Fundamentalism in the Heart of Empire
Fundamentalism is one of those complex
topics we felt we had to tackle. For both of us, fundamentalism is an issue that intersects with many of our experiences
as women, Jews and as queer people. From our perspective, fundamentalism is tied to a much larger conversations about
imperialism, colonialism and empire. It is a global issue, one that manifests itself in almost every culture and religion
including, but not limited to, Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Having said this, however, we made a strategic and political
decision to focus this piece primarily on how fundamentalism is rooted in political evangelical Christianity. We did
so because we wanted to explore the impact of political Christian fundamentalism inside empire—which is where we both
currently reside.
In an effort to frame this
piece we came up with four questions about fundamentalism. These four questions will serve as our touchstones throughout this
piece:
- How
are we defining fundamentalism?
- What are the binaries embedded
in the language of fundamentalism?
- How do we hold privilege as radical
organizers, people of color, queers, living in the heart of empire?
- What
are recommendations for the progressive left on how to bust binaries around the language and concept of fundamentalism?
How do we define fundamentalism?
As an exercise we looked up the word fundamentalism in the dictionary (American Heritage and dictionary.com). We also went
online and did some research on movements outside of the U.S. that are responding to globalization and U.S. economic and political
imperialism. This is what we found:
Fundamentalism:
1.
A movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism and that stresses
the infallibility of the Bible not only in matters of faith and morals but also as a literal historical record, holding as
essential to Christian faith belief in such doctrines as the creation of the world, the virgin birth, physical resurrection,
atonement by the sacrificial death of Christ, and the Second Coming.
2.
A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those
principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.
3.
An organized, militant Evangelical movement originating in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th century in opposition
to Protestant Liberalism and secularism, insisting on the inerrancy of Scripture.
Sources: American Heritage Dictionary, Dictionary.com unabridged.
In addition to these standard definitions we
would also add that fundamentalism, in the early part of the 21st century, has become a global metaphor for anti-Arab
racism and conservative nationalisms. The US and other colonial powers have become particularly adept at drawing an exclusive
parallel between “Islamic fundamentalism” with an urgent need for ending a “global war on terror”. This
parallel has been drawn under the guise that:
·
“Islamic fundamentalism”
is the only kind of fundamentalism that exists; and
·
Without examining the ways
in which occupation, colonialism and imperialism have fueled the existence of fundamentalism within Islam.
If we look at the global media’s use of the concept following 911 (and even before), fundamentalism has been used
to conflate the actions of Al Quaeda with Islam, to fuel anti-Arab racism globally, and to further the justification of the
US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. Fundamentalism has been strategically divorced from its global manifestations, including
how it’s risen from U.S based Evangelical Christianity (The New Right of the 80’s, 90’s and today) or from
how it has risen from conservative Judaism and has, for example, been used to justify the occupation of Palestine.
This piece, although focused on recognizing the global context of fundamentalism, will explore at a deeper level how fundamentalism
manifests within empire. We are interested in exploring the implications this particular “brand” of fundamentalism
has on those of us living inside empire and who are trying to wage struggles for justice and peace from this location. Without
a deeper exploration of fundamentalism within empire we feel that movements inside the U.S can not form the kind of analysis
and strategic organizing necessary to both strike at the heart of empire and build solidarity with other global movements.
Fundamentalism and the binary framework:
The ideological underpinnings
of fundamentalism have everything to do with binary thinking and practice. As with all of the binaries that we have
explored, there is an either/or inflexibility to fundamentalist ideology that strips away all complexity. This discussion
of fundamentalism only adds another dimension to the way in binary thinking and practice is deeply rooted in U.S culture and
can also be seen manifesting itself (albeit differently) in a global context. In this piece we want to highlight three
ways in which binaries present themselves within the context of fundamentalism:
- The strategic and imperialistic message that fundamentalism only exists within Islam
and that all other manifestations become justified, for example within Christianity or Judaism, as liberation movements.
- As an ideology fundamentalism is rigid. It’s used, as with other binaries
we have explored, to perpetuate and disseminate an “us vs. them” framework. This is why, for some, fundamentalism
is attractive as a political and ideological framework. We experience this so starkly in the current political/global
moment where "us vs. them" is the fuel that is being used to grow fundamentalist movements all over the world.
- The collapsing of the separation between church and state/religion
and politics. The messaging we receive that conflates all of these aspects of our lives is intentionally crafted to eliminate
a clear separation between our communities and the religious and political institutions that have been set up to govern our
lives.
