Anti-Oppression Glossary (non comprehensive) by Darren Parker
I have been asked many times to provide real world examples of oppression in order to take it out of the realm of just the philosophical so people can make changes in their day to day behavior. This is part of a longer text I am working on in an effort to do this.
The format is: The definition as it relates to anti oppression, the anecdotal psychological motivation for the concept, and then how is plays out in the real world.
This is not to say that the use of certain concept herein is wholly bad but to elucidate how they are used to maintain existing systems of oppression. For example, consensus decision making is not “Bad” but can be used to exclude those that prefer Democracy or who are shy about speaking up in group settings.
I hope this clarifies…
Peace and Namaste, Darren Parker (all rights reserved)
Activist-speak: using language designed to prove ones intellect and awareness of the issues in order to impress other activists, as opposed to fostering justice for the oppressed. (this is not to preclude the use of these terms but only to be critical of the reasons for which they are often used….to impress other activists at the cost of alienating the less educated.)
Often takes the form of: Emphasizing how a given author would describe a conflict as opposed to stating it in ones own words. For example, the workers becomes “The Proletariat” and a better society becomes “The Beloved Community.”
This also includes conventions activists use to maintain group dynamics but are also often indicative of a certain education level and class background: Panel becomes Plenary Session and Frequent use of the terms: Military, Prison, Pharmaceutical etc….Industrial Complexes etc
Dominant Groupthink: a paradigm which is based around the mores, standards etc of the dominant group as opposed to the oppressed…often in spite of new community or geographical circumstances. (See racial rationalizing)
Many times a result of low self confidence or low confidence in ones critical thinking ability leading to “the self” being subsumed by the group identity.
Often takes the form of: Activists surrounding themselves with people of similar racist, sexist, heterosexist etc backgrounds even while benefiting from the psychological rewards of living “in solidarity with” those in a subordinate group. Often “the poor” in a neighborhood of color.
Group discernment: Believing that decisions brainstormed in a homogeneous dominant group are representative of anything larger than that group.
Doctrine-ism: circumstances in which a group follows a set of philosophical beliefs or principles said to be legitimized by an institution or group (see Dominant Groupthink). Often at the expense of people in a subordinate group or held in spite of conflict with superior real world experience. Acceptance of this doctrine is often a requirement of participation and serves as a way to maintain boundary control.
Many times used to give legitimacy to an argument that is weak (and therefore needing artificial support) or when the speaker hasn’t performed the requisite critical thinking to be confident in his or her own conclusions.
Often takes the form of: Using the Bible to justify the continued oppression of LGBTQ persons by saying “God says its wrong.”
Using religion to say that “abortion is wrong in the eyes of god” as opposed to stating that YOU individually think its wrong.
The inability to answer questions about one's motivations without referring to the doctrine in question or a leader more well versed in its nuances.
White activists justifying supremacist beliefs given by a philosophy about why the poor and people of color don't do “Direct” Action. Normally held in spite of little or no contact with analogous radicals of color and stated as because of fear or “Not being ready.”
[Side note: This is miraculously held in spite of the millions in prison as a result of resisting the system and the millions that have been murdered by white people over the centuries in Native (10-40 million in 400 yrs of colonial expansion), African (10-20 Million During the Middle Passage and Slavery in the Americas) and Latino (1-2 Million in the annexation of one third of Mexico, Cuba and the Philippines) communities. All Numbers are estimates although conservative and well researched ones and include the time since the founding of the US to the present.
