Can Intersectional Politics be Productive?

When talking about emancipation struggles and freedom movements the discourse is largely based on two categories- the oppressor and the oppressed. It is about the oppressed fighting to win power; rights, respect, authority from the oppressor. However, while these neat categories are convenient as they clearly define who is to be emancipated and consequently the course of action for the subject of emancipation, they end up glossing over diversity which ultimately silences those who most oppressed.
Intersectionality becomes relevant here in helping one understand the different ways in which an individual is placed within and affected by power structures in society. In Bell Hooks one finds that the white woman is oppressed by the white man but the black man is oppressed by both, white men and woman while the black woman is oppressed by white men, white women and black men. With such a hierarchical power structure the categories of oppressed and oppressor begins to break down as the oppressed in some capacity are also the oppressors. Intersectionality also complicates the matter of naming oppression. Black women for example, are oppressed by racism and sexism so then which box are they to be placed in? Or is a new box to be made for them? Similarly if one keeps adding other forms of oppression; class, language, sexuality etc the concept of a fundamental oppression also begins to break down.
If these differences and numerous permutations of oppression are to overlooked the liberation becomes pointless actually. By lumping people together on any one basis, race, gender, class, the dominant subgroup end up dictating the terms upon which liberation is to be achieved and what direction the movement takes. For example, in the struggle against white power was headed by black men who were the dominant subgroup and ended up silencing black women (and possibly other back subgroups). So if the purpose of liberation is to give a voice to the voiceless and empower the disenfranchised, the black movement against white power was clearly incomplete if not pointless since the most marginalized stayed where they were.
However, if the ‘subject’ of emancipation can be broken down endlessly and cannot be categorized, can a universal politics of liberation exist? Is there anything which ties them all together? If not, where is the struggle to begin? Who is it that needs to be liberated? If the purpose of emancipation is to restore every human being to certain level of dignity and respect, then a particular ‘subject’ of emancipation becomes irrelevant. It is no longer about a certain interest group trying to climb up the power hierarchy rather, it is about subverting that hierarchy. Only when the movement becomes all inclusive, addressing every strain of oppression and voicing the concerns of every oppressed person can the goal of subverting oppressive structures be achieved (since it is those who lie outside the norm who explain and subvert it). In this sense, intersectional politics is ideally and theoretically integral to emancipation and so to realize its potential and ultimately the fruit it will bear, the devotion of the freedom movement’s attention and energy is integral.

A Change is Gonna Come

Oh I know change gonna come, yes it will
This song illustrates a strong belief that the present condition and way of life is something that will inevitably change. Sam Cooke does not talk about how or when but he just knows that it will. This sentiment can be understood in relation to Martin Luther King’s ‘Unfulfilled dreams’.
King claims that life is a succession of unfulfilled and broken dreams. He also talks about the ‘ethical life’, a right way to live but living ethically does not guarantee the successful realization of dreams or even a proper, satisfying end or answer and this is a realization that one must live with. However, this realization is not something which should stop one from dreaming or eliminate the desire to pursue dreams or to live an ethical life. It is a burden that must be carried by those who dream of emancipation.
Basically MLK advocates acting ethically in recognition of the fact that there is no end and that you may never live to see or experience you goal of emancipation and freedom but nevertheless, one must continue walking down the ethical path with the burden of this recognition. Further, to live ethically is to live lovingly and to live lovingly is to live vulnerably since to love, one must open their heart up others and that opens up the possibility of hurt. But one must be prepared to live with possibility of heart break and eternal despair and that is what is MLK’s ethic of emancipation. However, the heaviness of this burden and the hopelessness of the mission begs the question, ‘why’? What can be salvaged by this? For MLK it is heart, the human soul, humanity. If one’s conception of freedom is love and idea of emancipation of restoring human beings to themselves, then the end result becomes irrelevant and so living with this burden ceases to be a hopeless. In fact, one begins to live on the force of a strong hope.
Sam Cooke’s song is a reflection of the same ethic. He talks about his current miserable state of affairs, ‘I go to the movie and I go downtown somebody keep tellin’ me don’t hang around’,’ Then I go, oh-oo-oh, to my brother and I say, brother, help me please but he winds up knocking me back down on my knees, oh’ but still lives with the firm belief in a hopeful future and so towards the end of the song he says, ‘There’ve been times that I thought I couldn’t last for long but now I think I’m able to carry on’. The hope for the future is what keeps him going, despite not knowing if he will ever live to see it. In other words, he is at peace with his position in the ‘not yet’ only because he believes in the ‘will be’.

