The Prerequisites of Activism: What It Really Takes to Create Change | Shahid Bolsen

You know, of all the people in the world, the poor and the oppressed can least afford to be emotional or ideological, but they tend to be the most emotional and the most ideological. And I think this is probably symptomatic of feeling powerless, in my opinion. And I think at least partially this feeling of powerlessness stems from ignorance about the systems of power that oppress them. They don't understand how the system works. It's opaque, it's confusing, you know, it's complicated, and seemingly impossible to actually dissect or dismantle.

So people fall into this simplistic emotional responses, ideological responses. But the truth is that of all the people in the world, the poor and the oppressed most need objectivity. They most need critical thinking, strategic thinking, realism, and so on. So, for example, everyone likes to say that they're ready to die, you know, for this or that cause. You know?

The price of freedom is death and so on. All of these very dramatic statements. I'm willing to sacrifice my life for freedom, sacrifice my life for justice or what have you, for Palestine, whatever the case may be. Okay. Great.

Fantastic. You're a brave man. I got it. Well, first of all, your willingness to die is completely matched with the power structure's willingness to kill you. So you're in agreement with power.

You're you're in agreement with the power structure about that. Your life can be snuffed out. You feel that way and they feel that way. But secondly, I'm not sure that your death is actually the missing ingredient for the collective liberation of the oppressed. You know?

I don't think that you being alive is the thing that has been holding us back from success all this time. And that therefore, you know, getting you out of the picture is gonna solve our problems. You getting killed by the power structure isn't the missing piece of the puzzle. I don't really need to know that you're willing to die. What we need to know is whether or not your commitment is great enough, actually, for you to be willing to do long term work, tedious, frustrating, exasperating, disappointing, anticlimactic, boring work over the course of decades to achieve actual incremental gradual progress because that's what we really need.

And very, very few people are willing to do that. That's the reality. So, okay, you're willing to die, you know, in a big dramatic fashion, but I'm afraid that doesn't really help us. I mean, imagine. Imagine it like we're talking about a business endeavor.

You know? You're you're interviewing potential new hires and someone tells you that they're ready to die for the company. Okay. How is that useful? What am I supposed to do with that?

See, I'm not really trying to be funny, but I think, you're misunderstanding the role that it plays in a movement to be willing to die for that movement. It's supposed to mean that you're willing to do the hard day to day work of organizing, you know, researching, educating, persisting in support of your goals. Even if as a result of that work, maybe you get taken out, which ideally you won't be taken out. I mean, more useful than saying that you're willing to die for this or that cause is to say that you're willing to volunteer hours of your time. Are you willing to spend from your own money in support of a cause?

Are you willing to be, publicly maligned and slandered and to have people hate you and to tell lies about you? Are you willing to be uncomfortable? Are you willing to repeat the same things, the same messages over and over and over again until your brain goes numb? Are you willing to be completely ignored? And like I said, are you willing to put in months, if not years, years upon years of work without seeing any massive meaningful changes?

Are you willing to take one step forward and be pushed 50 steps back? Because these are all the things that are gonna make you much more valuable to any movement than your supposed willingness to take a bullet. The truth is that that bullet probably will never come because the only people who get those bullets are actually the ones who are willing to do all of these other things that I mentioned, who and and who are actually doing them. So I mean, when you declare your willingness to die, it makes me wonder if you should just get help because you might actually just be suicidal. I mean, look, sure.

Okay. Maybe working against systems of injustice might get you killed at some point. Maybe. But this is understood going in. It doesn't need a lot of talk about it.

It's just understood. This is the minimum, not the maximum requirement. Like, we assume that you're ready for that from the outstart. But some of you talk like getting killed for your cause is the actual goal, which is messed up. There's a lot of strange notions actually that that that sort of confuse people when it comes to activism or opposition or resistance or what have you, in my opinion.

A lot of confusion about this. I don't see the point of all the melodrama. It's self aggrandizing, in my opinion, in a way. And it reflects an overall lack of realism or practicality when it comes to serious efforts. I mean, are several preliminary stages that you should actually go through before you make the decision, to get involved in any sort of activism or opposition or whatever the case may be, protest and so on.

You know? There are stages of, say, self reflection, self examination. Like, why do you feel driven to protest, to become an activist, to be in opposition? What's motivating you? You have to be honest about that.

You have to be objective about that. You have to be real about that. Is it pure emotion that's driving you? Is it guilt? Is it, reasons of related to your own self image?

Or is it just boredom? Is it avoidance of some sort of personal issues in your life? All of these things need to be questioned because they're all bad reasons, and they are very often major factors actually that, spur people to become involved in protests and, resistance movements and what have you. And then you have to honestly evaluate to what extent is this or that issue that you're concerned about, to to what extent is it any of your business? By that, mean, is it an issue over which you have some authority?