Educational Supremacy: Confusing Education with Intellect-many people “talk down” to those in a lower economic class, or different racial group because of their stereotypes about how people speak and sound as well as what they have been taught this implies about how “intelligent” one is. (see Activist Speak)
Often takes the form of: saying “I read somewhere…” (to remind one who the expert is) or “Did you know…a,b,c or d?” (which is indicative of the assumption that one does NOT already know and that it is imperative that one DOES to be considered legitimate) Stating “You speak so well.” (indicative of the assumption one has about someone is supposed to speak)
False Solidarity: Stating that acts or experiences of members of a dominant group are in solidarity with those in a subordinate group without the approval or consent of the oppressed. Designed to foster a positive self image of dominant group members regardless of how they are viewed by the oppressed. (see Justice Pride and Doctrinism)
Often takes the form of: Comparing Simplicity to Poverty; Comparing prosecution for acts of Direct Action to the unwilling incarceration of millions of the poor or their murder and death; Co-opting leaders of members of a subordinate group to justify ones actions. For example using MLK Jr. to justify continued oppression. (used against affirmative action by the Right…or for self aggrandizing Direct Action by the Left)
Fear/Guilt: The emotional response of those members of a dominant group in response to the criticisms of those in a subordinate group or using dominant power to avoid the possibility of criticism. (especially in relation to the white/ black dynamic)
The first reaction is fear…not necessarily of the messenger but of losing ones positive self image (see Pride and Racial Rationalizing). The second reaction is the psychological angst felt by many activists after being criticized.
Often takes the form of: Oh my god I'm SOOO sorry…BUT …I'm “trying” so give me some slack…something must be wrong with YOU for continuing to criticize (or for more accurately for getting in the way of their positive self image)
Often causes the avoidance of situations and relationships where one could encounter this dynamic, limiting the effect of efforts for justice.
Gate-keeping: Many activists only want members of a subordinate group around that fit criteria determined by the dominant group…normally those that “push” less…have less group or geographic loyalty …or are lesser educated…and therefore not as threatening to dominant group members or ideals.
Often takes the form of: Activists inviting those they “heard of” as opposed to asking constituencies to send representatives which they respect. Bringing a few “Poor” or “uneducated” who are seen as non threatening to dominant group power or goals. (see Tokenizing). Requiring rigid acceptance of a doctrine as a requirement for participation.
Justice Pride: comparing oneself to those that are “worse” in order to feel superior as opposed to being measured against an objective standard of justice or by the standard of the oppressed groups. This pertains in particular those activists acting on behalf of a constituency which they are not themselves a part of.
[Anecdote: Often motivated by the psychological damage of being the outsider during ones youth resulting in adult overcompensation by demanding to being seen as “good” as necessary to maintaining positive self esteem. (as evidenced anecdotally by the large number of eldest siblings and the socially alienated in many activist groups)]
Often takes the form of: An overemphasis on easy targets such as George W. Bush, the small bigoted town where one was raised, or less “advanced” activists, as opposed to having the focus on the internal anti oppression work which affects those one actually encounters in life. (Not looking in the mirror…. First)
Deliberately surrounding ones self with the oppressed, poor, or less educated in order to foster this sense of superiority and of being needed in order to assuage ones psychological insecurities and aid in comparisons to those that are “worse.”
Placing “desire” or “effort” above effect and change in reference to those in subordinate groups. The false belief that if one is “different” than those you deem “worse” that one should be protected from criticism. (see Racial {class, gender, etc} Rationalizing)
Many times: Activists can accept a little criticism as this is beneficial to their own self image of being willing to “hear” the oppressed thereby providing its own psychological rewards. However, often “hearing” does not go far enough for the group in question and these activists then demand to be praised for not being AS oppressive as someone else.
“I know I’m not perfect but let's focus on The Right!”
“I'm not sexist …you should see my father!”
Magnet Effect: The attraction (fetishizing)/ repulsion (demonizing) response of members of a dominant group towards those in a subordinate group.
Often takes the form of people adopting standards of the subordinate group or fetchizing leaders of subordinate groups while not changing oppressive behaviors or accepting participation of members of such groups.
College students fetishizing Mumia (or Che Guevara) but not being able to work effectively with other Black or Latino people.
Activists quoting MLK while not examining their continuing white supremacy (or the even more common, using his speeches out of context to justify their supremacy).
Men claiming support for gender equality while not respecting the power of women in decision making.
Suburban whites emulating black Hip Hop artists but being afraid of actually interacting with black people.
