I'm glad you're here. But where have you been?

How to approach political awakenings and the newly radicalized

Sirus Bouchat

Sirus Bouchat

— 8 min read
I'm glad you're here. But where have you been?
Photo by Roger Bradshaw / Unsplash

This month has been an absolute eternity. But it's felt like a chasm of time with big structural breaks. Maybe you've felt it, too. I've fielded more than a few messages in the last week since Alex Pretti's murder, all of them remarking on the tide change. The feeling that time sped up or slowed down. The feeling that your face was being forcibly grabbed by some invisible hands and made to look.

For some, that breaking point meant finally acknowledging our political reality and stepping in to act. For others, it meant changing their tune.

Margaret Killjoy and James Stout did some reporting from Minneapolis this past week that's worth a listen. Notably, Margaret spends some time talking about what our collective orientation should be to political newcomers—these people who are just now seeing the same horrors that perhaps you have been witnessing for months or years or maybe your whole life. She says:

...the thing I've been thinking about a lot is that glad you're here, gets so
much further than what took you so long. Yeah, And there just is a line. The federal government has crossed it. And the more people who are aware of that, the better.

I've been blissfully away from some of the more ridiculous internet discourse of the last week thanks to travel, but have already seen some more niche accounts arguing that the people who have experienced a change of heart only in the wake of white people being murdered by the state aren't to be trusted. Arguing that their values are too fickle, that they're too self-interested and narrow-minded, that if only the most egregious actions are enough to change hearts and minds, those hearts and minds aren't worth our time.

It's that sort of rhetoric that Margaret is speaking to: that if we (collectively, amorphously) want a groundswell movement mobilized with people power, we're better off welcoming in anyone who has an interest, rather than shaming and berating people who have taken a more winding road to arrive at their political awakening.

Not to be That Person, but I'm going to say it's more complicated than that, obviously. A while ago I wrote about how our movements and our actions are missing friendship as a foundation, because we need relationships of trust in order to do scary, hard work together. That we can't start with broad coalitions, that we need to start closer and deeper.

The same is true here. In a broad sense, it's critical to movement growth to welcome newcomers. In a more narrow sense, you can (and should) still ask where someone has been until now. Perhaps not for the reasons you think, though. Let's break it down.

I'm glad you're here...

Why should it matter if or when someone comes around to your political vision, ideology, or worldview? If you feel sure in your own beliefs and assessments, then who cares whether anyone else agrees?

There are two main reasons why you might be invested in others' agreements, one material and one less-so.

On the material front, axiomatically there is strength in numbers. Strength to do what? What you think we need strength for conditions whether and how much weight you put on someone espousing updated beliefs.

What I mean is, if you believe this is and has always been a "battle for hearts and minds" (it's not, it wasn't), then someone claiming their beliefs have shifted and worldview has changed is a sufficient victory unto itself. Nothing further is necessarily required or expected of a person whose heart is changed.

If, on the other hand, you believe that a shift in commitments should also be followed by a shift in action—now we're in the land of material implications. What should those actions be? How should someone behave differently now that their beliefs have shifted? Whatever the context, the risks someone is willing to take on as a result of their beliefs is almost certainly correlated to the strength of their commitments, the depth of their convictions. Sometimes converts to a faith are the most devout and virulent in their newfound religiosity; other times they remain in liminal syncretism forever.

That is, some of the newly politically awakened will be the staunchest supporters and most fervent actors toward political change. Others will attempt to walk the lines of both/and. Neither is necessarily wrong, but if you're glad to have new recruits because you're hoping for material help and strength in numbers for whatever comes, which type and how many will determine whether your optimism bears out.

On the flip side, the other reason you might be glad to have newcomers to your political understanding and vision is precisely because they shore up your own sense of reality. Feeling alone in watching the world burn around you is isolating and crazymaking—it's one of the main weapons wielded against marginalized people who have seen this "reality" firsthand for decades and centuries, but whose insights were gaslit and suppressed.