Spirit in Art

Art is means through which ones understanding of reality may be projected. However, reality is not as objective as it may seem and through the writings and works of (Afro)surrealists we find that the world beyond the visible and rational world also needs to be explored and expressed. This essay will attempt to understand how this mystical, invisible world, which lies beyond the rational, visible world is accessed through the works of Afro-surrealist artists and how they have found self-expression there. Further it will use the writings of theorists like Cesaire and Senghor to establish a framework within which to generally approach these works and will look at specific works of artists like Herbert Cogollo and Jessi Jumanji from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

Senghor: Towards a more Holistic Universal

When talking about Negritude, Senghor calls it a confirmation of one’s being, the black personality or, the African personality. A being/personality characterized by an ‘African’ way of life, an ‘African’ sense of relating to the world and, by ‘African’ art and aesthetics.
Initially, this idea of negritude may seem to be firmly rooted in the particular as it only refers to the African identity and approach to life. According to Senghor, the African sees the world as a network of integrated life forces. A world devoid of strict binaries, where Man embodies the spirit and matter, body and soul, the masculine and the feminine. A world characterized by a network of seemingly opposing elements/forces all beautifully brought together to compose the painting of Man’s being and the universe. Art too is central to the African identity for Senghor. Art for the African is not divorced from his being. It is not an extra activity but an expression of humanity and human value. It is a social activity and a way of being, woven into the social fabric and fundamentally a part of human experience and existence. African art is rhythmical, ‘for it is rhythm-the main virtue of negritude-in fact, that gives the work of art its beauty’. This sense of rhythm is what balances the life forces (by which the African recognizes and relates to the world) and keeps them running in perfect harmony. Hence, art is the way by which the African, and his world’s, opposing elements come together to form an integrated network of life and of the universe.
However, despite the fact that Senghor seems to solely be interested in the African and his idea of negritude and African aesthetics only seem to accommodate the African world view, to say that he is limited to the particular or unconcerned with the universal would be a rather narrow reading of Senghor’s idea. His theory of negritude and African philosophy of being, that are completely opposite to western notions, are to be seen as a response to modern western humanism. An alternate way of being in a world violently dominated by the concept of western humanism and its superiority. Simply put, it opens up the possibility of having space in the world for a non-western identity. His negritude is not reserved for black Africa, rather, it is what he calls ‘Africa’s contribution to the universal’, a contribution to ‘international cooperation’. Again, the possibility of different, seemingly opposing and contradictory elements/life forces/identities/ideologies coming beautifully together to form a harmonious and balanced whole. Even when talking about African art and aesthetics, which he explains as rhythmic, it can be understood more largely as the idea of an aesthetic which seeks to find harmony and balance in differing forces. That is to say, proposing a universal aesthetic which finds beauty in the complete and harmonious accommodation, coming together and integration of various ways of being.
Hence, Senghor’s negritude or idea of African being can be seen as a way of relating to the world. A way characterized by reciprocity, rhythm, harmony, space for alterity and the integration of various different identities to the formation of a more beautiful, accommodating and holistic universal.

