In recent months and weeks, it has become common-knowledge among leftists around the world that the United States is, once again, attempting to overthrow the democratically elected government of Venezuela. Reports vary, yet it’s clear the U.S. and its lapdog allies have been ramping-up the ongoing and never-ending cycle of economic and counterrevolutionary warfare against the Latin American nation. For those who study Venezuela, or are routinely exposed to information regarding the nation, such news comes as no surprise. However, for many, including those who should be viewed as potential allies in the struggle against U.S. Empire, the picture begins to blur.
However, instead of examining the intricacies of U.S.-Venezuelan relations, I think this moment in history provides an opportunity to contemplate when and how specialists could and should be used to educate citizens about very complex, yet inherently important issues. In other words, sometimes a lack of knowledge produces political paralysis as many citizens, and even some activists, become confused or gravitate towards overly-simplistic explanations when faced with extremely dense and complex topics. In this context, specialists could provide essential knowledge, if organized in the proper venues and with active communities.
In данас‘s world, events seem to happen at a ridiculously rapid pace: coups, uprisings, terrorist attacks, etc. Even for the most seasoned activist or public intellectual, it’s virtually impossible to keep up with it all. Nonetheless, these occurrences have a profound impact on geopolitical, economic and ecological realities. In this way, I must say that I appreciate the work of certain specialists such as Norman Finkelstein, someone who is constantly pressured to talk about issues other than Israel and Palestine, yet continues to commit his intellectual and activist energy to that very specific struggle. His work has become indispensable for those seeking justice in Palestine.
Surely, I know of others, although lesser known, who fit into the same category. A great example would be Ross Caputi, an Iraq veteran who fought in the second siege of Fallujah only to come home a strident anti-militarist activist, dedicated to helping, in whatever way he can, the people of Iraq. Eventually, Ross founded the Justice for Fallujah Project, which aims to provide reparations to the people of Iraq, as well as health care needs and other essential services. This very specialized work is undoubtedly worthwhile and absolutely necessary, especially in a world where people jump from one issue to the next, conveniently neglecting the issues that are seemingly too difficult to properly address, or fix.
In short, when I say specialized work, I mean that which requires someone, or a group of people, who devote their energy toward researching, writing about and addressing a particular subject, issue or phenomena in-depth, not topically. When it comes to foreign affairs, most U.S. citizens require specialists in order to properly understand geopolitical events, as the average person living in rural Kansas or urban Cleveland most likely doesn’t know the difference between Sunni and Shia. In my experience, the situation is similar in other western nations. Most people simply do not have the time to understand the nuances of Russian, Venezuelan, American, German, Chinese or Ukrainian geopolitical histories, interests or current events.
In some cases, specialists are not immediately needed. For example, black citizens in Ferguson did not necessarily require a specialist to explain how racism or policing works. Indeed, residents who live in Ferguson experience those realities on a daily basis. They, unlike many specialists, live, work and die in the communities that are often seen as places to study or write a dissertation. In a less cynical manner, the ideal situation would be to have specialists operating in communities they once lived in or where they currently reside. Obviously, for many reasons this makes sense.
From a different angle, with regard to events in Ferguson, I would say that it would have been nice to have specialists assist in the process of developing effective strategies and tactics. For many, that was their first political experience. Of course, while some of the knowledge needed to make informed decisions surrounding strategies and tactics will not require a specialist, the overall process of developing effective methods is usually based on the experiences of previous movements and struggles, and that knowledge will likely necessitate the use of specialists. One of the questions that immediately comes to mind would be: How can activists and educators transfer specialist knowledge to those who do not have the training or much political experience?
Returning to the topic of foreign affairs, I think it’s essential to provide citizens with a historical background when talking about international events. Yet, specialists are not the cure to a disengaged, disinterested or uninformed public. Here, previous engagement is required in order to properly utilize specialist knowledge, such as the history of Venezuela, the Monroe Doctrine or the legacy of U.S. Imperialism, for example. To put differently, I think it would be more worthwhile to use specialists when helping activists to better refine their knowledge on particular issues, while it is undoubtedly more useful to have people from local communities explain why folks should be involved to begin with.