Because
Christian political fundamentalism is either/or in it's framing, its simplicity is its primary recruiting and selling mechanism. For
example, George Bush has used this ideological framework to the fullest in his messaging. He uses “us vs them”
messaging laden with fear to justify his war mongering, empire building and fear tactics. Without question, because of the
vast resources at his disposal, George Bush is far more dangerous than the "Muslim fundamentalists" about which
he spends most of his day propagandizing.
As with other binaries that
we have explored, Christian political fundamentalism serves the white supremacist project. Because fundamentalism in
all of its forms is so rigid and binary (us vs. them/good vs. evil) it is the “perfect” tool for ensuring that
white supremacy stays solidly in place. Christian political fundamentalism serves as the “super glue” that holds
the structure of white supremacy in place. This does not mean that without Christian political fundamentalism there would
be no oppression.
However, Christian political fundamentalism is one of the essential ingredients needed to ensure
that there is an air tight seal on both/and thinking. The more people fundamentalists can engage, recruit and solidify
the less “oxygen” there is for those of us who hold critical thinking and multiplicity as a necessary, libratory
and urgent paradigm.
Because of the rigidity of
fundamentalism it has a tendency to fuel violence. Strategically, fundamentalist ideology does not leave room for any other
option but violence. Because fundamentalist ideology is so dichotomous, it is guided by the principle that you are “either
with us OR against us”. Within the context of Christian political fundamentalism there is the possibility of only
one truth—and that truth dictates that those of us who hold multiplicity and difference must be “saved”.
There is no room for human experience, difference or for exploring ways to resolve individual, institutional or global conflict/difference.
This is why fundamentalism is so dangerous. There is no way for people to relate to one another on multiple human
levels. Binaries—especially when they are embedded in fundamentalist thinking and practice---cut us off from one
another in the most dehumanizing ways.
Church and State:
How Binary Thinking Replicates Binary Strategies
There is something really
profound happening between the Christian Church and State here in the U.S. As we learned from some of the definitions
above, fundamentalism is often a response to perceived secularization (further problematized below) by those who want a strict
interpretation of religious texts. Secularism – or the idea that civil institutions should not be affected by religious
values – in turn, has been posited as the complete opposite of fundamentalism. As a result, we question whether
or not secularism can truly take root if not critically understood on its own as a necessary and libratory theory and practice,
rather than as a response to religious practice.
As the Civil Rights movement made way for new policies (inter-racial marriage, education policies) and alliances (inter-racial
unions and children, LGBT and feminist rights struggles, environmental justice struggles), the new Religious Right – what
we are defining as a cadre of politicians and church leaders working together to push a politically conservative agenda -
responded by stepping up its call to fundamentalism. One example of this is Anita Bryant’s anti-gay crusades of
the 1970s (1977 & 1978). Add to this the Reagan era, Ralph Reed, Newt Gingrich, George W Bush and Pat Robertson. One
by one, the civil rights gains that were made in the 60’s and 70’s have systematically been repealed in the post
9-11 era. This insidious campaign has been waged by the new Religious Right who strategically used the church as their
primary avenue for communicating, justifying their political objectives under the language of morality and religious righteousness.
In the end, the new religious right and the Republican Party have consolidated their power by aligning with one another and
dismantling-- brick by brick—the constitution and any equality gained under the law in the last several decades.
Although we find the Civil Rights and anti-war movements of the 60’s to be a significant example of both the libratory
power of the Church working with the people as well as an example of the potential of secularism—at the same time they
highlight what can go wrong when progressive movements themselves do not break free from binary thinking and practice.
As the rise of the right wing and the Religious
Right began to take hold in the 70’s and 80’s the Left did not understand that this was a mass opposition movement
based in either/or thinking. These binary tactics and frames have been used to fuel nationalist, fundamentalist and imperialist
sentiments. Only in recent times have the majority of the Left begun to understand that the primary tool used by the right
to further embed religiously fundamentalist and nationalist ideologies in US is binary thinking (us vs. them). The right has
framed all of their strategies and messages in an “us vs. them” framework and, in turn, what has solidified their
ability to do this is that the Left has not freed itself from its own binary thinking and strategies.
As a result, a truly libratory and intersectional framework based on our values of liberation and democracy
have not emerged in a way that would truly allow something revolutionary to happen. We are our own worst enemies and,
in turn, our movements have been married in our own lack of creativity and commitment to alliance building across movements
and communities.
