For a while now I’ve been wanting to write a post responding to several emails and comments I’ve received about this blog. The specific emails and comments I have in mind have to do with concerns that the XChange is simply “preaching to the choir.” In all but a couple of cases, these concerns were expressed by people who are invested in building a stronger union, who want to push our local and state union to be more proactive, and who are, by their own admission, part of the choir.
Anyone who has been involved in progressive politics, activism, or labor organizing is undoubtedly familiar with some version of this line of argument: progressives/ activists/ organizers/etc. spend way too much time talking to each other an not enough time trying convince those who are not already on our side. This claim, of course, is an important one. But I have always been troubled by an unarticulated consequence of this line of argument that devalues what I might call “rhetorics of solidarity” in favor of “public rhetorics.” That is, an implication of the criticism that a blog like this is “preaching to the choir” is that a blog like this should strive to reach a “general public” or that the work of a blog like this is a “waste of time.” Let me emphasize once again that I do not think that was the intention of those who took the time to write me. However, I think these criticisms are part of bigger discourse about what kind of work is valued by progressive/activist/labor communities.
One of the podcasts that I listen to is “Media Matters with Bob McChesney,” which comes out of University of Illinois Public Radio station WILL AM 580. On May 9th, McChesney had Jessica Clark and Tracy Van Slyke on the program discussing their new book, Beyond the Echo Chamber: How Networked Progressive Media Can Reshape American Politics. Most of the discussion was centered around the rise of what has become known as the “progressive blogosphere” and how emergent networked media is helping challenge the mainstream media’s lack of critical reporting.
At one point in the discussion McChesney raised the issue of the progressive blogosphere “preaching to the choir.” Clark and Van Slyke were quick to take issue with the whole notion of preaching with the choir, preferring instead to foreground the concept of “assembling the choir.” That is, Clark and Van Slyke drew attention to the importance of “rhetorics of solidarity” to a broader progressive project. In their book, Clark and Van Slyke argue that
“preaching” is actually a false description of what many progressive projects do…it is the assembling and activating of the choir that is the critical strategy. Just as churches, temples, or mosques serve as the hubs for those seeking to examine and fortify their beliefs, a number of media outlets have evolved into central meeting places for those looking to join, debate, and strengthen political movements (148).
A bit further on they quote from Bob Ostertag’s book, People’s Movements, People’s Press: The Journalism of Social Justice Movements about the importance of “solidarity rhetoric” to any developing social movement:
if we seek a voice in shaping our society beyond our immediate social circle, we have to step outside our daily existence into roles which we are not accustomed and for which we have little or no institutional support. We have to band together to maximize our very limited time and resources. Before we can do any of that, we have to find each other–identify others with the same interests who are also willing to step outside their daily lives to pursue our long-shot objectives. We have to see who’s good at what, who else is doing what, who might rise to the occasion if given half a chance. We have to make plans, formulate strategies, set priorities. We have to agitate, educate, mobilize, confront, and more. In short, we have to constitute ourselves as a political subject, a constituency, a social movement. And if this we had done this sometime between 1830 and 2000 we would have made a newspaper. In most cases, it would have been the first thing we did (148-9).
Clark and Van Slyke then add that “From 2000-2008, the first thing that many activists and journalists did to join and define the progressive movement was to start a blog” (149).
Frankly, I think that this work–the work of constituting ourselves as a political subject–has been glaringly absent from both our local and State union work. This book is helping me think through some of the issues I raised in some earlier posts about the DIY ethic. It’s that “constitutive work” that has been absent from our union work in any sustainable way. Since I’ve been here, there have been moments of this work, but in each case it seemed as though we were constituted as a political subject by circumstances. To put it in the terms of my field, we responded to an external exigence–for example, our last contract negotiation. The problem with that kind of dynamic is that when the exigence is gone, so is the “stuff” that helped link people together. Some of this is unavoidable, of course. But it is clear to me that we need more forums–not ONLY the XChange–in which this work takes place.
As the fall semester quickly approaches, so does our next round of contract negotiations and strike preparations. Our contract expiration date, June 30, 2011, seems like a ways away at this point, but I can promise you that it will be upon us sooner that any of us would like. And it promises to be a difficult contract negotiations year. With the organizing we will do, will come new networks of affinity and we will once again constitute ourselves as a political subject. The question remains as to whether or not we will consciously try and do so or if we will be constituted by circumstances.
For my part, I will continue my work on the XChange as a small piece of constitutive work. I’m on the other side of the “preaching to the choir” criticisms, recognizing what I think is of value in this little experiment. That does not mean that I think that the work of getting the word out to the “public,” or establishing effective communication among all of our members is not important. In fact, I think it’s absolutely critical. And so I return to the critics. Yes, you’re right. We do need to do more than “assembling the choir.”
I challenge you to do it.