proposing quick fixes, we should spread new practices. We don’t need to follow manifestos or rigid programmes, but points of departure. In fact, our desires and dreams will never be accepted by those in power. By making demands, we minimize and distort our abolitionist desires in language and terms that are suitable to those in power. When we become legible to the state, we lose our autonomous potential and fall into the trap of visibility and reformism. When demands are made, suddenly, our dreams of liberation encounter a reduction in the face of the bureaucracies and re-legitimization of the state.

From this vantage point, we can see that choosing not to make demands is not necessarily a sign of political immaturity. On the contrary, it can be a savvy refusal to fall into the traps that disabled previous generations of movements. Let’s learn our own strengths, outside of the cages and queues of representational politics — beyond the politics of demands.

In the words of James Baldwin: “Perhaps, however, the moral of the story (and the hope of the world) lies in what one demands, not of others, but of oneself.”

 

Further Reading:

“We Demand Nothing: On the Practical Necessity of Demanding Nothing” by Johann Kaspar

“What is Policing? and Tactical Terrain Analysis: a How-To Guide” by Tom Nomad

“Defend the Territory: Tactics and Techniques for Countering Police Assaults on Indigenous Communities” by Warrior Publications

Activism™ Must Be Abolished: Abandon Old Activist Models

This is a short guide on abandoning outdated (but popular) activist models for folks new to organizing in the Inland Empire. Take the time for this important read. It is a breakdown of what so-called “activism” is, how it stifles true community building, and what can be done in place of that model. Note that this is a critique of Activism™ as a particular brand that people take up and the dynamic it creates, and NOT criticism of organizing against oppression itself. We are all for the proliferation of autonomous activities, but not for using movement organizing for clout-chasing or celebrity culture. Abolish Activism™!

Have you ever had these fears before entering new organizing spaces?:

– Concerns about not being radical enough in others’ eyes?

– Being shut off by others, or having your ideas rejected and dismissed?

– Feeling like you constantly have to prove your self-worth and commitment?

– Fears about not having the “right” politics or the “best” analysis?

– Hyper-awareness of oneself and of others that constantly looks for errors?

You are not alone if you have ever felt these feelings and all of those feelings are valid. Not only is engaging in a new environment anxiety-inducing on its own, many of these feelings and fears come from the ways a particular model of “activism” has taken over community and organizing spaces. This model approaches organizing as though it has all the answers, which is rooted in an ideology that believes liberation can only be engaged in one particular type of way, which then invalidates all the other ways that groups and individuals engage with organizing and community-building. Much of the more popular, self-proclaimed, and highly visible “activism/ activists” model behaviors and ideas that, in reality, do more harm than good in organizing spaces, creating a model for newcomers to follow who then perpetuate that same dynamic.

We encourage folks to do the work without worrying so much about labeling themselves or their work as “activists” and “activism,” respectively. After all, whether you’re anonymous or simply unlabeled, your work will show for itself if it’s good work.

What else does the model of activism consist of?

– The activism model needs people who are deemed “activists,” and these people who call themselves “activists” usually try to set the terms and agenda for all the right and wrong ways that other people (“non-activists”) can engage with social change.

– Usually, these activists are people with a lot of social capital, visibility, and popularity, and they self-appoint themselves as representatives of a particular struggle, usually seeking to profit off of it (see: DeRay Mckesson).

– Activism then tends to consolidate itself into scenes and cliques, which are exclusive in-groups that exclude people who are deemed not “worthy” or “smart” enough to engage with the political struggle that they are trying to control.

Where does the model of activism originate from?

Fundamentally, the problem with activism (and activists) is that it tries to tell you what is right and wrong, robbing you of the ability to think and act for yourself.

Historically, activist mentality can be tied to the histories of institutional religion and its morality. The building blocks of activism can be traced to a Christian current of moralism and the way it instilled fear and hostility towards a sinful world. Through practices like confession, Christianity taught its subjects   to internalize their own sinfulness and guilt (for more on this point, check out the book titled Joyful Militancy”). Another historical building block that leads to the emergence of activist mentality is the institution of schooling. The educational system crushes the openness to new ways of doing things. For example, traditional schooling replaces curiosity with instruction, memorization, and hierarchical evaluation, so you do not get to think for yourself.

Together, morality and schooling (as well as many other social institutions) affect the way we think that organizing must be done. They impact and create the image of activism that restricts other ways of thinking and doing.

What are the problems with the model of activism?

– It puts you in a box and closes off all kinds of other potential ways of doing things.

– It becomes the only legitimate way to engage, so it becomes condescending toward new organizers who do not fit into the activists’ ideals and protocols.