Senghor: Towards a more Holistic Universal

Culture and Liberation

In his essay ‘National Liberation and Culture’, Cabral places culture at the heart of Imperial domination but also considers it the key to the idea of national liberation. In Cabral’s view, cultural domination was essential to the imperialist’s mission since culture is the means of opposition to foreign domination. However, if repression of the native culture is what allowed the colonizers to take over, the recognition and reshaping of the native culture is what will allow national liberation.
Culture has its base in the means of production. It is rooted in material reality and is open to influence by exterior factors. Therefore, it is dynamic and constantly changing to adapt to historical circumstances and so for Cabral there is no notion of a pure, untainted, perfect African past/culture from pre-colonial times and the idea of harkening back to such a past/culture is a futile exercise. Rather, the current culture, rooted in the current material reality needs to be understood and redirected to serve as the basis for a nationalist struggle. Imperialist domination was actually a negation of the true historical process and therefore was the negation of the organic cultural process. By rejecting and standing against foreign rule which had hindered the organic process, national liberation movements were essentially acts of cultural resistance.
European cultural domination created a local elite alienated from the masses. They sought to become ‘civilized’, following and idealizing the colonizer’s ways and learning to look down upon the native culture and attempting to break away from it. This assimilated group of elites, leaders, rulers, intellectuals, professionals etc. served their European masters and would place their own class interests above everything else. Cabral recognized this and so explained that national liberation should be based on a profound understanding of all the various levels and elements of culture with the aim of bringing about a convergence of the various levels of culture. For this to happen, a reconversion of the mentalities of the assimilated elites was necessary in order to integrate them within the national struggle along with the integration of the leaders with the masses. The masses needed to break away from ethnic and social boundaries and progressively integrate with the larger national principles, rejecting principles and rituals not compatible with the rational national character of the struggle. Such a convergence was necessary to the formation of a national cultural force which would ultimately become the foundation of the armed struggle towards national liberation.
Liberation, characterized by democracy, popular participation, mass education etc., would then serve as a builder of culture with the objectives of developing a national culture grounded in the history of the nationalist struggle, raising political consciousness, developing patriotism, the spirit of progress through science and ultimately integration with the modern world. Therefore, culture is central to Cabral’s argument since it is the key to understanding European domination but also the key to national liberation and ultimately a progressive future.

A Break with the Past

In the decades following the second world war, the rise of the Soviet Union as a world power not only signaled the decreasing power of Europe but for Amir Haider Khan Dada, represented an alternative to the colonial order and the path to freedom and liberty for all. It represented a break with the past and the beginning of a glorious future for humanity based on unity, equality and justice. Similarly, for Sukarno, the post war period was a time for a new beginning and the time for the third world to lead the way to a prosperous future of unity, equality and freedom.

Writing about his stay in Moscow and his experience at the University of the Peoples of the East, Dada feels as if he has entered the new epoch of history and has left the colonial past behind. At the university Dada saw black men with Russian women, walked in the May Day procession parade and freely interacted with his superiors at summer camp. Here for the first time he felt respected and on an equal footing with the other races and his origins, his brown skin and ‘Indian-ness’ were a source of pride rather than humiliation and discrimination. A complete subversion of what it meant to be respectable.

For both, Dada and Sukarno, in this new era the political geography of the globe had also been inverted since in the past the geographical relationship between different lands had been based on the link between the colony and the metropole. Europe was the center of the world. No longer was this the case since Moscow was the new place of congregation, the center of revolution and offered a promise of alternate governance and self-determination. The Comintern being the biggest example of this. The conference at Bandung too was a reflection of this inversion. Sukarno called it the ‘first intercontinental conference of coloured peoples in the history of mankind’ and ‘a new departure in the history of the world’. This was one of the features of the ‘new order’ where the power of the colonizers was redistributed by decentering them. This was the new way of being in which the third world no longer needed Europe as a platform to discuss their matters.

