The Right Kind of Activism: How chasing the single best strategy leaves the movement brittle
Instead of a monoculture movement, we should be promoting a variety of theories of change that work under different conditions. Rather than competing with each other to prove who’s right and pick up volunteers, we can see ourselves as an ecosystem. Every organization has their strategy and our strategies complement each other. The more distinct the strategies, the better: a bunch of variants on street outreach is much less diverse than a group doing street outreach, another making social media content, and a third running grassroots protests. No matter what turns out to be effective, we’ll already be investing in it.
ZACHARY SEGALL: There’s a particular mindset among animal activists… called the “right kind of activism” mindset. It goes like this: There is a right way of doing activism, which is the activism I do. If there were a better form of activism, I would be doing that. Anything else is inefficient, ineffective, or even actively counterproductive.3 Since animal activism is such a life-and-death pursuit, it’s my duty to convince other activists that their forms of activism are inferior and to get them to join my cause…
Even those of us who don’t have that level of conviction often embody milder versions of the mindset. Perhaps we’re accepting on the surface, but harbor doubts about whether other forms of activism are worth the time or money. Perhaps we have doubts about our activism, but still carry a quiet confidence that it is still better than everything else. In some ways, this attachment is difficult to avoid: when we commit so much of ourselves to an approach, it’s hard to see it as anything but the right approach…
On their face, the premises behind the Right Kind of Activism mindset seem reasonable: There are more and less effective forms of activism, so there must be a best kind of activism. If we know the best kind of activism, we should try to convince people to follow that form of activism. But when we look at these premises from a strategic perspective, they start to fall apart… Our best activism is really more like our best guess activism… Our desire for a good solution and our personal affiliations make us overconfident in our approaches…
Instead of a monoculture movement, we want a diverse ecosystem. Specifically, this looks like promoting a variety of theories of change that work under different conditions… Rather than competing with each other to prove who’s right and pick up volunteers, we can see ourselves as an ecosystem. Every organization has their strategy and our strategies complement each other. The more distinct the strategies, the better: a bunch of variants on street outreach is much less diverse than a group doing street outreach, another making social media content, and a third running grassroots protests. No matter what turns out to be effective, we’ll already be investing in it…
With how much time we’ve spent criticizing each other, we should know where our weak points are. Instead of using those critiques as a reason why someone should stop doing cage-free campaigns (street outreach, digital activism, whatever), we can reframe them as a way to bring those forms of activism into their best selves. Yes, street activism often lacks long term feedback; let’s figure out how to track our impact. Yes, there’s a danger of reinforcing the system with corporate welfare campaigns; let’s pick better campaign targets. Yes, our activism is flawed; let’s refine our strategies instead of abandoning them…
Some forms of activism will end up getting more resources than others. These choices should be informed by our best understanding of what strategies are most effective, but are not a reason to write off a strategy wholesale or stop looking for the best version of a strategy. We can invest in what seems to be working and still preserve diversity. We can build a robust movement that thrives no matter what’s going on around us. SOURCE
RELATED VIDEO: