Slacktivism to Activism
A few years ago, the word "slacktivism" entered the English lexicon. It describes "taking action" that doesn't require one to bestir oneself from the couch or office chair - signing an online petition, changing one's Facebook profile picture, firing off an email to one's politcian of choice, etc. For instance, a friend of mine has an Arabic letter in place of his face on FB, and notes that the letter is spray-painted on the homes of Christians in Mosul, Afghanistan, to mark their homes as belonging to Christians (the letter is essentially an "N", for Nazarene, or Jesus) and allowing them to be targetted for "forced conversion, religious taxation, or murder." These are truly horrible things! But his use of it is not going to prompt an ISIS or Taliban warrior to come over here, hunt him down, and either force an oath of conversion to Islam from his lips, demand his life's savings as a religious tax, or blow up his house. It's a safe activism, saying, "I stand with you there... from over here... 9,000+km away... across the largest sea and third-largest ocean in the world... and sending you neither arms, food, or financial support other than what the goverment of Canada may be sending you out of my tax money..."
It's an activism without commitment. It's an activism without changing anything on anybody's part. It's an activism committed by the click of a mouse and the flick of an electronic switch.
And it doesn't really accomplish much.
Another friend of mine reposted something to do with the Residential Schools. At the end, it encouraged all readers to be horrified at what was done and to commit to actions to repair what was done. Great! What *are* those actions? What *are* these things I'm supposed to support? Exposure trips? Those will show me what was *done* and what *exists* - what are the things that *need doing now*, to change the situation and make life better for the current and future generations?
I've had one concrete suggestion come my way: urge my politicians to support making clean, potable water available to the hundreds of indigenous communities who are under constant boil-water orders due to the pollution of their local aquifers *or* the fact that their local aquifers have such high mineral content that the water is considered unsafe to drink. Great thought! Concrete suggestion!
But what's my leverage - if you don't push for it, O Mr. Politician Sir, I won't vote for you but will vote for a candidate who *will* promise action on this? *THIS* issue...? When I've got a dozen *OTHER* issues that impact me, or my family, or my congregation, right here, now, in *their* lives? (And would *also* benefit the natives if it came to pass...?)
Food banks have a single purpose: collect food, by whatever means possible, and distribute it to those who come to them because they have too much month left at the end of their money and can't afford groceries. As an individual, you can purchase food, make a cash donation, or volunteer to sort what has come in or hand it out. Concrete. Simple. And, even if it's only a couple of bucks, you've actually invested something of yourself into it.
Cancer Associations are looking for a cure. Since not everyone can do the research, again, one can raise funds *for* the researchers, or for the counselling programs for the families trying to rally around the person who has been diagnosed with the particular strain of cancer. "Finding the cure" has many roads, and walking in circles all night once a year *is* a form of personal investment, in addition to walking with, standing with, or sitting with the individual at the centre of your particular touch with cancer.
I could go on ad nauseum but I'm sure the point is made - true activism requires investment, but it also needs a *goal*. Screaming "Change this!!!" at the top of one's voice has no view to outcome. A bellow of "This is wrong!!!" needs to be followed by an understanding of what would be right.
Now, true, the Food Bank would not be necessary if a system of equitable food distribution could be discovered... or the root causes of the poverty of the various individuals identified and addressed... or the inherent laziness of certain individuals (a vanishly small number, as I understand it, though touted as much higher) declared intolerable. Mental illness, addiction, chronic home instability, etc., all form causes for unemployment and a *need* for food bank handouts. Getting to the roots of those is *VERY* expensive, and not just in terms of money! Food banks are not a cure, but they treat a symptom, and people can easily invest themselves in treating a symptom, from a few bucks to a few hours a month of free labour. Problem > Action > Someone feels better!
But getting back to it: it is very hard to get people involved in some kind of "activism" if they don't see themselves as having a personal stake in it. The Civil Rights Movement involved everyone in the United States who was of African descent. The Women's March involved half the population. The investigation into the Missing & Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls currently involves 302 individuals and their families, stretched out over years; last year alone, there were about 100,000 drug offences noted across the nation, and that cluster isn't counted in the 1.9 million *other* criminal offences that were reported / charges laid. 1 Canadian in 20 will have a criminal act committed against them in a given year. It's easier to put money into campaigns reminding people to lock their doors or be wary of their surroundings than to try to figure out if their are any truly nefarious forces behind the disappearance of those 300 native girls. (Oh, and by the way, it was estimated in a 2009 report that 2000 persons get "trafficked" into Canada every year, plus 600-800 that are routed through Canada on the way to the US. These are 80+% female, from nations around the globe, not just native Canadian. Large numbers of native Canadian girls / women *are* in the sex industry, many driven their because their poverty and certain discriminatory prejudices that they encounter leave them few other options in their own minds... but many others are in the sex industry as well, and *not* because of their indigenous heritage.)
