Skip to main content

All lives do matter, but why ignore words Black, Dalit for the sake of convergence?

By Jai Sen*
In June 2020, soon after the Black Lives Matter movement irrupted in the US, Ashish Kothari published an article titled ‘Lives matter!: Can black, indigenous, worker, farmer, ecological, women, queer uprisings come together?’ Though I've seen other such ‘plays’ off the name (‘All Lives Matter!’, or ‘White Lives Matter’, and even ‘Blue Lives Matter’, referring to the police in the US), I was first struck by the removal of the word ‘Black’ from it; and then, frankly, by the fact that one of ‘us’ had done this, in a way that was both inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement but also piggybacking (to use that term) on it, to make his own proposal about convergence.
(I say ‘us’ in part because Ashish is an old friend, and in many ways, I think we are fellow-travellers in social movement; but also because we both belong to so-called ‘civil society’, which I see as an issue in of itself.)
But then, and as I read the article itself, I also came to be struck by the myriad, multiple meanings of this seemingly simple, innocent action, and especially in relation to the emerging moment in history and struggle for social justice, in the US and worldwide.
I  want to clarify that though apparently addressed to Ashish and his article, my comments here are not about him as such but about all of us and addressed to all of us, and about what I see as serious social problematics, and contradictions, that we all need to struggle with; but perhaps especially those of us who structurally belong to so-called ‘civil society’, myself included. In my opinion, it is therefore best to get such thoughts out onto the table, and even if doing so runs the risk of personalising the issue. 
Here, I try to summarise my points in a longish essay, "On removing the Black from Black Lives Matter, and more: In defence of the specific, in search of principles, and speaking to this moment in history -- Comments on and triggered by Ashish Kothari’s article...": 
1) I believe that the idea of removing the key word from the name of a movement of historically and structurally oppressed peoples, in order to put forward another idea, is not acceptable, and has multiple, deep, and profoundly negative meanings. (In my opinion anyway, piggybacking – as it’s commonly called, in English – is always a bad idea, but especially a bad idea done like this.) In this sense, and even if – I feel sure -- not meant in that way in this case, this removal does violence to the name, and implicitly to the peoples.
2) I feel that this is especially so when done by someone, or some people, who does/do not belong to that section of peoples, and all the more if it is done by someone who belongs to what in terms of social and political relations, is structurally a more ‘powerful’ section of society. I do not think that ‘we’ (since I myself belong to this section) have the moral right to do this.
I’m not sure about this, but I very tentatively venture the idea that something like this is to be done at all, it is perhaps – perhaps -- only those who belong to equally historically and structurally oppressed sections of people, such as Dalits or Indigenous Peoples, and Women, who might have the right to do so; as has historically happened, such as in the case of the formation in the 1970s of the Dalit Panthers, inspired by the Black Panthers. (But as I say, and since this is hardly for me to ‘decide’, I also put this idea forward only very tentatively.) 
One should consider accepting leadership of people now building movements -- such as peoples of African descent in the US and Dalits in India
3) Three key issues I think are critical in such situations, and therefore necessary for us all to address in proposals such as the one made by Ashish:
  • Talking power, making power visible
  • The dialectics of ‘convergence’ and of power 
  • Recognising structural location in society. 
4) In short, I suggest, while elegantly argued, Ashish’s proposal for ‘convergence’ fails to understand – and therefore hugely over-simplifies and overlooks – the profound internal contradictions that lie within and between movements, some of a structural nature. While I agree with him that in some ideal world, ‘convergence’ is an important thing to attempt, in order to do so we need to also address all the hidden dynamics that are involved, especially when proposing convergence across sections of society that are in profoundly different locations in society, in structural terms. 
 (Quite aside from also being in different parts of the world and from different cultures, which he also suggests, but without even opening up and addressing this issue.)
5) In terms of social dynamics, and of the rise of movements among historically and structurally oppressed peoples in different locations across the world, we might have entered (or now be entering) a moment in history where people such as Ashish and myself, belonging to middle and upper-middle sections of society who would like to be consider themselves working in solidarity with historically and structurally oppressed peoples, could also consider taking a step back in relation to making such proposals, to make way for the emerging movements and their proposals; and also consider accepting the leadership of the people now building such movements -- such as peoples of African descent in the US, Dalits in India (and elsewhere), and Indigenous Peoples and Women everywhere; and/but where practising this of course has many very significant ramifications. (I have said this before, over the past some years, and I say it again here.)  
---
*Independent researcher, editor; senior fellow at the School of International Development and Globalisation Studies at the University of Ottawa. Source: Peoples Media Advocacy & Resource Centre (PMARC). This article has been edited for style 
Click here detailed arguments by Jai Sen in his essay, "On removing the Black from Black Lives Matter, and more: In defence of the specific, in search of principles, and speaking to this moment in history"