Is it an issue which you have the the capability to have an impact? Do you even fully understand the issue? Are you educated about the issue? Or are you just reacting without understanding the issue because it struck you emotionally? Is this an issue about which Allah is gonna question you?

Question whether you did anything about it or not? Because you understand that you're not gonna be questioned about any issue that's not under your authority or any issue that is beyond your capacity to do something about it. You're not gonna be questioned about that. You're not held accountable for that. See, I think that the very high level of popular of politicization is a new phenomenon in the world, and it's very western.

This idea that everyone is supposed to have a say in everything that happens everywhere. You know, historically, especially in the Muslim world and in most traditional societies, most people understood that governance was the business of the government and not the general public. But this so called democratic notion infected a lot of people with the idea that governance is actually the business of the citizenry. No matter how ignorant they may be, no matter how emotional or unqualified or uninformed they may be. They're still supposed to have a say.

And then you have people, on one side of the world thinking that they're supposed to, have a say in what happens on the other side of the world. Because everyone's supposed to have a say about everything. And it all just gets ridiculous at that point. Like, you can be concerned about what what what your government is doing on the other side of the world. Sure.

Because that's your government, you know, or what your companies are doing on the other side of the world. You can be concerned about that because those are your companies, meaning, they are from your country. They're your country's companies. But what the government of this or that country is doing with regards to their own people, that's not within your purview. That's not that's none of your business.

And, okay, even with regards to your own government or, say, your own power structure, which includes the private sector power within your country, again, you have to make this assessment. Why are you involving yourself? Should you involve yourself? Are you qualified to become involved? Are you informed enough?

And do you have the capacity to influence the situation in any way? You have to examine all of this, in my opinion, before you ever make a decision to become an activist or to become involved, you know, even when it regards your own society. And say that you determine that you that you want to involve yourself for the right reasons, you know, you've made an assessment, you are educated about the issue that you're concerned with. You are informed and so on. But your assessment also determines that you have a very limited capacity to actually change anything.

Well, then, of course, what you're supposed to do is try to build your capacity. Because if your concerns surpass your capacity, first of all, you're not gonna be asked about it by Allah and it's enough for you in that case to just oppose this or that injustice in your heart. Because realistically, you don't have the power to change it with your actions or with your speech. And secondly, if this is the case, your actions and your speech will be futile at best, even if you become active. And at worst, they'll be detrimental.

So you need to build your capacity to where you can realistically be effective in some way. Otherwise, you're not only not helping, you're probably hurting the situation. Okay. So then, when you have decided that you want to be an activist or you wanna be involved in some sort of movement for social change or whatever the case may be, well, then you have to determine precisely what course of action is gonna be useful, which means that then you have to examine and you have to analyze and you have to map out the power dynamics, the power structure in your society. Because if you've decided to be an activist, it doesn't mean that you automatically go out and protest in the street or start calling for revolution, or marching, or what have you.

You don't automatically do that. You can't just jump to that. I mean, you don't know, actually, if any of these things, if any of these, you know, items on the generic activist menu are even effective in your society. I mean, to be honest, it's questionable to what extent these tactics are actually effective in any society. But even if they are effective in some societies, in some cases, regarding some issues, it does not mean that they are universally applicable, and that they will necessarily work in your society, in this case, for this issue.

You can't just make these kinds of assumptions as irresponsible. I mean, I had someone ask me on Twitter the other day, if most protest movements in the global South are infiltrated by Western intelligence for the purpose of destabilization, so then if that's the case, what can people in those countries do when they oppose the government on this or that policy? You know. The question is, should they just abandon the whole idea of protest? Okay.

Well, first of all, you should definitely abandon the idea of protest if you have just jumped to that idea without any deliberation. You should never decide on your strategy. You should never decide on your tactics without careful analysis first. But, yes, when you see a protest movement bursting out on the streets in the global South without there being any strategic planning beforehand, it's almost already a given that this has been infiltrated, that it's an infiltrated movement, and that it will be dealt with by the authorities as such. Meaning, it will be severely cracked down upon because the authorities will assume that you're nothing but Western provocateurs trying to stir up unrest.

Look, the Western model of street protests and so on is highly dubious the extent to which these are even effective in the West, much less in global South countries, much less in Muslim countries. I mean, you can make the argument that these types of protests in America or, you know, Europe or what have you, elsewhere in the West, that these types of protests are encouraged because they just let the people burn off steam. And they make them feel like they're doing something consequential precisely to prevent them from actually doing something consequential. So, no, you should never just jump straight into organized mayhem of street protests. That's a big mistake.

You have to look at the power structure and the power dynamics of your society, your specific society, and locate and identify potential avenues for redress because they may exist already. You just have to learn what they are. Like I've said many many times, you have to identify the of your society. The people of influence, the people of power, the movers and shakers, the decision makers. And then you have to see how they can potentially be influenced, how you can potentially influence the influencers.

