-
Two of my favorite people from history.
-
My dad gets upset because they don't really
teach science anymore in the public schools,
-
and this is mostly because the Right Wing
can't bear the thought of evolution.
-
My mom gets sad 'cause they don't
really teach history anymore
-
and my sister fairly weeps because you don't
get art anymore in the school system.
-
But me, I'm like, “they just don't teach
revolution anymore in those public schools.”
-
[audience laughs] Am I right?
Right?
-
So this is like the basic political education that really,
we all should have gotten, and really most of us didn't.
-
And I start here with liberals and radicals
because I think this is the main division.
-
I think this is important because a lot of times in our
friendships and our activist networks and even in our groups,
-
and across broader movements, there are these
tensions that can be really painful and profound
-
and a lot of it really comes down to the
difference between liberals and radicals.
-
I, in the end, don't care which
side of this you decide to land on
-
you got to figure out which, you know, which world
view actually describes the world as you know it
-
(and that's up to you really).
-
But it can really help to understand where these different perspectives are
coming from because then when you have these conflicts suddenly you go,
-
“right, that's liberal and I'm radical, and that's why we're never going to
meet in the middle” because these are profound differences, politically.
-
Doesn't mean we can't work together;
lots of coalitions need to happen.
-
I mean, I am not trying to demonize anybody here but these ARE
different positions that people can take across the spectrum.
-
I would say the main division between
liberals and radicals is individualism.
-
Liberals believe that society is made up of individuals.
That's the basic social unit.
-
In fact individualism is so sacrosanct that in this view, to be identified
as a member of a group is seen as an affront; that's the insult.
-
Totally different for radicals over
on the other side of the chart.
-
Society is not made up of individual
people, it's made up of groups of people.
-
In Marx's original version this was class, it was economic class. This is the debt
that all radicals owe Karl Marx. It doesn't matter if you are a Marxist or not,
-
HE figured this out. It's groups of people and some groups
have power over other groups. That's what society is made of.
-
In the radicals' understanding being a member of a group is not an insult.
In fact it's the first primary step you have to take
-
coming to a radical consciousness and then ultimately having effective
political action, you have to identify as a member of that group.
-
You've got to make common cause with the people who share
your condition. That's how political change happens.
-
This is both an active and a critical
embrace of that group identity
-
We radicals get accused all the time of creating this kind
of “victim identity”, but that's not what's going on.
-
We are more than what they've done
to us, and we do have agency.
-
But we do have to recognize that there is power
in the world and we're on the receiving end.
-
The other big division is between the nature of social reality.
Liberalism is what's called “idealist”.
-
Social reality, for them, is made up of
attitudes, of ideas; it's a mental event.
-
And therefore social change happens through education.
Through changing people's minds.
-
Materialism, in contrast, over on the radical side: society is organized by
concrete systems of power, not by thoughts and ideas. By material institutions.
-
And the solution to oppression is to
take those systems apart brick by brick.
-
The liberals will say, “we have to educate, educate, educate”,
and the radicals will say, “actually we have to stop them”.
-
Political movements need education, this
is an educational event, here we are.
-
And you need active proselytizing, the oppressed need mechanisms
to understand political oppression, consciousness raising.
-
This is all really profoundly important.
-
But for radicals alone that does not change social reality. Because
the world is not an internal state. It's not a mental state.
-
The point of education is to build the movement that can take down
those oppressive structures and bring about some kind of justice.
-
If you remove power from the equation
oppression looks either natural or voluntary.
-
If you're not going to see that people are formed by these social
conditions how else are you going to explain subordination?
-
Well either those people aren't quite human, so they're
naturally different than us -- that's why they're subordinate,
-
or they're somehow volunteering to be subordinate.
Those are the options that you're left with.
-
For instance race and gender are seen as biological. These are supposed
to be physically real. Well they're not, they're politically real.
-
It's brutal, vicious subordination that creates those things. But it's
ideology, and it is the ideology of the powerful that says this is biological.
-
They make that claim that this is biological because how are you going
to fight God or Nature or 4 million years of evolution? Well you're not.
-
There are physical differences between people who are from northern Europe and people
who live at the equator, just like there are differences between males and females
-
but those differences only matter because power needs them to. It is power
that creates the ideology and it's a corrupt and brutal arrangement of power.
-
These are unjust systems that we are going to have to dismantle,
and these are social categories we are going to have to destroy.
-
Just like naturalism operates in the
service of power, so does volunteerism.
-
If you are not going to go the biological route,
all you are left with is volunteerism as a concept.
-
This is the thing that liberals do not understand. With power removed from the equation,
if it looks voluntary you are going to erase the fact that it's social subordination.
-
So here is Florynce Kennedy, “without
the consent of the oppressed.”
-
90% of any oppression is consensual. That's what it does. It does
not mean it's our fault, it does not mean we are responsible,
-
it doesn't mean it will somehow
crumble if we withdraw our consent.
-
All it means is that the powerful—the capitalists, the white supremacists, the
masculinists, whoever—they can't stand over vast numbers of people 24/7 with guns.
-
Luckily, for them, depressingly for
the rest of us, they don't have to.