Comments

TRENDING

'Flawed' argument: Gandhi had minimal role, naval mutinies alone led to Independence

Counterview Desk Reacting to a Counterview  story , "Rewiring history? Bose, not Gandhi, was real Father of Nation: British PM Attlee 'cited'" (January 26, 2016), an avid reader has forwarded  reaction  in the form of a  link , which carries the article "Did Atlee say Gandhi had minimal role in Independence? #FactCheck", published in the site satyagrahis.in. The satyagraha.in article seeks to debunk the view, reported in the Counterview story, taken by retired army officer GD Bakshi in his book, “Bose: An Indian Samurai”, which claims that Gandhiji had a minimal role to play in India's freedom struggle, and that it was Netaji who played the crucial role. We reproduce the satyagraha.in article here. Text: Nowadays it is said by many MK Gandhi critics that Clement Atlee made a statement in which he said Gandhi has ‘minimal’ role in India's independence and gave credit to naval mutinies and with this statement, they concluded the whole freedom struggle.

BSF should take full responsibility for death of 4 kids in West Bengal: Rights defender

By Kirity Roy*  One is deeply disturbed and appalled by the callous trench-digging by BSF in Chetnagachh village under Daspara Gram Panchayat, Chopra, North Dinajpur District, West Bengal that has claimed the lives of four children. Along the entire stretch of Indo-Bangladesh border of West Bengal instead of guarding the actual border delineated by the international border pillars, BSF builds fences and digs trenches well inside the Indian territory, passing through villages and encroaching on private lands, often without due clearance or consent. 

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

By Rajiv Shah*   The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual. 

How GMOs would destroy non-GMO crops: Aruna Rodrigues' key submissions in SC

Counterview Desk The introduction of Bt and HT crops will harm the health of 1 billion Indians and their animals, believes Aruna Rodrigues, who has made some 60 submissions to the Supreme Court (SC) during the last 20 years. As lead petitioner who filed Public Interest Litigation in 2005, during a spate of intense hearings, which ended on 18 January 2024, she fought in the Apex Court to prevent the commercialization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Indian agriculture. 

Social justice day amidst 'official neglect' of salt pan workers in Little Rann of Kutch

By Prerana Pamkar*  In India’s struggle for Independence, the Salt Satyagraha stands as a landmark movement and a powerful symbol of nonviolent resistance. Led by Mahatma Gandhi, countless determined citizens walked from Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi in Gujarat. However, the Gujarat which witnessed the power of the common Indian during the freedom struggle is now in the throes of another significant movement: this time it is seeking to free salt pan workers from untenable working conditions in the Little Rann of Kutch (LRK).

Corporatizing Indian agriculture 'to enhance' farmer efficiency, market competitiveness

By Shashank Shukla*  Today, amidst the ongoing farmers' protest, one of the key demands raised is for India to withdraw from the World Trade Organization (WTO). Let us delve into the feasibility of such a move and explore its historical context within India's globalization trajectory.

Jallianwala massacre: Why Indian govt hasn't ever officially sought apology from UK

By Manjari Chatterjee Miller*  The king of the Netherlands, Willem-Alexander, apologized in July 2023 for his ancestors’ role in the colonial slave trade. He is not alone in expressing remorse for past wrongs. In 2021, France returned 26 works of art seized by French colonial soldiers in Africa – the largest restitution France has ever made to a former colony. In the same year, Germany officially apologized for its 1904-08 genocide of the Herero and Nama people of Namibia and agreed to fund reconstruction and development projects in Namibia. .

Interpreting UAPA bail provisions: Is Supreme Court setting the clock back?

By Kavita Srivastava*, Dr V Suresh** The Supreme Court in its ruling on 7th February, 2024 in   `Gurvinder Singh v State of Punjab’ held that its own well-developed jurisprudence that "Bail is the rule and jail the exception" will not apply to those charged under the UAPA.

A 'distorted narrative' of Indian politics: Congress failing to look beyond LS polls

By Prem Singh*  About 15 days ago, I told a senior journalist friend that there are not even two   months left for the Lok Sabha elections, Rahul Gandhi is roaming around on a delectation (tafreeh). The friend probably found my comment exasperating and replied that he is not on a delectation trip. The conversation between us on this topic ended there. 

Livelihood issues return to national agenda ahead of LS polls: SKM on Bharat Bandh

Counterview Desk  Top farmers' network, the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) has claimed big success of Grameen Bharat Bandh and industrial /sectoral strikes, stating, the “struggle reflected anger of farmers, workers and rural people across India”, adding, the move on February 16 succeeded in bringing back peoples’ livelihood issues in the national agenda just ahead of the general election to the Lok Sabha.