White activists claiming to adopt Gandhian non-violence while not challenging their internalized (White/ Euro) supremacy which he was resisting in the form of the British.
Co-opting Jesus of Nazareth’s message while continuing his De-Jewing and the aligning of him with the European oppressors he was resisting in the form of the Romans.
Oppression Olympics: using ones experience as a member a subordinate group to maintain supremacy along another praxis of oppression in which one is a member of the dominant group. (see False Solidarity and Justice Pride)
Often takes the form of: White women using their oppression at the hands of white men to legitimize their continued oppression of people of color or implying solidarity with such struggles. (see False Solidarity); Men of color using their position as a member of a subordinate group to maintain gender supremacy over women of color or implying solidarity with such struggles.
Paradigm Control: delegitimizing the world views of those in opposition or which prevail in a subordinate group. Using ones world view to justify a critique.
Often takes the form of “I know that a, b, c, ….but…” “I know that I had money growing up but materialism is bad…people should be satisfied with less.” “I know that Men and women communicate differently, but if they want to be heard they should be more assertive.”
“I know that not everyone has the same chances in life, but my grandfather pulled himself up by his bootstraps.” “I know that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves but he’s one of the Founding Fathers.” “ I'm not Homophobic but cant they keep it in the closet?!”
Purse String Control: using greater access to monetary resources to limit participation to acceptable participants in a campaign or event. (See Gate keeping.) Used to maintain Supremacy.
Often takes the form of: Charging too much (or not making adequate allowance for class background) for attendance at an event or conference… Consistently organizing events in areas in-accessible to those on public transportation. Demanding time commitments that are unreasonable for those without a certain level of financial independence….etc”
Internalized White Supremacy: subconscious belief in the superiority of whiteness…OR an over emphasis on the things which whiteness normally gives access to in our society (superior education in the forms and methods of the dominant system, more formal speech, assumptions about values consistent with the dominant paradigm)
Racial Rationalizing (as well as Gender, Class etc): using ones positive self image to delegitimize criticisms of others. Being unable to take, or reasonably consider, criticisms because they interfere with ones positive self image. (See Justice Pride)
Often takes the form of the fear/guilt dynamic…initial shame and guilt followed by inevitable justification and then anger directed toward the messenger.
Also includes the period of self questioning in organizing situations where a variable is considered against its monetary or logistical impact and then justified as consistent with a positive image. For example: “Is it worth it (monetarily or logistically) to ensure adequate representation of the oppressed? Not really…but WE TRIED! We are still good!”
Radicalism: The pursuit of a better self image (as opposed to fostering more justice) by pursuing supremacy over activists that are younger, less well read, or activists that use other methods. (aided by Educational Supremacy, Doctrinism, and Activist Speak). A belief that if one can simply read more and quote more intelligent authors then you are a superior activist. The act of defining ones self a superior activist itself at all as opposed to being a more just person or fostering a better society.
Often motivated by a sense of inferiority and an innate desire to BE good (and superior) often at the expense of DOING good.
Many times takes the form of: Using tactics such as Direct Action when it is in actuality for the purpose of group boundary control or proving that one is better than activists that use other methods regardless of the effectiveness of other methods. The belief that resistance takes a few given forms deemed to be “radical.”
Often leads to activists searching for those that share similar methods and the failure to link with others that work for magazines, community centers, schools, record companies, corporations etc…. who also may share similar political perspectives in the pursuit of justice.
“Where are all the black activists doing CD like us!” (which ignores its limited effect in most circumstances and the fact that if black people being imprisoned caused societal outrage they wouldn’t be able to have 2 million black people in prison or on probation already.)
