Leftism Revised #2: From Protest to Progress

Youth activists excel at identifying and critiquing injustices, but effective activism requires more than just criticism

Young activists excel at identifying and critiquing global and local injustices, playing a vital role in the journey toward social justice. Their ability to deconstruct problems like the Israel-Palestine conflict or regional systemic racism is both impressive and significant. However, effective activism requires more than critique alone; it demands a balanced approach that combines critical analysis with practical action, historical understanding, and strategic coalition-building. In this discussion, we will explore how activists can leverage various tools, from critical theory to interest convergence, to create lasting, positive social change while navigating the complexities of modern social and political landscapes.

Youth-led movements have consistently demonstrated their ability to drive social change. Black Lives Matter, emerging in 2013, has effectively highlighted police brutality and institutional racism in the United States, continuing the legacy of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Climate advocates like Greta Thunberg have successfully brought worldwide attention to the urgent need for environmental action, echoing systemic approaches that emerged in the 1990s. These movements showcase the impact of youth activism while addressing persistent human rights violations and the effects of rapid globalization.

Comprehending the historical context and evolution of social and political challenges is crucial for activists to better adapt to current obstacles. For instance, understanding the history of redlining (discriminatory lending practices, usually based on race) and housing discrimination is essential for modern housing rights advocates. The Women’s Suffrage movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries fought for the fundamental right to vote, facing hurdles like those encountered by contemporary activists, including opposition from entrenched power structures, social stigma, legal barriers, violence, lack of representation, and media bias.

Historical movements offer valuable lessons in coalition-building and strategic activism. The Labor Rights movement of the early 20th century formed diverse coalitions with immigrants, women, Black Americans, and various worker groups, demonstrating the power of forging alliances across differences in social location, or one’s position in society based on dimensions of their identity such as socioeconomic status, gender, race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s gained broader support when it was framed as necessary for America’s international reputation during the Cold War. The LGBTQIA+ movement, which began in the 1960s and continues to the present, has worked to represent a wide spectrum of identities and experiences.

International movements have also provided important insights for modern activists. The anti-apartheid campaigns that took place from 1948 to 1994 laid the groundwork for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in post-apartheid South Africa, exemplifying how open dialogue can facilitate healing and progress in deeply divided societies. The so-called Arab Spring of 2010 to 2012, with its setbacks and successes, demonstrated how activism can envision and work toward a just world, using resilience and realistic appraisal to drive advancement, even when goals are not fully or immediately achieved.

The Occupy Wall Street movement of 2011 demonstrates the complex nature of measuring activist success. Although successful in raising awareness about economic inequality and shifting public discourse, it initially struggled to translate its critique into concrete policy changes. Yet, its long-term impact has been more substantial. The movement introduced concepts like “the 1% vs. the 99%” into mainstream political discussions, influencing subsequent campaigns and policy debates. Although Occupy intentionally avoided formal leadership and specific demands, which limited its immediate legislative impact, it sparked a lasting, incremental conversation about wealth disparity and corporate influence in politics. This legacy can be seen in the growing focus on economic inequality in political platforms, the rise of grassroots initiatives, and the shaping of later social movements. Thus, while Occupy may not have achieved immediate policy victories, its role in shifting the political landscape and inspiring future activism suggests a more complex and enduring influence than initially apparent.

More recent movements have continued to shape the landscape of modern activism. The Standing Rock protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline in 2016 to 2017 showcased leadership and activist paradigms in which guidance is shared and focused on social change. The #MeToo movement, launched around 2017, demonstrated the importance of amplifying diverse voices and experiences across different social locations by using social media to share personal stories of sexual harassment and assault. This movement exposed widespread abuse and challenged power structures in various industries.

These initiatives highlight the historical evolution of leadership and activism. From early ideas centered on individual leaders, inherent traits, and a top-down authoritarian approach to power, to more collaborative approaches that emphasize situational adaptability and mutual development. The shift from industrial to post-industrial paradigms in notions of what activist leadership should be occurred around 1978, wherein an emphasis arose that focused on collaborative and mutual development in leadership as a means of encouraging effective activism. The authentic leadership paradigm that emerged in the late 1990s continues to influence leadership thinking today, emphasizing genuine, value-driven guidance.

Critical social theory plays a significant role in activism by rejecting the idea of a singular truth and highlighting systemic inequalities. It encourages activists to raise consciousness about societal norms and integrate theory with action for social justice. As Leonardo (2004) argued: “a Pedagogy centered only on critique becomes a discourse of bankruptcy, a language devoid of resistance or agency.” Changemakers must leverage their insights to empower communities and build coalitions that cross cultural and social divides.

Focusing on interest convergence, advocates can engage others in social change by highlighting shared benefits, thus encouraging broader participation in their causes. Bell (1980) introduced the phrase interest convergence to explain how in the United States, White people often only support change associated with racial justice when they see some form of mutual or shared benefit. Similarly, nearly a decade prior, Alinsky (1971) argued that we cannot wait for people to engage in the work of social change out of altruistic intentions but must appeal to reciprocal benefits if that is what will lead to action.

