I've been thinking a lot lately about the role of concrete solutions and deliverables in our social movements. I hear this critique pretty often, that a movement is restrained by its lack of clearly defined demands. Or, “X sucks, but what else would we do instead?”
In other words—“X sucks, but give me an alternative that’s socially/economically/politically/structurally viable.”
Various critiques of the original Abolitionist Movement included economic collapse, structural collapse, population influx, mass unemployment, etc. Today, can you imagine someone saying, “Human property sucks, but is freedom economically viable?” That’s not what it’s about. These movements begin—and end—with abolishing that which is wrong.
In addition, no one individual is representative of an entire movement, nor should they be. In the same way that artists should be valued just as much as academics just as much as business owners, we build worlds—and movements—through collective creation. Part of the movement is waking up; part of it is waking up others. Part of the movement is proposing a new reality; part of it is working to create that reality. No one part is more or less valuable than another.
Who knows whether or not there’s a plug-and-play formula for the perfect social movement? But whatever it is, I’m fairly confident that the solution is not sitting at home thinking, “Yeah, X sucks. But how would we even begin to fix it?”
What a great question. If you’re so concerned about alternatives and action plans, why not come up with some yourself?