Canadian Dimension just posted this piece, my latest “writing with movements” column. I’m re-posting it here.
The COVID-19 pandemic is revealing a lot
about the current capacities of social movements and communities in struggle. Much
of this is hopeful, as people across North America are organizing workplace
actions, resistance to prisons and detention
centers, combative protests
against racist police violence, rent
strikes, and community-based mutual
aid initiatives. It’s also inspiring to see emerging collaborative efforts
to generate political vision for
moving forward in the midst of deepening
crises.
At the same time, this pandemic illuminates
significant challenges facing our organizing efforts. One of these came up
clearly at the recent Montreal Anarchist Bookfair, held online this year. In a generative
session on “Collective Care vs.
Containment,” an activist from Mali asked the featured speakers how
anarchists in North America are thinking about mutual aid beyond the borders of
the U.S. and Canada.
This
is a pressing question for all of us committed to collective liberation. As activist-scholar
Adam Hanieh writes: “It is not
enough to speak of solidarity and mutual self-help in our own neighbourhoods,
communities, and within our national borders – without raising the much greater
threat that this virus presents to the rest of the world…. Without a global
orientation, we risk reinforcing the ways that the virus has seamlessly fed
into the discursive political rhetoric of nativist and xenophobic movements – a
politics deeply seeped in authoritarianism, an obsession with border controls,
and a ‘my-country first’ national patriotism.” Hanieh is right: this pandemic
requires movement responses and relations at a scale well beyond the nation-state.
The “global orientation” that Hanieh emphasizes
is what has been known, historically, as “internationalism” on the left. While it
has taken different forms, the basic idea is working across national borders to
offer tangible solidarity in struggles against oppression and exploitation and
for dignity and self-determination. In a useful 2015 editorial on this topic, activist
journal Upping the Anti poses a
fundamental question animating internationalism: “While we organize
for liberation close to home, what is our role in getting others free –
especially when the governments and economies in North America cause so much
exploitation and harm abroad?”
Underlying
this orientation is an understanding that successfully challenging ruling
systems requires building movements that connect, communicate, and collaborate
globally. This is the substance of the slogan from the global
justice movement of the 1990s and early 2000s: “let our resistance be as
transnational as capital.”
Over
the last decade, experienced radical organizers have talked more frequently
about the decline of left internationalism. Upping
the Anti sums this up as “a retreat in continued, cultivated forms of
international solidarity from various grassroots activists and labour unions in
North America.” Compared to even the movement activities of the 1980s and 1990s
– such as the anti-apartheid movement, Latin American solidarity efforts, global
AIDS activism, and anti-war mobilizations – this retreat is unmistakable. In a
recent webinar hosted by Briarpatch, activist-scholar Nandita Sharma put it starkly: “we’re living in a time where
the left is the least internationalist (for lack of a better term) than perhaps
at any other time in our history.”
How
should we understand this decline in left internationalism in the U.S. and
Canada? I have yet to see a rigorous account. That said, I don’t think it’s a
coincidence that this decline has happened amidst the accelerating hardships
coming out of the 2007-2008 global economic crisis. A lot of people have,
understandably, been focused on immediate struggles for survival, and a lot of radical
initiatives have become much more domestic in practice.
In
addition, many activists and organizers experienced intense demoralization
after the historic anti-war mobilizations of the early 2000s failed to prevent unfathomably
devastating U.S. military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over the last
couple of decades, there have also been impactful discussions on the left about
the problems of activism that focuses only on faraway places while ignoring injustices
closer to home.
This
decline has not been absolute. Many Indigenous peoples, as Michi Saagiig
Nishnaabeg writer Leanne Betasamosake Simpson emphasizes, have long practiced
elaborate forms of internationalism in relation to other human and nonhuman
nations. Whether in defense of Standing Rock or Wet’suwet’en territory, recent Indigenous-led
efforts have built on these practices, fostering
international relations in joint struggles against colonial dispossession and
ecological devastation. Internationalism includes solidarity among and with Indigenous
nations, even within the colonial borders of nation-states.
There
have been other internationalist efforts in recent years. Palestine solidarity
organizing has been growing, particularly since the launch of the global boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaign in 2005. As the Kurdish
freedom movement has propelled a revolution in Northeastern Syria, activists
have developed solidarity groups. There are
radical diasporic efforts, such those mobilizing in solidarity with struggles in
India against the far-right BJP government. In the labor movement, there are
some small but stalwart initiatives, such Labour Against the Arms Trade and U.S. Labor Against the War. There are also significant
internationalist dimensions in current organizing around migrant justice and
climate justice, especially those activities that center struggles in the
global south.
If we want to revive a global orientation
in our movements, all of these efforts are worth building on, as we also learn
from previous initiatives. And if any moment calls for a revitalization of
internationalism, it is this one. As the COVID-19 pandemic intensifies crises
from Guatemala to Gaza,
the stakes grow higher by the day. Radical
historian Mike Davis observes that we’re currently witnessing “a kind of triage of humanity where wealthy
countries have retreated from even the pretense of moral obligations to the
poorer countries.” The only force that will change that is collective and resolute
international solidarity in action.
Internationalism
is also about hope. This is something that socialist-feminist organizer and
theorist Sharmeen Khan has consistently argued. “In terms of dealing with
despair,” she writes, “one of the
things that really helped me was becoming more of an internationalist…. Things
may be very frantic, but if you can talk to people around the world who are
doing good work, it is a way to keep going…. My fight includes them and really
helps me work through that despair.”
In
concert with people around the world doing good work, we can resist despair and
isolation. We can build strong relations, individually and collectively, across
movements and borders. We can recognize our responsibilities, rooted where we
are, in getting one another free. We can win a new world by winning across the
world.