“I live on 10 dollars a week.” (which ignores the privilege of having others provide the infrastructure and resources necessary to do this)
“We marched to protest the war in Iraq…where were you?!” (which ignores that resistance to the war in Iraq in communities of color was already between 75 and 90 percent making such visible displays unnecessary and that seeing large numbers of people of color in the streets was not likely to sway any whites to the cause)
Supremacy: defines a power dynamic-Refers to the state of being supreme (or in pursuit of such) in reference to a subjugated group or individual. Includes the assumptions which under- gird ones moral and ethical systems which foster this unbalanced power dynamic in groups and in individual behavior.. As members of a capitalist, racist, sexist, homophobic society, such assumptions are often (but not always) unconscious. Often a result of unchallenged childhood assumptions, the pursuit of greater power or comfort in the status quo of injustice.
Often takes the form of: The gamut of social justice issues…racism, white supremacy, sexism, heterosexism, etc etc etc
Systems Control: Confusing the dominant way with the “correct” way- failing to challenge the exclusionary way our society lifts up methods used by the dominant white, heterosexual, male society at the expense of those used in subordinate groups. Many times used to maintain the status quo of supremacy while providing the psychological benefits of Justice Pride.
Often takes the form of: not asking how others wish to participate as opposed to assuming that the way things “have always been done” is correct. (see Tokenizing)
Following a particular organizing strategy because its “the right way” regardless of whether it actually is more just or representative of anyone other than the dominant group.
Anarchists (and others) assuming consensus is egalitarian while ignoring peoples personal power and other power dynamics which effect decision-making ie gender, racial, educational, sexual biases.
Demanding equality in situations where it does not exist in reality. That is men demanding to march in “Take Back the Night”… White people demanding to been seen as equals in presenting anti racism trainings…. Middle classed activists demanding that their “simplicity” be seen as analogous to the psychological damage of poverty.
Tokenizing: not to be confused with attention to representation- Tokenizing is the use of a characteristic of a subordinate group to justify underlying power imbalances and assuage the fear/ guilt of the dominant group…making the inclusion about the best interest of the dominant group as opposed to the interests of the oppressed.
Often takes the form of: “Bean counting” after the important decisions have been made… or placing members of a subordinate group in a leadership position so it LOOKS like its representative of the oppressed. Choosing members of the subordinate group that will not question dominant group interests…(often accompanied by eliminating or demonizing those that do question dominant group interests)
The format is: The definition as it relates to anti oppression, the anecdotal psychological motivation for the concept, and then how is plays out in the real world.
This is not to say that the use of certain concept herein is wholly bad but to elucidate how they are used to maintain existing systems of oppression. For example, consensus decision making is not “Bad” but can be used to exclude those that prefer Democracy or who are shy about speaking up in group settings.
I hope this clarifies…
Peace and Namaste, Darren Parker (all rights reserved)
Activist-speak: using language designed to prove ones intellect and awareness of the issues in order to impress other activists, as opposed to fostering justice for the oppressed. (this is not to preclude the use of these terms but only to be critical of the reasons for which they are often used….to impress other activists at the cost of alienating the less educated.)
Often takes the form of: Emphasizing how a given author would describe a conflict as opposed to stating it in ones own words. For example, the workers becomes “The Proletariat” and a better society becomes “The Beloved Community.”
This also includes conventions activists use to maintain group dynamics but are also often indicative of a certain education level and class background: Panel becomes Plenary Session and Frequent use of the terms: Military, Prison, Pharmaceutical etc….Industrial Complexes etc
Dominant Groupthink: a paradigm which is based around the mores, standards etc of the dominant group as opposed to the oppressed…often in spite of new community or geographical circumstances. (See racial rationalizing)
Many times a result of low self confidence or low confidence in ones critical thinking ability leading to “the self” being subsumed by the group identity.
Often takes the form of: Activists surrounding themselves with people of similar racist, sexist, heterosexist etc backgrounds even while benefiting from the psychological rewards of living “in solidarity with” those in a subordinate group. Often “the poor” in a neighborhood of color.
Group discernment: Believing that decisions brainstormed in a homogeneous dominant group are representative of anything larger than that group.