Or again, you can try to become from among the influencers, from among that segment of the society, that segment of the people who have influence. So I'm I'm not a fan of spontaneous, you know, spur of the moment outburst style activism. Now that doesn't mean be acquiescent, it doesn't mean be compliant, it doesn't mean never rock the boat and so on. That's not what I'm saying. I have no problem whatsoever with confrontation when it is called for.

But if confrontation is called for, then it is even more important to be strategic and to be methodical and to objectively assess, the real existing power dynamics at play. And again, I'm not anti street protest per se, but understand what it really does and what it really does not accomplish. You understand? Have an accurate assessment of what role it plays in a movement. You know, the same goes for boycotts and so on.

Any sort of mass activism, you have to understand accurately what you're doing and don't have an unrealistic expectation of what you're doing or an expectation of what you're gonna achieve, what your action will achieve. Like, for example, the Montgomery bus boycott back in the nineteen fifties for the racial integration of city buses in Montgomery, Alabama. African Americans stayed off of the buses for over a year to protest or to press for integration. You know, this is the famous case with Rosa Parks and how Martin Luther King became a national figure in the civil rights movement. It was the Montgomery Bus Bus Boycott.

But the fact of the matter is the integration of the city buses in Montgomery, Alabama was ultimately determined through the supreme court case, in a case that was brought by the NAACP and argued by Thurgood Marshall. Thurgood Marshall famously said that he saw no reason why all those people in Montgomery had to walk for all those months because the outcome was, ultimately by means of the legal case, not the boycott. I mean, this isn't entirely true because the boycott did add pressure to the supreme court. It did it did create an environment of pressure. It galvanized opinion in support of integration and so on.

It had a role, but it did not cause the outcome. This is generally gonna be the case with protests and marches and rallies and so on. They establish a sort of mood of the society. They establish the mood of the market, and that can influence decision making, but they don't actually cause the results. They have a degree of influence, but they're not necessarily, decisive.

And, again, they have to be undertaken only after there's a full evaluation, a strategic evaluation of their potential impact. You see? Activism isn't really about big dramatic action. It's methodical, it's tedious, it's boring, and it's tiring. You know, it's like how people watch police shows, TV police dramas, and and and in the movies and so on.

They think that the police are always in shootouts, chasing down criminals on the street and whatnot, high speed chases. But in actuality, for real police officers, at least half of their time is spent doing paperwork. Cops are nothing but bureaucrats with guns. It's the same with activists, real activists. The greatest proportion of their time is spent in mundane tasks, filing papers, getting signatures, holding meetings, making appointments, you know, pushing an initiative inch by inch, day after day.

And sporadically, there may be a moment of excitement or drama when they organize an event, you know, or a rally or something like this. But most of the time, they're just doing drudgery. I mean, I've said it before. If you're gonna, become involved in political protest or political opposition or what have you, okay, That means that you are now involving yourself in politics. That means that you have to understand politics.

You have to understand the politics of your society, the politics of your community, and so on. Meaning, you have to understand the relationships between people. That's what politics is. The relations, the relationships between the people of influence, the relationship, between different interests, etcetera etcetera. And you have to figure out, how to navigate all of that, how to manipulate all of that, how to make compromises, how to make deals, and you have to follow protocols and so on.

So if you're not willing to do all of that, quite frankly, your activism or your reflex to become an activist is very shallow. That's probably emotional, and you're probably just looking for something to do, which is why most protesters, let's be honest, most protesters come from the bourgeois, the middle class, and so on. People with disposable time income and general privilege, and generally lead boring, uneventful lives. You know, some people go to raves and others go to protests. It's a it's a recreational activity, which is also why it's largely a Western phenomenon.

And why you will mostly see that the people in the global South who participate in these kinds of things also tend to be westernized people. But I'll say it again, not everyone needs to be an activist. Not everyone needs to be political. Not everyone needs to validate or justify their existence by participating in a social cause or by taking a stand or what have you. It's literally not for everyone.

You know, we all know the hadith telling us that you're supposed to change evil by your hand if you can, or by speaking against it if you can, or at least hating it in your heart if you can't do either of those. So So if you're in the last category, again, what you have to try to do now is to try to build your capacity. And that can mean also just building a workable strategy through which you can amplify your capacity. So that then you're in a position where speaking against it, speaking against an evil can have an impact because you built your capacity. And then you can build more to where you actually have the capacity to change it by means of effective action.

But if you can't do either of those things, building your capacity and so on, then you should probably just accept that you're not cut out for this kind of thing, and that's fine. And just settle upon providing moral support for those who are cut out for this kind of thing. But no, caring is not enough to qualify you for political activism and opposition and so forth. And being ready to die for a cause is not nearly as important as being ready to live for a cause.