Recently, my Ukrainian friend told me that his family and friends have been engaged in heated debates surrounding current events in their native country. Each faction of the family watches their preferred commentators on nightly TV shows and speak with relatives who still live in Ukraine; opinions widely vary on who is to blame and what is to be done. My friend, who recently obtained his graduate degree and has participated in social justice movements throughout his adult life, told me, “If people don’t understand history, and how that connects with what’s happening данас, their anecdotal experiences hold little value when trying to understand the broader picture.”
Returning to Venezuela, people living in the belly of the U.S. Empire are definitely holding events, trying their best to educate citizens about what their governments, economic elites and military entities are doing abroad. Nevertheless, many of the groups who are holding these events are connected with, or represent, sectarian political organizations. Often, these organizations are disconnected with local communities and drive people away from participating in future events or becoming more involved. According to my friends abroad, and my own experiences overseas, the story is the same in many western nations. Here, I think activists from around the world have a fundamental problem: on the one hand, it’s great to have people organizing around issues of imperialism and economic warfare, but if those very same groups are also discouraging activists and ordinary citizens from becoming more involved, then something different must be done.
Moving along, I’ve been attending antiwar demonstrations for the past nine years and with each passing year the rallies get smaller and smaller. To be fair, there were ample protests against Obama’s initial plan to bomb Syria, but as mentioned above, many of the groups who coordinated those protests were affiliated with sectarian groups that have alienated protestors in the past and continue to do so данас. Since then, the protests have dwindled as people are working on other issues. On the other hand, some people remain engaged, determined to prevent future wars of aggression, torture, spying and so forth. But the international movement against militarism needs to be reignited – that’s without question.
Right now, there is not a significant antiwar/empire/imperialist movement in the West. Sure, there are small groups who operate in dislocated geographical regions, but not in a coordinated manner, and surely not in an effective fashion, as the political subversion, coups, overthrows and counterrevolutions continue – some would argue at an even more rapid pace than during previous eras. But I’m not interested in defeatism or cynicism; I’m interested in thinking about what actions could be coordinated on an international scale in order to combat militarism and economic warfare abroad.
When thinking about building such a movement, I routinely think about the role of specialists, or those who can, in detail, discuss, examine and explain the history, nuances and practical reasons for understanding a particular issue, event or individual. Furthermore, in my thinking, after people are exposed to this knowledge, it would also be wise to have specialists around who could help orientate those who are already active, as they seek to develop more effective strategies and tactics.
Without doubt, all of this requires a balanced approach, for there is no reason to construct a false dichotomy of specialists vs. non-specialists. What I’m saying is that in certain contexts specialists are needed to properly explain a particular situation, such as the ongoing U.S. aggression aimed at the people of Venezuela. In the context of many western nations, I think specialists are needed more in the arena of international affairs than domestic affairs, but that’s not always the case. More importantly, the point is to turn non-specialists into specialists, as we don’t want to perpetuate the division of those with extremely specialized knowledge vs. those who have very little understanding of a particular issue, history, etc.
The point is not to further divide society, but to mend existing divisions. Quite obviously, so-called specialists could learn plenty from so-called non-specialists, and vice-versa. Often, those who should be involved in political movements are not because they don’t feel confident enough to speak-up. I talk to friends and family all the time who say, “I know the U.S. probably shouldn’t be meddling in the Middle East, but I don’t know anything about Syria, so how could I say anything?” On the surface, this is a reasonable concern. On the other hand, I usually respond with, “Well, what are your values and principles?”
People can make decisions with, or without specialized knowledge. If one understands that increased military actions abroad will always fundamentally result in further atrocities, it becomes a lot easier to reject militarism. Frequently, people are confused when approaching these issues. It’s our job as educators, journalists and activists to better explain, or help explain, these very complex issues. In my thinking, we should be helping people who are not politically engaged develop their values while simultaneously passing along historical knowledge and proposals for future actions, strategies and tactics.
Винцент Емануеле је писац, активиста и радио новинар који живи и ради у Руст Белт-у. До њега се може доћи на [емаил заштићен]
ЗНетворк се финансира искључиво захваљујући великодушности својих читалаца.
поклонити