Doctrine-ism: circumstances in which a group follows a set of philosophical beliefs or principles said to be legitimized by an institution or group (see Dominant Groupthink). Often at the expense of people in a subordinate group or held in spite of conflict with superior real world experience. Acceptance of this doctrine is often a requirement of participation and serves as a way to maintain boundary control.
Many times used to give legitimacy to an argument that is weak (and therefore needing artificial support) or when the speaker hasn’t performed the requisite critical thinking to be confident in his or her own conclusions.
Often takes the form of: Using the Bible to justify the continued oppression of LGBTQ persons by saying “God says its wrong.”
Using religion to say that “abortion is wrong in the eyes of god” as opposed to stating that YOU individually think its wrong.
The inability to answer questions about one's motivations without referring to the doctrine in question or a leader more well versed in its nuances.
White activists justifying supremacist beliefs given by a philosophy about why the poor and people of color don't do “Direct” Action. Normally held in spite of little or no contact with analogous radicals of color and stated as because of fear or “Not being ready.”
[Side note: This is miraculously held in spite of the millions in prison as a result of resisting the system and the millions that have been murdered by white people over the centuries in Native (10-40 million in 400 yrs of colonial expansion), African (10-20 Million During the Middle Passage and Slavery in the Americas) and Latino (1-2 Million in the annexation of one third of Mexico, Cuba and the Philippines) communities. All Numbers are estimates although conservative and well researched ones and include the time since the founding of the US to the present.
Educational Supremacy: Confusing Education with Intellect-many people “talk down” to those in a lower economic class, or different racial group because of their stereotypes about how people speak and sound as well as what they have been taught this implies about how “intelligent” one is. (see Activist Speak)
Often takes the form of: saying “I read somewhere…” (to remind one who the expert is) or “Did you know…a,b,c or d?” (which is indicative of the assumption that one does NOT already know and that it is imperative that one DOES to be considered legitimate) Stating “You speak so well.” (indicative of the assumption one has about someone is supposed to speak)
False Solidarity: Stating that acts or experiences of members of a dominant group are in solidarity with those in a subordinate group without the approval or consent of the oppressed. Designed to foster a positive self image of dominant group members regardless of how they are viewed by the oppressed. (see Justice Pride and Doctrinism)
Often takes the form of: Comparing Simplicity to Poverty; Comparing prosecution for acts of Direct Action to the unwilling incarceration of millions of the poor or their murder and death; Co-opting leaders of members of a subordinate group to justify ones actions. For example using MLK Jr. to justify continued oppression. (used against affirmative action by the Right…or for self aggrandizing Direct Action by the Left)
Fear/Guilt: The emotional response of those members of a dominant group in response to the criticisms of those in a subordinate group or using dominant power to avoid the possibility of criticism. (especially in relation to the white/ black dynamic)
The first reaction is fear…not necessarily of the messenger but of losing ones positive self image (see Pride and Racial Rationalizing). The second reaction is the psychological angst felt by many activists after being criticized.
Often takes the form of: Oh my god I'm SOOO sorry…BUT …I'm “trying” so give me some slack…something must be wrong with YOU for continuing to criticize (or for more accurately for getting in the way of their positive self image)
Often causes the avoidance of situations and relationships where one could encounter this dynamic, limiting the effect of efforts for justice.
Gate-keeping: Many activists only want members of a subordinate group around that fit criteria determined by the dominant group…normally those that “push” less…have less group or geographic loyalty …or are lesser educated…and therefore not as threatening to dominant group members or ideals.
Often takes the form of: Activists inviting those they “heard of” as opposed to asking constituencies to send representatives which they respect. Bringing a few “Poor” or “uneducated” who are seen as non threatening to dominant group power or goals. (see Tokenizing). Requiring rigid acceptance of a doctrine as a requirement for participation.
Justice Pride: comparing oneself to those that are “worse” in order to feel superior as opposed to being measured against an objective standard of justice or by the standard of the oppressed groups. This pertains in particular those activists acting on behalf of a constituency which they are not themselves a part of.