This approach to activism acknowledges the difficulty of engaging others and advocates for building coalitions across differences in social location. Effective leadership in activism, therefore, constructs alliances and aligns diverse interests for social change, involving empathy and the understanding essential for making lasting progress. This process of building coalitions, while crucial, can be grueling and even alienating. It regularly involves challenging deeply entrenched, hegemonic norms, or broadly accepted standards.

Understanding social location and engaging in critical reflection are imperative for activists. Social location influences opportunities and perceptions. A White, middle-class activist might need to critically reflect on how their standing or statuses in society shape their comprehension of racial injustice. Reflecting on personal assumptions and positionality enhances our ability to connect with diverse communities and build inclusive movements. We should recognize as well that even if someone shares a similar background with us, it doesn’t mean they have the same priorities, desires, needs, feelings, or fears.

To effectively apply these critical perspectives, changemakers should develop key skills. These include: metacognition (thinking about one’s thinking), critical self-reflection (examining personal biases), social perspective-taking (understanding others’ viewpoints), and dialectical thinking (evaluating opposing ideas). These skills can be honed through regular journaling, monthly social location reflections, organizing listening sessions with affected communities, and practicing debating multiple sides of a topic or problem. Communication and dialogue are crucial for resolving conflicts and understanding diverse perspectives within activism.

Many young people are familiar with deconstruction, but reconstruction is equally vital, if not more important. We live in a critique economy where criticism is lucrative and negativity is addictive. However, creating sustainable solutions and encouraging inclusive activism is crucial. We must understand that critique without action is incomplete and ineffectual. Activism is more than a buzzword or shouting about societal ills; it is a transformative tool for addressing pressing global and regional problems. The challenges we face today, such as nuclear threats, pandemics, class inequality, and resource scarcity, demand urgent and effective responses.

Incorporating adaptive strategies into our activism helps us stay flexible and collaborative. This includes rotating leadership roles to share responsibilities, using decision-making processes like consensus-building, where everyone agrees, or sociocracy, which uses consent-based decisions. Regularly reassessing goals and tactics ensures we stay on track, while creating mentorship programs supports growth and learning. Such strategies help distribute roles effectively, making leadership within movements collective and dynamic.

Changemakers face a fundamental tension between radical ideals and practical progress, which is central to debates about incrementalism, abolition, and even non-reformist reform. Incrementalism seeks gradual improvements within existing systems, exemplified by historical events like the expansion of voting rights to women and minorities over time. The modern abolitionist approach, in its own gradualism, aims to completely overhaul oppressive structures, as seen in the movement to end apartheid in South Africa. Non-reformist reforms, as conceived by André Gorz, and abolitionism, as defined by activists like Mariame Kaba, offer a middle ground. The New Deal programs of the 1930s demonstrate this approach, providing immediate relief while laying the groundwork for future social safety nets like Social Security. These various strategies improved immediate conditions while opening possibilities for further change. Yet, changemakers must be wary of willful blindness and benign neglect, where acknowledging inequities fails to produce actionable solutions.

Navigating these approaches to create meaningful and lasting social change requires balancing short-term improvements with long-term systemic transformation. This delicate equilibrium demands that activists harmonize radical critique with practical strategies, avoiding the pitfall of endless criticism without action, a common problem in certain forms of radicalism, especially on the internet. To this end, changemakers might consider adopting a non-reformist reform or abolitionist framework, pushing for immediate improvements while simultaneously building power and consciousness for more fundamental transformations. Such an approach could involve advocating for policy changes that redistribute resources or decision-making power to affected communities, launching public education campaigns that connect immediate challenges to broader systemic problems, and building alternative institutions.

Modern advocates for positive change must confront the societal notion that one person’s win requires another person’s loss. Throughout our lives, we learn about power dynamics, either implicitly or explicitly, deliberately or subconsciously. Society regularly suggests that success means surpassing others, that we must outperform others to prove our worth. This creates a fear of failure, and worse, resentment. However, someone else’s loss is not necessary for our own success. By integrating dialogue and relationship-building, activists can produce environments where diverse perspectives are understood and valued, leading to sustainable and meaningful progress.

References

1. Alinsky, S. D. (1971). Rules for radicals: A pragmatic primer for realistic radicals. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
2. Bell, D. (1980). Brown and the interest convergence dilemma. In D. Bell (Ed.), Shades of Brown: New perspectives on school desegregation (pp. 90–106). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
3. Brookfield, S. D. (2005). The power of critical theory: Liberating adult learning and teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
4. Derrida, J. (1977). Of grammatology. (Trans. G. C. Spivak). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
5. Gorz, A. (1989). Critique of economic reason. Verso.
6. Kaba, M. (2021). We do this ‘til we free us: Abolitionist organizing and transforming justice. Haymarket Books.
7. Leonardo, Z. (2004). Critical social theory and transformative knowledge: The functions of criticism in quality education. Educational Researcher, 33(6), 11–18.