Especially for white people, people with economic means, people with access to power by dint of their positions or identities, moving outside the comfortable bubble of ignorance requires so much work and intervention. The entropy toward ease and away from awareness and solidarity is real. Seeing fellow traitors to the unearned inheritance of power can fortify any fractures or fragilities in convictions.

All of that by way of saying, we can and should be glad when others evolve in their political understanding and move toward justice. No matter whether we think they have a material role to play, or simply can be vocal in their stances for now.

...but where the hell have you been?

But. Having said that. It still matters what path was walked to arrive at this moment of political reckoning. How someone sees themselves in the political landscape, what narratives or actions spoke to them and which ones washed over them, how they understand the stakes of action before and right now—all of these are determinative of behavior, all of these will likely shape the trajectory that someone takes in their ongoing political journey.

There's a difference between asking this question only with indignation or to induce shame, and asking this question because the journey to your moment of political pivot matters. And it's ok to be suspicious: why was this the final straw for someone and nothing before? what about this moment spoke to someone, and what does that say about their enduring beliefs or worldviews or perspectives?

Those questions matter because the work of political opposition has inherent risk. If you're going to get risky with someone, you need to know with what, how much, and how far you can trust them. And it's not offensive to say some people are not trustworthy yet. It's not that you need to be bled in to some organization through ritual or sacrifice (necessarily), but rather that finding your political convictions and knowing what to do with them are two different things. Knowing what actions to take, and how your actions impact other people, are part of a process—they're not something you immediately know the moment your experience your own political wake-up call.

Asking how someone has evolved to this moment, and what about this moment made them decide it's finally "enough," is critical not only for ascertaining how much and with what responsibilities we can entrust someone in community or movement work. It's important for assessing where they might need ongoing support in their education or personal work. But it's also important in assessing how they understand the circumstances we find ourselves in.

Comparisons to Nazi Germany abound; comparisons to the US' own history of racial animus and exclusion also apply. Which comparisons you reach for matters, but also how you characterize your own tipping point is informative: when did this become like Germany to you? what were the signs? who are you in that story and how did you arrive in that story? who are you hoping to become in the story that's being written? and what will that require of you?

Traveling in the same direction, together or alongside

I'll check in next week with some thoughts about our mental comparison cases—what historical or contemporary instances you draw on for inspiration, guidance, and education in this moment, and what your frames of reference mean—but suffice it to say for now that part of what dictates your turning point or your "aha" moments or your political awakening is what references you have to draw on. Those can come from so many places. They might come from your heritage and lineage. They might come from your formal or informal education. They might come from your community. How you got here influences where you're going, and we each have the opportunity to be catalytic for each other. Your reaction to others joining the fray right now might determine how and with whom they're able to stay on a political path. Others' reaction to you will shape the next steps you take toward liberation.

This isn't to say that there's one "right" answer, either. Not everyone will have the energy and disposition for constantly educating newcomers. Not everyone will have the patience and openness to shepherd the less experienced. And that's ok. Because there isn't a narrowing funnel with only one correct, narrow path that we all have to walk. And no one is actually the gatekeeper of the One True and Right™ way to help us all get free.

However/and. Knowing that you have that immense power to influence others' journeys in this work, and that how you do that might impact how winding our collective road is, might make you choose differently. It might inspire you toward patience. It might encourage you to reserve judgment. Or it might just soften you toward giving newcomers a poke toward someone else or another space if you don't have the capacity, personally.

And if you're the newcomer (or have been made to feel like the Johnny-come-lately in an organizing space), this is your reminder to have patience with yourself and others, too. Just because you're rebuffed in one space does not mean all political work is closed off to you, and it doesn't even necessarily mean that that space isn't a good fit. It may just mean you have more work to do.

If you're trying to find your path forward in some political education and practice this year, there's still a little time left to get 25% off when you sign up for the Radical Reading + Practice Group. The first edition is dropping before the end of the month, so don't wait!

Sign Up

There's a lot in here since we're coming up on the end of the month.

I can't possibly collect all of the writing and work that's been done around the murders in Minneapolis, but there are a few pieces here you should pay special attention to, and feel free to share them with anyone in your life who is feeling unsure of what to think or believe right now.

Some things you may have missed

Read more