This is really a long way of saying that if there were a cause that was easier to define and an outcome that was simpler to view, more people would actually invest themselves in it. Anyone can post a picture or repost a statement and say, "There, I've done what I can do..." and, indeed, it may *be* all you can do! But getting folks truly involved requires actual goals and actual desired outcomes.
And THOSE can be very hard to come by!
It's an activism without commitment. It's an activism without changing anything on anybody's part. It's an activism committed by the click of a mouse and the flick of an electronic switch.
And it doesn't really accomplish much.
Another friend of mine reposted something to do with the Residential Schools. At the end, it encouraged all readers to be horrified at what was done and to commit to actions to repair what was done. Great! What *are* those actions? What *are* these things I'm supposed to support? Exposure trips? Those will show me what was *done* and what *exists* - what are the things that *need doing now*, to change the situation and make life better for the current and future generations?
I've had one concrete suggestion come my way: urge my politicians to support making clean, potable water available to the hundreds of indigenous communities who are under constant boil-water orders due to the pollution of their local aquifers *or* the fact that their local aquifers have such high mineral content that the water is considered unsafe to drink. Great thought! Concrete suggestion!
But what's my leverage - if you don't push for it, O Mr. Politician Sir, I won't vote for you but will vote for a candidate who *will* promise action on this? *THIS* issue...? When I've got a dozen *OTHER* issues that impact me, or my family, or my congregation, right here, now, in *their* lives? (And would *also* benefit the natives if it came to pass...?)
Food banks have a single purpose: collect food, by whatever means possible, and distribute it to those who come to them because they have too much month left at the end of their money and can't afford groceries. As an individual, you can purchase food, make a cash donation, or volunteer to sort what has come in or hand it out. Concrete. Simple. And, even if it's only a couple of bucks, you've actually invested something of yourself into it.
Cancer Associations are looking for a cure. Since not everyone can do the research, again, one can raise funds *for* the researchers, or for the counselling programs for the families trying to rally around the person who has been diagnosed with the particular strain of cancer. "Finding the cure" has many roads, and walking in circles all night once a year *is* a form of personal investment, in addition to walking with, standing with, or sitting with the individual at the centre of your particular touch with cancer.
I could go on ad nauseum but I'm sure the point is made - true activism requires investment, but it also needs a *goal*. Screaming "Change this!!!" at the top of one's voice has no view to outcome. A bellow of "This is wrong!!!" needs to be followed by an understanding of what would be right.
Now, true, the Food Bank would not be necessary if a system of equitable food distribution could be discovered... or the root causes of the poverty of the various individuals identified and addressed... or the inherent laziness of certain individuals (a vanishly small number, as I understand it, though touted as much higher) declared intolerable. Mental illness, addiction, chronic home instability, etc., all form causes for unemployment and a *need* for food bank handouts. Getting to the roots of those is *VERY* expensive, and not just in terms of money! Food banks are not a cure, but they treat a symptom, and people can easily invest themselves in treating a symptom, from a few bucks to a few hours a month of free labour. Problem > Action > Someone feels better!
But getting back to it: it is very hard to get people involved in some kind of "activism" if they don't see themselves as having a personal stake in it. The Civil Rights Movement involved everyone in the United States who was of African descent. The Women's March involved half the population. The investigation into the Missing & Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls currently involves 302 individuals and their families, stretched out over years; last year alone, there were about 100,000 drug offences noted across the nation, and that cluster isn't counted in the 1.9 million *other* criminal offences that were reported / charges laid. 1 Canadian in 20 will have a criminal act committed against them in a given year. It's easier to put money into campaigns reminding people to lock their doors or be wary of their surroundings than to try to figure out if their are any truly nefarious forces behind the disappearance of those 300 native girls. (Oh, and by the way, it was estimated in a 2009 report that 2000 persons get "trafficked" into Canada every year, plus 600-800 that are routed through Canada on the way to the US. These are 80+% female, from nations around the globe, not just native Canadian. Large numbers of native Canadian girls / women *are* in the sex industry, many driven their because their poverty and certain discriminatory prejudices that they encounter leave them few other options in their own minds... but many others are in the sex industry as well, and *not* because of their indigenous heritage.)
This is really a long way of saying that if there were a cause that was easier to define and an outcome that was simpler to view, more people would actually invest themselves in it. Anyone can post a picture or repost a statement and say, "There, I've done what I can do..." and, indeed, it may *be* all you can do! But getting folks truly involved requires actual goals and actual desired outcomes.
And THOSE can be very hard to come by!