Although the progressive Left
had a really difficult wake up call in the 2004 Presidential elections—it was made even more difficult by the fact that
these elections completely unmasked how intimate the Church and State had become. As religious minorities in this country,
and specifically as Jews, it was not a surprise to us to see how steeped the United States is in Christian values.
As Jews our experience has been that that the Christian (not even Catholic, but specifically Protestant Christian) Church
has always been the State and the State has always been the Christian Church. Our experience has been that the United
States has constructed a false separation between Church and State that non-Christian people globally are keenly aware of.
Ironically, the main “pushers” of the thinking that there is a separation between
Church and State are the same as the people who think that there should never be a separation between Church and State: Christians.
They benefit from the false separation as well
as from the collapsing of the binary.
In the past decade, however, there is one example
that indicates the powerfully damaging outcomes of the visible and deeply disturbing alliances between the Religious Right
and religious conservative politicians around the world. This is not just a U.S. phenomenon. What often binds religious
fundamentalists together is a desire to consolidate power and, consequentially, limit the lives of women, LGBT people, People
of Color etc. on moral/religious grounds. The best example of this is the response by Fundamentalist religious leaders
in Israel following the announcement of World Pride: featured on the cover of The New York Times, the most powerful clergy
of the Jewish, Muslim and Christian faiths joined together to sign a document specifically denouncing LGBT rights to assemble. Alternately,
the Religious Right has employed a racist, xenophobic and clearly binary strategy for justifying empire: the framing of all
Muslims as fundamentalists. Ironically, the U.S. Religious Right has specifically sought to diminish the presence of
Muslim nation-states by targeting those that have a strong consolidation of religious and political power, while simultaneously
applying similar (though not as apparent) religious-political structures.
We do think that the majority of Christians, like people of all other institutionalized faiths, are focused primarily on
practicing the tenets of their faith. And we believe that spirituality is fundamental to bridging the body-mind gap. For
example, the feminist movements among women of color were spiritually rooted and, as a direct result, were effective in reaching
thousands of women of color seeking to understand how our bodies can move through a society that is split between body-mind/rational-emotional,
etc. Because Gloria Anzaldua asked us to consider the spiritual dimensions of this work, we were able to re-consider
our place on this planet. Because Audre Lorde asked us to consider the spiritual dimensions of this work, we were able
to solidify our place on this planet. Because of the Black Church, the Civil Rights movement was able to mobilize millions
of people. And the spiritual, in this case, is about a politics of memory and interaction. Given this, the response
of secularization in the face of fundamentalism still doesn’t get to the fact of faith – and that we as human
beings in general seek to confirm our existence through outside structures – whether they be religion, science, community
or art.
Where all of this goes wrong
is when religion and religious institutions become the masks under which the State – a relatively new institution and
socio-political structure – makes decisions affecting people living in a pluralist society. And the State, in this
moment in history in which we find ourselves, is clearly interested in the consolidation of power under the guise of the nation
and the nation of the United States, specifically.
Nationalism, Imperialism and Liberation
We see nationalism as fertile
"training ground" for fundamentalist thinking and practice. This is not to say that everyone that is a nationalist
is going to eventually gravitate towards fundamentalism. However, we do think that religious fundamentalism is one of
the most extreme outlets of nationalism. For example, in the years immediately following the Holocaust, Jews all over
the world exhibited a justified nationalist politics as it related to the state of Israel. However, in recent times,
this nationalism has manifested itself into a more politically oppressive practice, enveloped in the language of religiously
fundamentalist ideology, which as led to a state politic of armed occupation and the monitoring of Arab/Palestinian bodies
and lands. These state actions have caused a huge ideological divide in the Jewish Diaspora because some of us still
believe that Zionism is a liberation movement while many of us believe that Zionism is a primary tool of oppression.
