(IND6) Allyship in a time of Change

At a time where the ‘Me Too’ movement, Black Lives Matter, and the finding of Unmarked Graves raise critical questions around decolonization, social change and critically considering what ‘sustaining shared futures’ really means, the concept of allyship becomes paramount: What is an ally in the role for social change? Where does allyship get produced and who gets to be an ally? What does it look like in practice and what does it do? This panel seeks to foster a discussion on the concept of allyship - it’s limitations and possibilities, and the role it plays in working towards decolonization and a ‘sustained shared future’. Tags: Mouvements Sociaux, Race et ethnicité

Organizers: Katie Boudreau Morris, Carleton University, Sherry Fox, CSA; Chair: Katie Boudreau Morris, Carleton University

Presentations

Katie Boudreau Morris, Carleton University

Where did transnational indigenous solidarity come from? Indigeneity as both structure of and resistance to settler colonialism, in the case of Turtle Island and Palestine

Why do some people engage in transnational, indigenous solidarity? Experiences of settler-colonialism vary widely between contexts and over time. Indigenous peoples of Turtle Island can be conceptualized as a group – as ‘indigenous’ and especially as ‘Aboriginal’ – only because of settler colonialism (See, for e.g., Alfred and Corntassel 2005: 598; Wolfe 2012: 134-135). So how do those engaged in anti-colonial solidarity and activism draw lateral connections between peoples belonging to vastly different geographic, ethnic, and ontological existences? The creation of the concept of indigeneity is a major feat of colonial power, considering the enormous diversity the term elides and discursively erases. Indeed, having suffered under colonialism may be the only common defining characteristic of indigenous peoples. Settler colonial realities are inextricably linked with the creation of indigeneity, in that it is shaped by power relationships that are both affected by and often produced as a response to societal frameworks such as capitalism and colonialism (Coulthard 2014: 7). Considering that indigeneity is a construction of colonialism and fraudulently suppresses an immense diversity of peoples, why draw any connections between diverse indigenous contexts, processes and peoples? Examining the common elements of systems of power, while always striving for a greater understanding of differences, allows for essential critical analyses of those systems. For example, critical genocide studies employ their framework with the understanding that genocides have occurred through different processes in different times and places, but that connecting the “structural elements” (Martínez Salazar 2014: 15) provides a basis for understanding and working against such processes. The same might be said for analyses of gender regimes or systems of apartheid. Using these critical frameworks pushes back against the “active work of epistemic, political, and economic elites that recognize and exercise the power of naming, including, excluding, and denying” (Martínez Salazar 2014: 15). The framework of settler colonialism, as an analytical tool and type of colonialism/coloniality framework, allows for greater and more accurate understandings of global historical and contemporary processes of power relations, “reconcil[ing] a range of historical practices that might otherwise seem distinct” (Wolfe 2012: 134). Thus, there are a number of common threads to be drawn between various realities of colonial oppression. These common threads are worth examining so as to contribute to counter-narratives. Alfred and Corntassel write, There are approximately 350 million Indigenous peoples situated in some 70 countries around the world. All of these people confront the daily realities of having their lands, cultures and governmental authorities simultaneously attacked, denied and reconstructed by colonial societies and states. This has been the case for generations (2005: 599). In the case of Palestine, Abdo writes that “The loss of land for indigenous Palestinians meant the loss of their lives as they had experienced them; it was and is the loss of their very history and existential being” (Abdo 2018: 58). In discussing the economic resources used to establish settlement, Wolfe writes that “there was nothing in particular to Zionism about settler colonialism’s metropolitan funding” (2012: 136). He also identifies several examples of other oppressive actions common in the creation and maintenance of a settler colony: “homicide, spatial expulsion and/or confinement, various forms of assimilation, and a repressive discourse” that he names “repressive authenticity” (134). This list is not exhaustive. Lugones (2010), for example, also names process of defining and relegating “women” as a gender class as another commonality. Wolfe contends with the notion that links cannot or should not be drawn between contexts with different specificities, arguing that “the idea that particular histories should share nothing in common would… be absurd – how else could we talk of such widely distributed commonplaces as capitalism, patriarchy, or homophobia? …national histories are unique but unexceptional.” (135) He argues furthermore that “our task,” by which I presume he means the task of those engaging in scholarly work, is to analyze and record the diverse and specific historical and contemporary contexts of settler colonialism in its various manifestations (135). And so, in regard to my big questions above, I wondered: are any the broad common threads of settler-colonialism observable in the specificities of relevant discourses? To that end, I analyse two sample sets of messages posted on Twitter; one set of tweets which I gathered with the hashtag #BDS which had been posted in September 2014 relating to solidarity with Palestine, and one publicly archived set of tweets that were posted in July 2013 with the hashtag #IdleNoMore relating to solidarity with indigenous peoples of Turtle Island. Significantly, between a quarter and a half of the sampled tweets contained direct or indirect references to land. 10% and 2.3% of the sets, respectively, contained the word “genocide,” while 17% and 19% contained references to solidarity at a local and/or international level. In this paper, I take a closer look at these narratives and how they might reflect a sense of lateral connection and transnational indigenous solidarity.