– It has made toxic in-groups and out-groups, each with their own specialized languages and habits.

– It is dismissive towards non-activists and discourages autonomy.

– Its ways of doing things become very cookie-cutter and performative, with preset ideas of how to act properly at all times (as opposed to what may be needed in a particular moment or setting).

How can we move beyond the model of activism?

Ultimately, the activist mentality is full of tendencies that seek to fix, govern, discipline, and control other people. Activist practices are based on suspicion and distrust towards the capabilities of others, constantly pitting people and groups in competition with each other. Activism prevents us from thinking about our liberation in deeper ways; it entrenches us in only one way of doing things as opposed to living dynamically.

Instead of trying to control others, we should learn to remain curious and open to newness. Instead of dismissing our community members, we should embrace and work across our differences and open the possibilities of invention, experimentation, and creativity. Instead of creating a cliquey and unwelcoming social scene, we should find ways to build trust and community because liberation will always be a collective effort.

A few suggestions for organizing instead of using the activist model:

  1. Abolish that “activist” mentality. We should be centering people and communities first, not activist cliques and their desires to control others.
  2. Push for a proliferation of different kinds of activity, and not conform into just one type of activism. (Again, we are critiquing the label instead of the work.)
  3. Measure action by its local effectiveness (in terms of materially dismantling oppression), not by how it measures up to the ideals and standards of activist cliques.
  4. Proactively create warm and inviting social and community spaces so that no one feels like they are unable to contribute to the struggles for our freedom.

In conclusion… Activism must be abolished.

An F.A.Q. on Local Protest for IE Folks

This post addresses common concerns and responses for the growing movement for abolition in the Inland Empire. Since we are trying to promote unrest and social change in the IE, we get a lot of questions about protests and actions. We put together this post for folks who are new to protesting and commonly asked the following questions. These perspectives can give us a sense of how to orient ourselves in our growing social movements. It is still only the beginning!

Who are the organizers?

95% of the time, this does NOT matter. We all know the stories of well-known and prolific organizers whose names were publicized and became targets of white supremacist, police, and FBI harassment. Knowing names and faces of those who organize actions not only puts them at risk, but has nothing to do with the REASONS people should be turning out to actions in the first place. If you agree with the need for social change, you don’t need to know who the organizers are because you are showing up for the what you believe in and not showing up for some social media celebrity with clout. In the almost non-existent cases where the protests may be organized by cops or sus people, still show up. Be cognizant of your surrounds and simply stay on the outskirts of the demonstration or in the back of the march if you are wary of who is there or who organized it.

Will it be peaceful?

This question also misses the point of actions and demonstrations, mostly due to the fact that this is impossible to guarantee. The only people who guarantee this are the police themselves which, in this case, are the very institution that people are protesting against. All other people who attempt to guarantee peace at actions are known as “peace police” because they replicate the actions of police themselves. They tend to be annoying people with vests and megaphones and should be ignored. Most importantly, the only way to guarantee your safety is for you and the homies you’re with to have each other’s backs because only we keep us safe. If you disagree with the abolitionist actions of property destruction, simply move out the way, but don’t act like the same police that you claim to protest – DON’T SNITCH.

Is this a permitted march?

This is also a question that misses the point: we roll out to the streets with the intention of shutting down this white supremacist system and all means are needed to accomplish that. Sometimes this means that actions transform and change moods, and actions are reflections of that. If the protest has the appearance of illegality – such as if people march without permits or begin to walk on the streets instead of sidewalks – these are only superficial appearances. Police act in illegal ways all the time and even following all of the “rules” at protests does not guarantee that the police won’t turn violent. The safety of those around you depends on your own boundaries, limits, preparation, and flexibility to respond to changing situations. Freedom is always risky and only your homies will ever have your back, not protest “leaders” or cops. The protest is ultimately about getting in touch with our own autonomy.

I don’t like how others are doing it, can I just organize one myself?

Yes! The more actions the better. There is a role for everybody in our movements. Accessibility is key to freeing our communities and so, invention is also needed to figure out ways to fully involve everyone. The more people who organize projects and actions, the more people who will be pulled into the inspiring work of liberation and abolition. It is within everyone’s autonomy to take action for themselves and their loved ones, and you don’t need to be a celebrity or experienced activist to do so. The point is to begin anywhere with those around you; all we need to free ourselves is already in our midst.

Further Reading:

“Revolutionary Solidarity: A Critical Reader for Accomplices”

“Who Is Oakland: Anti-Oppression Activism, the Politics of Safety, and State Co-optation”

“Anarchism and the Crisis of Representation” by Jesse Cohn