In order to really see how problematic the intersection religious fundamentalism and conservative politics can be it is
essential to place them in a global context. It is true that the right wing, wealthy, white fundamentalists in the
U.S. use hierarchy, power and oppression to impose their order on the rest of the world, through war and social
and economic policies, as well as privatization. However, it is also true that for many others in the world—particularly
People of Color— their commitment to fundamentalist religious practice is directly related to the oppression they have
been forced to bare at the hands of the United States and other first world countries. With the bombardment, sometimes
literally, of U.S. products (Coca-Cola is perhaps the most benign example – McDonald’s begins to get evil –
especially knowing what we know about the health impacts of fast food), policies (NAFTA/CAFTA/bi-lateral agreements attempting
to regulate the production of AIDS drugs are another example), norms and values (this is most apparent in Western discussions
of the veil as a metaphor for women’s rights in the Middle East), many peoples respond by their own extremes –
sometimes going so far as to search/claim “purity” or “tradition” as the stronghold of resistance
to what they are experiencing as cultural erasure and the loss of political sovereignty. For many People of Color globally,
fundamentalism and nationalism are often ideological and political tools used to cope with the repression and genocide
they face at the hands of imperialist empire. Despite what can result from their immediate effectiveness to organize against
empire, fundamentalism and nationalism are not viable long term solutions for growing liberation movements and democracy. Liberation
movements and democracy need flexibility and a commitment to preserving the human dignity of all to survive.
We do want to be clear that nationalism has been a valid response of people under colonial rule. It was the response
of liberation movements throughout Africa and Latin America in response to European colonial rule. The ideals of trying
to search for a nation-state not ruled by one ethnic group or people, and ruled under democratic or socialist principles –
arose out of the conditions of hundreds of years of slavery and domination by people not of one’s land. So, in
this, we do not critique the ideals that gave rise to nationalism as an instrument of liberation. Where nationalism falls
short is when it serves as the end goal of any peoples’ movement – when the nation state takes on the role of
the oppressor. Nation states throughout Africa and Latin America have notoriously oppressed their own peoples, and people
of ethnic and religious minorities, to the point where now the response is trans-national organizing and solidarity movements,
as well as indigenous movements such as EZLN, which specifically advocate for a dissolution of borders and a re-organization
of power.
A really poignant example
is East Timor, where Ana lived and worked in 2000. The struggle for national independence following the Portuguese withdrawal
from and the Indonesian occupation of East Timor in 1975 gave rise to an incredible spirit of hope and vision, a new language
of resistance (Tetum) and a fierce independence of thought and movement among the Timorese people. As the U.N. (this
in and of itself is problematic) negotiated the establishment of the nation state of Timor Leste, and then officially “handed
over” the Presidency to Xanana Gusmao. Right now in 2007, East Timor prepares for its first free elections. And
yet, the country is struggling as guerilla leaders vie for power, women and children continue to be displaced by violence
and international bodies continue to participate in shaping the Parliamentary processes. This is among a people who maintained
indigenous language and clan structures through 450 years of European occupation and genocide under Indonesian rule. So,
while the desire for an independent nation served as the fuel for liberation, once it became the ultimate goal, tensions around
who is a legitimate Timorese, and who gets to decide the agenda came into play – and is strongly influenced by larger,
more financially powerful countries like the United States.
The national project of the United States has always been an imperial project, beginning with the 13 colonies and extending
westward, and with the Monroe Doctrine, southward. In this day and age, American empire (and Arundhati Roy has brilliant
writings on this), is extending into Southwest and Central Asia, implementing the structures of war and business – and
with Evangelical Christian missionaries at the forefront. All in the name of democracy and “freedom”. So
while the links between Church and State in the U.S. are not as obvious as they were under the Spanish Crown in the 15th
and 16th century, or the Protestant church in the 18th and 19th centuries, it is how they
are being framed and used by the religious right under the guide of “moral values” and “true democracy”
that has become increasingly insidious and problematic.
How do we hold privilege as radical organizers, people of color, queers, living in
the heart of empire?
Ana’s Experiences:
As you know, I grew up in and outside of the United States, and out of a bi-racial/bi-cultural/bi-national union. In addition
to navigating the exploding binaries around race, I’ve also had to learn to navigate different ideas of citizenship
and belonging. I have also had the privilege of being exposed to many different societies and traveling extensively. As a
person who has consciously chosen to live in the United States, and who had the privilege to leave the land of my birth, I
am constantly asking myself about the pitfalls and limitations of living in the heart of empire. And about my responsibilities
as an international citizen living in the belly of the beast.
For one, regardless of where I live
in this world, I am still a queer Jewish radical female artist with a U.S. passport. That does not change. My racial
classification changes, and my class status changes, but not the fact of the little blue book. This is increasingly significant
in the era of U.S. empire. And more so because the little blue book is backed up by years of being educated in the norms
and expectations of U.S. society – I am not just a representative citizen, I am an educated, socialized representative
citizen. This is important not just outside of U.S. borders, but also within – because we are in a struggle between
nationalist fundamentalism and internationalism best exemplified by the anti-immigration/immigration struggles affecting the
majority of communities of color. I hold the privilege of a blue book that says I am a U.S. citizen.
