Liberal activists often accuse conservatives of being dogmatic, unfeeling, and unyielding, lacking in compassion, emotion and humanity on issues of rights for certain groups such as minorities, homosexuals, trans people etc. Conservatives on the other hand accuse liberal activists of trying to tear down the foundations of western democracies by promoting a victim complex amongst said groups. Both sides dig in their heels and refuse to acknowledge that merit may be found on the other side.
This essay is going to be a critique of liberal activism and how they ultimately go wrong. But before I offer that critique, let me be charitable and acknowledge the necessity for the emergence of certain activists or activist movements.
Throughout human history it was not inherently apparent that certain groups should be accorded certain rights, for example, slaves were once viewed as subhuman; property to be used as deemed by their owners, with no rights whatsoever. Women didn’t always have the right to vote and It wasn’t until 1893 that women were first granted the right to vote by Newzealand, heck even men didn’t always have the right to vote either back when kings ruled.
In those times, some had vested interests in maintaining those oppressive regimes, either because they benefited from them or because of the comfort of familiarity and the dread of uncertainty. If nothing had been done, sadly, that is how the world would have remained.
But it took the incredible efforts and sacrifice of certain revolutionary individuals the likes of Abraham Lincoln who freed the slaves in America, at great cost not only in terms of the threat it posed to the unity of the American union but also at the cost of his life afterwards.
Nelson Mandela spent the better part of his youthful age in jail fighting apartheid in South Africa before gaining freedom for his people.
Martin Luther King Junior championed civil rights for African Americans with an equally tragic cost of his life. These examples are inexhaustive, but the point has been made.
In those times, some genuinely believed that the status quo needed to be upheld and that society would likely fall apart if those systems were rocked. Well, they turned out to be wrong.
Today, the issues seem to be about police brutality, universal health care, immigration, transgenderism, intersectionality and all that colourful stuff.
These may seem like non-issues to conservatives today, but who is to tell whether these things would become the conservative position of a future yet undetermined—I make no case for this, but it might well be. For example, In the time of Lincoln, some argued that freeing a large number of black slaves at once would be catastrophic for the American union even though they believed that slaves should ultimately be freed, but at a later undetermined date. In hindsight, it seems Lincoln did the right thing freeing the slaves when he did, but it wasn’t that apparent to many then that it was the right thing to do.
Even Lincoln himself had evolving thoughts on the emancipation of slaves, and as much as he abhorred the practice of slavery, he believed sudden emancipation of all slaves might be bad for the stability of the union. His letter to Albert G Hodges in 1864 confirms this.
Lincoln wrote “I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I can not remember when I did not so think, and feel. And yet I have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an unrestricted right to act officially upon this judgment and feeling. It was in the oath I took that I would, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it my view that I might take an oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power. I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment on the moral question of slavery………I could not feel that, to the best of my ability, I had even tried to preserve the constitution, if, to save slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government, country, and Constitution altogether. When, early in the war, Gen. Fremont attempted military emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an indispensable necessity. When a little later, Gen. Cameron, then Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected, because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still later, Gen. Hunter attempted military emancipation, I again forbade it, because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come….”
He did go on later to free all the slaves at once, but this account crystallizes the reality that even good men may tolerate bad systems for the sake of “the greater good” how much more men who are oblivious or downright sinister.
All this is to say that, liberal or even radical activists are often adept at identifying societal problems and raising the needed awareness. In that regard, we would always be in need of such visionary, revolutionary individuals, because human progress is a journey, not a destination, but this is where my charity ends.
I have observed that almost all activist movements eventually become toxic, corrupt, inept and irrelevant. I theorise that there are different stages in the natural life cycle of any activist movement—the inception phase, the resistance phase, the acceptance phase and the grift phase.
At the inception phase, an important social issue is recognized, and the revolutionaries galvanize and champion a change.
During the resistance phase, there is a natural sometimes violent pushback to this change, and the battle for acceptance rages on bitterly between opposing camps. This can be exemplified by the white minority of South Africa who wanted to maintain the system of apartheid and violently resisted the revolutionary Nelson Mandela and the ANC.
But soon escape velocity is achieved—after a period of intense struggle—the dam breaks, the struggle is accepted and becomes mainstream, and this is where the true problem with activist movements begins. This marks the end of the acceptance phase and signals the birth of the grift phase.
A couple of things happen that drive the now successful movement mad for want of a better term. The activists haven been so primed for combat are unable to recognise that the battle has been won, so they remain in fight mode, building up their arsenal and seeking justifications for further escalation. The likes of Al Sharpton exemplify this when they scream that conditions for African Americans are just as bad, if Martin Luther King Junior were alive today, he would likely differ with Al Sharpton on the progress of civil rights for African Americans.