Dada experienced true cosmopolitanism in Moscow. Moscow’s cosmopolitanism went beyond just having people from different backgrounds around, rather it was the active appreciation of diversity in which each tradition was considered respectful in its own right. An example of this being the vast number of languages in which the curriculum at the university was taught. The students, coming from diverse backgrounds, were given the opportunity (right) to study in their native tongue and no language was given preference over the other- something new for Dada. Sukarno’s speech gives the same message and emphasizes the spirit of unity and tolerance. He acknowledges the diversity, ‘Yes, there is diversity among us… with people professing almost every religion under the sun… Almost every political faith we encounter here… And practically every economic doctrine has its representative in this hall…’. However, for him this diversity is not harmful. In fact, this conference is one of ‘brotherhood’ and the difference has its own place in the new order while the unity and desire for collective well-being is the primary concern.

While at Moscow Dada learnt about Communist Internationalism which tied the fate of the world together and supported revolution all over the world. The belief that everyone’s freedom was linked led to the purpose of politics being the collective freedom and betterment of all peoples. For Sukarno the new purpose of politics is essentially the same. Now it is time for the people of the third world to redefine politics and go beyond self-interest. A ‘fresh approach’ is needed with the aim of ending war and conflict and striving towards peace and stability.

Since the colonial era, the colonized people had been living in the colonizer’s past. They had no present but were stuck in the time of the ‘not yet’. Communist Internationalism, supporting the cause of self-determination for all, called for independence- now. This meant the that time of the not yet had become a time of the now, breaking away from the colonial understanding of time and taking charge of the present. This breaking away resulted in a sort of temporal rupture. For Dada, Communist Internationalist sought to heal that rupture of time by opening up the possibility of a new reality where all people are free and equal and collective well-being the priority. Similarly, for Sukarno, there has been a break with the past. With the coming together of the leaders of the newly freed nations ‘… a New Asia and a New Africa have been born!’. It is now up to these nations to lead the world into a new epoch characterized by unity, peace, tolerance and morality rather than war, greed, discrimination and exploitation. Just as Russian Communism is the opening up of new possibilities of ways of being, for Sukarno the Third World represents a third way. A new alternate way for the world.

20020042

Representation of the ‘Savage Mind’

The ‘European’, white, logical, rational, civilized, liberal, male, was everything that the rest of the world was not. This image came from a myth model which defined the European in relation (opposition) to the ‘Other’, the ‘Native’. Therefore, European colonizers understood their thought process in opposition to the thought process of the indigenous people and since they regarded themselves as logical, rational and civil, this automatically rendered the thoughts and actions of the natives as illogical, irrational and savage. Hence the myth of the European was constructed in terms opposing the myth of the native. Colonialism relies on this idea of inherent and essential difference and so, can be seen as not only as a form of civilizational dominance and economic extraction but as an epistemic conquest which impacted the colonized beyond the economic and material level.

We find that the crew aboard the ships voyaging to places like Polynesia and the Americas consisted of men from various occupations and fields of study, like scientists, artists and anthropologists along with sailors and their captains. These men were engaged in gathering information about the natives and the production of knowledge which directly gave them the power to represent the people and land who were the subject of their study. Ethnographies, diaries, accounts of the Europeans were the only sources of information which presented the image of the native, as irrational, pre-logical, too caught up in ritual, passive and overly determined by signs, back in Europe and consequently the rest of the world and it is against this image that the image of the European was reaffirmed.

What is considered a pragmatic response differs between people and it is this difference which classified the native as the other. The act of knowledge production, gave the colonizers the power to determine which belief and knowledge system to privilege at the expense of the other. This epistemic conquest placed the European above the native. Therefore, the image of the savage is constructed based on the assumptions of the Europeans, de-personalization of the indigenous people and is through the European lens. So when voyagers like Cook describe themselves as gods in the natives’ eyes or their lives being governed solely by signs and ritual, they are presenting their own interpretation of the natives’ actions which ends up representing them- rather misrepresenting them.

The image presented by the Europeans, through their knowledge production along with the absence of native sources, is then taken up by academia and scholarship which continues to propagate the European bias and misrepresentation due to which the voice of the indigenous people is silenced and the European self-image continues to be strengthened at its expense.