Where the privilege lies for me is in the fact that I have been taught to believe in a democratic history (even if history
indicates to me that the U.S. has been autocratic, the belief in the ideal of democracy is there). I have also been taught
to believe in religious freedom, secularism and in the Constitution. Regardless of my individual views on these documents
and doctrines, the fact is that many people who come here to the U.S. do so because those documents and doctrines are in place. And
I think that part of sitting in my privilege as a U.S. citizen is acknowledging that there are many people who are here not
just because of economics, but because they seek religious freedom, and the other freedoms spelled out in the Constitution. And
that while most countries around the world fall back on the language of human rights (which, in general, we do not), it is
so because human rights are often violated to degrees not as of yet imaginable in the U.S.
Right now, we are all living in empire, however, our bodies occupy different spaces of power based on citizenship and nationality. What
are the implications of fundamentalism on transnational bodies (immigrants, emigrants who are transnational because of economic
or political imperatives, specifically)? For one, fundamentalism under empire gives rise to the domination of one set of bodies
by other sets of bodies – in this case, this is best exemplified by xenophobia and neo-colonial racism which is giving
rise to the elimination of multiple cultural expressions and forms. And because of empire, nationalism and ethnocentrism
act as responses of resistance – in other words, as the U.S. encroaches on the independent nations of the Caribbean,
the resistance takes the shape of extreme national identities (Cuban, Dominican, Trinidadian, etc), where essential notions
of ethnicity and religion come into play. In the best case scenario, U.S. imperialism re-awakens collective memory and provokes
a call for the mining of personal wells of strength and struggle to hold onto cultural values that provide a framework of
sustenance for a people. In the worse case scenario, imperialism and fundamentalism provokes nationalist fundamentalism. So,
as an example, with U.S. Evangelicals doing missions in communities throughout Latin America at the same time that MTV fills
the airwaves, and U.S. economic and political policies weaken the agricultural and manufacturing sectors of society, nationalism
and fundamentalism fall hand in hand by creating a limited definition of citizenship that excludes the most vulnerable sectors
of society – sectors that are vulnerable because of racism and colonialism in the first place.
Lisa’s Experiences:
I was born and raised in the US. Unlike your broader crossing experience I only have the experience of living in empire
we call the United States. I work at being aware, on a daily basis, of the fact that there is considerable privilege
and power associated with this experience. Yet, I also think that there is a critical analysis that can emerge from
living within the belly of the beast. Making it a daily practice to develop an analysis of my location within empire
is, from my perspective, an important step in making a life long commitment to understanding privilege and power from a global
perspective... What I find frustrating is that there are not enough spaces in our movements where those of us who are
organizers can learn how to dismantle the US power structures from within. Although it is essential that there
is pressure from outside the US around dismantling all aspects of empire —I also think that it is critical that those
of us that benefit directly from it are engaged in daily practice and struggle around how to dig deeply at the roots of beast
in which we live. . If our movements were unified in this commitment we may be able to make more of an impact.
Yet, our movements have become so siloed and single issue focused that we may not be digging at the deepest roots of oppression
and privilege.
One of the things that I have
been thinking in relationship to this is what comes up in my body as a mixed race, Jewish/Arab and woman identified body as
I consider the issues of fundamentalism, empire and nationalism. My body feels both restricted and, at the same time,
a sense of possibility. I feel restricted because the “system” is so huge and these issues are so deeply rooted
and laden in power dynamics that I know that my body alone can not dismantle empire. As a result, I almost feel a suffocating
weight on my shoulders because that’s what living in the belly of the beast feels like to me. I feel an extra
layer of suffocation as a Jewish/Arab-American because I inherently know that empire has been set up to annihilate my body
and bodies like mine. I feel this very acutely as a Jewish/Arab American in particular. Empire is so saturated
in Judeo-Christianity that I often feel sickened by it.