[Anecdote: Often motivated by the psychological damage of being the outsider during ones youth resulting in adult overcompensation by demanding to being seen as “good” as necessary to maintaining positive self esteem. (as evidenced anecdotally by the large number of eldest siblings and the socially alienated in many activist groups)]
Often takes the form of: An overemphasis on easy targets such as George W. Bush, the small bigoted town where one was raised, or less “advanced” activists, as opposed to having the focus on the internal anti oppression work which affects those one actually encounters in life. (Not looking in the mirror…. First)
Deliberately surrounding ones self with the oppressed, poor, or less educated in order to foster this sense of superiority and of being needed in order to assuage ones psychological insecurities and aid in comparisons to those that are “worse.”
Placing “desire” or “effort” above effect and change in reference to those in subordinate groups. The false belief that if one is “different” than those you deem “worse” that one should be protected from criticism. (see Racial {class, gender, etc} Rationalizing)
Many times: Activists can accept a little criticism as this is beneficial to their own self image of being willing to “hear” the oppressed thereby providing its own psychological rewards. However, often “hearing” does not go far enough for the group in question and these activists then demand to be praised for not being AS oppressive as someone else.
“I know I’m not perfect but let's focus on The Right!”
“I'm not sexist …you should see my father!”
Magnet Effect: The attraction (fetishizing)/ repulsion (demonizing) response of members of a dominant group towards those in a subordinate group.
Often takes the form of people adopting standards of the subordinate group or fetchizing leaders of subordinate groups while not changing oppressive behaviors or accepting participation of members of such groups.
College students fetishizing Mumia (or Che Guevara) but not being able to work effectively with other Black or Latino people.
Activists quoting MLK while not examining their continuing white supremacy (or the even more common, using his speeches out of context to justify their supremacy).
Men claiming support for gender equality while not respecting the power of women in decision making.
Suburban whites emulating black Hip Hop artists but being afraid of actually interacting with black people.
White activists claiming to adopt Gandhian non-violence while not challenging their internalized (White/ Euro) supremacy which he was resisting in the form of the British.
Co-opting Jesus of Nazareth’s message while continuing his De-Jewing and the aligning of him with the European oppressors he was resisting in the form of the Romans.
Oppression Olympics: using ones experience as a member a subordinate group to maintain supremacy along another praxis of oppression in which one is a member of the dominant group. (see False Solidarity and Justice Pride)
Often takes the form of: White women using their oppression at the hands of white men to legitimize their continued oppression of people of color or implying solidarity with such struggles. (see False Solidarity); Men of color using their position as a member of a subordinate group to maintain gender supremacy over women of color or implying solidarity with such struggles.
Paradigm Control: delegitimizing the world views of those in opposition or which prevail in a subordinate group. Using ones world view to justify a critique.
Often takes the form of “I know that a, b, c, ….but…” “I know that I had money growing up but materialism is bad…people should be satisfied with less.” “I know that Men and women communicate differently, but if they want to be heard they should be more assertive.”
“I know that not everyone has the same chances in life, but my grandfather pulled himself up by his bootstraps.” “I know that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves but he’s one of the Founding Fathers.” “ I'm not Homophobic but cant they keep it in the closet?!”
Purse String Control: using greater access to monetary resources to limit participation to acceptable participants in a campaign or event. (See Gate keeping.) Used to maintain Supremacy.
Often takes the form of: Charging too much (or not making adequate allowance for class background) for attendance at an event or conference… Consistently organizing events in areas in-accessible to those on public transportation. Demanding time commitments that are unreasonable for those without a certain level of financial independence….etc”
Internalized White Supremacy: subconscious belief in the superiority of whiteness…OR an over emphasis on the things which whiteness normally gives access to in our society (superior education in the forms and methods of the dominant system, more formal speech, assumptions about values consistent with the dominant paradigm)
Racial Rationalizing (as well as Gender, Class etc): using ones positive self image to delegitimize criticisms of others. Being unable to take, or reasonably consider, criticisms because they interfere with ones positive self image. (See Justice Pride)
Often takes the form of the fear/guilt dynamic…initial shame and guilt followed by inevitable justification and then anger directed toward the messenger.