Another thing that may happen is that the original activists become replaced by those who do not understand the vision and mission of the struggle and cannot tell what the original objectives were and so invent new areas of grievance. The feminist movement is an example of this, first wave feminists were concerned with equal rights for women, now third-wave feminists want special rights for women.
The third and most sinister thing that may happen is that the movement begins to attract a lot of funds, and grows too big to fail, it becomes an organism that wants to survive, soon corruption sets in, the goals are no longer a priority, it becomes pecuniary, such that even when the battle is won admitting it becomes an admittance that funds are no longer needed to prosecute a war that’s already been won.
The activists become used to a certain lifestyle, seduced by their success, this becomes their job, passion is replaced by business interests and business must sell to remain in business, so they moan that the problem has never been worse even though it has gotten objectively better. They seek new justification for escalation and take on an apocalyptic stance. The leaders of these movements grow fat from the proceeds of the misery they continue to sow. The current milieu of BLM partly exemplifies this problem.
All these sorts of corruption are by no means unique to activist movements on the left, the red pill movement which I can comfortably say sits on the right has birthed some toxic behaviours as well such as incels etc. Although it began as a reaction to genuine grievances and abuses men face in relationships with women, it has devolved for the most part into a woman-hating movement.
These activist movements run the risk of becoming that which they oppose, soon their tactics are indistinguishable from that of their opponent, and though the message may be different, the tactics become similar.
It’s best to treat activist movements with a healthy dose of scepticism however lofty their ideals and to always watch out for signs of corruption and toxicity, because, it is easy to become sucked into an echo chamber where critical thinking is lost and biased regurgitation of an ideological position reign supreme.
Excerpts from Novel Hotel Shendam
The room looked old and the sheets felt clammy, almost in contrast to the outward appearance of the hotel. Certainly, this was not how the other rooms were, thought Ada. She had sneaked a peek into one of the other rooms as the hotel porter walked them down to theirs, it looked a lot nicer. She had complained immediately they were shown the room, but her boyfriend Mande with whom she was lodged calmed her down and appealed passionately, stating that they might not be able to find another accommodation for the night if she rejected this one. She had reluctantly accepted and tried to mask her annoyance by focusing on other things, but it was barely working.
Mande was in the bathroom whistling to himself as he showered, washing off the scents of sex, he always seemed to do that every single time, where she would want to curl up and cuddle and sleep in his arms, he’d get up immediately, rush to wash as he whistled his favourite tune to himself. On getting back he’d draw out his briefcase and begin to work. His life seemed to alternate between those two, and at times she felt she only came in when it was time to set the sheets afire.
She needed the emotional connection just as much as he needed the physical, but he seemed not to notice or to care. In her heart a deep gulf was building up, growing at a pace even she could not keep up with. She knew what she needed to do, but it was just so hard because she loved him, she thought he did too; it was all so confusing.
There were times when he becomes romantic and shatters her expectations, and in those moments she prayed for time to stand still. She wanted to be lost in the abyss of those moments, but it only lasted as long as he wanted. The moments were fleeting, soon he was back to his old ways. So, she usually distracted herself with memories stored from such moments—they were her haven, so that, when he retreated to his work, she did same too, retreating to her memories. It seemed like a good arrangement, and it was working well; at least for now, until the growing dissatisfaction becomes bigger than the pleasure of the escape.
Charles Ekokotu (Pharm. D.) is a bibliophile, prose fiction writer, poet, and playwright. His first self-published novel, Hotel Shendam—a crime fiction novel featuring a debate on race and colonialism—is available on Amazon. A very fun read! Grab a copy now!
This was a pleasure to read. You've thoughtfully articulated a concept here I've seen time and time again...once a necessary social movement as indeed achieved "escape velocity" and the necessary societal changes have been embedded (voting rights for women, minorities, etc.) then that tent should be folded up and the improvements celebrated. But this puts the activist class out of a job, so their intense energy is instead directed toward "fanning the embers" of whatever problems remain - often this perpetually energizes misgivings which would (I'd argue) have naturally otherwise have diminished to a negligible level. It is a sort of U-shaped curve where they begin doing societal damage because they can't let go, or derive their paychecks and life meaning from "the cause". There are these outfits like Color of Change which are the other side of this - they oscillate from outrage to outrage every few days and ask for donations, etc. all the time (I am on their mailing list out of curiosity). What "change" is ever secured? Unclear. Never is there any appreciation or context for how much better many aspects of life are over the past 10 years, 20 years, etc. It is just a persistent drum beat of rage, and suspicion pumped into your mind daily.