Marianne Vardalos, Laurentian University

Reactive Thinking as a Source of Potential Allyship for the Left.

Critical thinking, within the sociological context, is both a theoretical and methodological approach to confronting otherwise accepted ideas. Critical theory analyzes the dominant ideology in order to expose how it purposely misrepresents, justifies and legitimates domination. It is systematic and methodical. It is informed and deliberate. The ideas of many left-wing social movements such as post-colonialism, anti-capitalism, anti-racism, gender studies, and feminism utilize critical theory to interrogate power dynamics and call for radical, foundational change.  In contrast, there exists a threat to critical thinking known as reactive thinking— an automatic and unexamined mental process inherent in human behavior. A knee-jerk reaction. Although reactive thinking has its merits, particularly in situations demanding immediate response, for example, when one might be in danger, it is not at all seen as conducive to reflective analysis. While not entirely divorced from critical processes, reactive thought operates on a less conscious level, proving beneficial in scenarios where time constraints limit the application of a comprehensive critical approach. Although in Canada, reactionary thinking is much more associated with the Freedom Convoy and the Proud Boys than left-wing politics, perhaps a way forward is to see similarities between both perspectives. Both seek to challenge dominant power structures and promote social justice and equality. In this presentation, we ask if a reactive thinker might have more potential in becoming an ally of the Left, than a neoliberal who is steadfast in their support of the very systems that oppress them. This presentation posits that reactionary thinkers can be recruited and mobilized to examine deeply ingrained social norms, power structures, and cultural assumptions through a critical lens so that they can organize in revolutionary terms rather than destructive ones.

Malak El-Outa, Carleton University

Imagining Solidarity and Co-Resistance: The 9/11 Generation's Understanding of the War on Terror and American War Resisters of the 2003-2011 US-Iraq War

This research examines how the 9/11 generation in Canada, a cohort comprising of Muslim and/or Arab individuals who came of age during the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks (e.g., the War on Terror, heightened Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism) interpret the testimonies of American war resisters from the 2003-2011 US-Iraq War. Specifically, through qualitative semi-structured interviews with members of the 9/11 generation, this study explores how this generation imagines solidarity and co-resistance with American war resisters, that is former soldiers who participated in the Iraq war and developed a resistance against it, an understanding based on this generation’s own experiences of the enduring post-9/11 era. In doing so, this study raises pivotal questions about lived experiences, refusal, forgiveness, and the potential for solidarity and allyship between these two distinct communities. Specifically, this research provides valuable insights into how a generation profoundly influenced by the everlasting post-9/11 landscape imagines solidarity and co-resistance with individuals who at one point perpetuated the challenges and racism faced by the 9/11 generation, but now find themselves advocating against the same oppressive forces. Moreover, this study holds broader implications, particularly in the context of the ongoing atrocities in Palestine. Specifically, it underscores the urgent need to refocus discussions on the enduring impacts of post-9/11’s heightened Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism, evident in the current public portrayal of Palestinians, and the escalating acts of discrimination and violence against the Muslim and Arab community. Through re-centering these discussions, this research contributes important insights on how these acts of racism persist, how Muslim and/or Arab individuals challenge these facets, and the ways in various actors within our society, such as potential allies like American war resisters, can actively address and support those victimized by such acts. Lastly, this research’s exploration of how the 9/11 generation envisions movements of solidarity and co-resistance with American war resisters is more crucial than ever. This importance presents itself through the widespread acts of support occurring globally for the Palestinian cause, and by extension the Muslim and/or Arab community who once again are subjected to heightened Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism reminiscent of the immediate post-9/11 era.