Also includes the period of self questioning in organizing situations where a variable is considered against its monetary or logistical impact and then justified as consistent with a positive image. For example: “Is it worth it (monetarily or logistically) to ensure adequate representation of the oppressed? Not really…but WE TRIED! We are still good!”
Radicalism: The pursuit of a better self image (as opposed to fostering more justice) by pursuing supremacy over activists that are younger, less well read, or activists that use other methods. (aided by Educational Supremacy, Doctrinism, and Activist Speak). A belief that if one can simply read more and quote more intelligent authors then you are a superior activist. The act of defining ones self a superior activist itself at all as opposed to being a more just person or fostering a better society.
Often motivated by a sense of inferiority and an innate desire to BE good (and superior) often at the expense of DOING good.
Many times takes the form of: Using tactics such as Direct Action when it is in actuality for the purpose of group boundary control or proving that one is better than activists that use other methods regardless of the effectiveness of other methods. The belief that resistance takes a few given forms deemed to be “radical.”
Often leads to activists searching for those that share similar methods and the failure to link with others that work for magazines, community centers, schools, record companies, corporations etc…. who also may share similar political perspectives in the pursuit of justice.
“Where are all the black activists doing CD like us!” (which ignores its limited effect in most circumstances and the fact that if black people being imprisoned caused societal outrage they wouldn’t be able to have 2 million black people in prison or on probation already.)
“I live on 10 dollars a week.” (which ignores the privilege of having others provide the infrastructure and resources necessary to do this)
“We marched to protest the war in Iraq…where were you?!” (which ignores that resistance to the war in Iraq in communities of color was already between 75 and 90 percent making such visible displays unnecessary and that seeing large numbers of people of color in the streets was not likely to sway any whites to the cause)
Supremacy: defines a power dynamic-Refers to the state of being supreme (or in pursuit of such) in reference to a subjugated group or individual. Includes the assumptions which under- gird ones moral and ethical systems which foster this unbalanced power dynamic in groups and in individual behavior.. As members of a capitalist, racist, sexist, homophobic society, such assumptions are often (but not always) unconscious. Often a result of unchallenged childhood assumptions, the pursuit of greater power or comfort in the status quo of injustice.
Often takes the form of: The gamut of social justice issues…racism, white supremacy, sexism, heterosexism, etc etc etc
Systems Control: Confusing the dominant way with the “correct” way- failing to challenge the exclusionary way our society lifts up methods used by the dominant white, heterosexual, male society at the expense of those used in subordinate groups. Many times used to maintain the status quo of supremacy while providing the psychological benefits of Justice Pride.
Often takes the form of: not asking how others wish to participate as opposed to assuming that the way things “have always been done” is correct. (see Tokenizing)
Following a particular organizing strategy because its “the right way” regardless of whether it actually is more just or representative of anyone other than the dominant group.
Anarchists (and others) assuming consensus is egalitarian while ignoring peoples personal power and other power dynamics which effect decision-making ie gender, racial, educational, sexual biases.
Demanding equality in situations where it does not exist in reality. That is men demanding to march in “Take Back the Night”… White people demanding to been seen as equals in presenting anti racism trainings…. Middle classed activists demanding that their “simplicity” be seen as analogous to the psychological damage of poverty.
Tokenizing: not to be confused with attention to representation- Tokenizing is the use of a characteristic of a subordinate group to justify underlying power imbalances and assuage the fear/ guilt of the dominant group…making the inclusion about the best interest of the dominant group as opposed to the interests of the oppressed.
Often takes the form of: “Bean counting” after the important decisions have been made… or placing members of a subordinate group in a leadership position so it LOOKS like its representative of the oppressed. Choosing members of the subordinate group that will not question dominant group interests…(often accompanied by eliminating or demonizing those that do question dominant group interests)
posted by Rich Gardner | 12:09 PM
<< Home