On the other hand, I feel
a sense of possibility because I believe that those of us that live at the intersections in the very essence of who we are
have a powerful perspective to bring to this work. Those of us who are both deeply conscious and intersectional in our identities
are never comfortable living in empire. Our bodies carry tremendous tension and resistance. This tension and resistance,
along with the complexity of our identities, provide the makings of a lens that can allow us to vision what is possible beyond
empire, fundamentalism and extreme nationalism. If unlocked, our bodies and experiences contain the essential components of
libratory thinking and practice. This is why I think that bridge people are uniquely positioned to understand, challenge
and ultimately dismantle empire, extreme nationalism and fundamentalism. Within our bodies we possess the ability
to get into those grey areas and tease apart the binaries in the most complex ways. Our work of teasing, stretching
and busting the binaries is liberation work unto itself.
What are recommendations for the progressive left on how to bust binaries around the language and concept of
fundamentalism?
We are always talking about busting binaries – refusing to participate in essentialism in its many forms. This
dialogue we have been having around fundamentalism is particularly about how to occupy the grey spaces afforded us as queer
Jewish radical organizers of color – spaces that can hold alliances between radicals and progressives searching to transform
the way we do this work. The transformation has become increasingly necessary and urgent in our view. We do not
see ourselves as “experts” on any of this. Yet, we do feel a responsibility to reflect and share some recommendations
we have based on our own lived experiences. We have framed these recommendations as either questions or reflections that we
would like to share with the progressive movement.
- How much do we know about liberation movements outside the U.S. that arose out of anti-imperialist struggles
and became or have become true liberation movements (and what are the markers of “true liberation”)? How
do we learn from these movements without appropriating the peoples’ cultures, values, etc?
- Having clear examples of where democracy and liberation manifested themselves and/or were close to doing
so can provide us with a vision for alternatives to fundamentalism. The best antidote to fundamentalist ideologies are
complex and dynamic forms of democracy and liberation.
- In times
when people around the world have specifically been affected by U.S. policies and actions, what are the lessons that we can
learn about how U.S. citizens have held each other accountable around these struggles? What are ways in which we’ve
meddled that have been ineffective and harmful? What are ways in which holding our government accountable has proven to be
a successful strategy? Taking stock how our government has acted globally and how we, as citizens, have either turned
a blind eye or challenged the behavior is an important step in being aware of our position within empire. Because the
imperialistic behavior of the US government has so much to do with fueling fundamentalism and nationalism in other parts of
the world, it’s important to have an ongoing awareness of the actions of our government.
- What are our U.S. based movements doing to build alliances between people affected by
U.S. policies abroad who are now as a result living in the U.S. and those who are U.S. born and raised? Alliances based
on solidarity and liberation and that can forged between organizers inside and outside of the United States are critical to
rooting a different kind of vision. Weaving together all of the strategies, practices and thinking that folks are doing
around the world about democracy and liberation is one of the best ways of challenging nationalism and fundamentalism. Together
we are more powerful (and complex) than we are alone! Also, since fundamentalist ideologies exist in every corner of
the globe and in every religion it’s going to take collective action and thinking to hold a more humane vision.
- How do we as radical organizers and people in the left occupy the grey spaces between
being a subject/object of empire to embodying dualisms? How do we sit in that uncomfortable place of being both privileged
and affected by institutions of oppression? Sometimes being inside the belly of the beast can provide an intimate understanding
(and discomfort with) the power structures (as is true for folks located outside of the belly). The more willing those
of us on the left are to use this discomfort for the purposes of greater awareness and action the stronger our organizing
can be. Challenging the empire from within is one way that we can try to lessen the impact of the actions of our government
globally.
- For people of color, queer, Jews, Muslims, indigenous,
mixed race people in the U.S., we embody the binary of colonial/imperial subject/object – what does that mean, then,
for us as organizers? How do we avoid and/or excavate the pitfalls of empire? What are these pitfalls (hint: fundamentalism,
nationalism, secularism, essentialism)? Those of us who hold multiplicity in our bodies and experiences have something
to contribute to how we hold a different kind of vision for democracy and liberation. The best antidote to binary thinking
and practices (such as fundamentalism, nationalism etc…) is democracy and liberation that allows for multiple truths
and realities. Since those of us who are living multiple realities simultaneously have some practice with trying to create
this vision, we also may have some useful insights around how to achieve this globally.
Finally,
we both believe that it is essential that our movements understand that issues of fundamentalism,
nationalism and empire ARE at the roots of any issue that they may be singularly focused on. Our movements are stuck in this
false dichotomy: imperialism, fundamentalism and empire are international issues and, as a result, they are separate from
women’s issues, LGBT issues, civil rights etc… This false dichotomy MUST go because we will never get to the
roots of oppression until the Left recognizes that dismantling empire is OUR necessary, urgent and immediate work.