There are many versions of the story of the blind men and the elephant. Some involve three blind men, some six. The essence of the story is that each of the blind men, in trying to ascertain the nature of an elephant, touch one of its parts – its flank, its leg, its trunk, etc., and come up with a false conclusion. The blind man who felt the elephant’s trunk, for example, concluded that the elephant was a snake. The one who felt a leg concluded the elephant was a tree and so on.
I am reminded of that story in connection with our single-issue movements for social justice. Finally sensing that preoccupation with a single issue has hindered the struggle, the fashionable theory has emerged of “intersectionality”. So if we go back to the story of the blind men and the elephant, it would now conclude thus: After discussion among themselves, the blind men finally resolved their confusion. The elephant was indeed a snake, but it was also a tree, and an…etc.
The movement today says our society is sexist, racist, and homophobic, “classist”, environmentally destructive, and imperialist, and….etc. – all of which are equally unjust. So the movement will continue to organize around these single issues – what I call boutique activism – but burying the hatchet over priorities, without fighting over the market share. Just as the decision of the blind men to combine their opinions on what an elephant is did not correctly identify the nature of the elephant, our movements’ friendly compromise has not succeeded in grasping the systemic, organic, holistic nature of the various social injustices, which they have indeed not connected, but only with a plus sign. For example, the Human Organism is made up of its heart, lungs, bones, and many other organs and systems – do they intersect to meet the needs of the Human or are they the inextricable parts of the entire organism which they serve?
So getting back to our social-justice intersectionalitists:
What is the relationship of these injustices to one another? If they intersect, why do they Do they truly have an independent existence?
I would suggest that our problems stem from capitalism. They are manifestations of the capitalist system. They are all related to the origin and development of the capitalist system. And some of the issues are more critical to the capitalist class, to the maintenance of the system, than others. This does not mean that we ignore any injustice – quite the contrary. To ride ourselves of the oppressive capitalist system, it is necessary to demonstrate how it spawns and encourages every type of injustice. But it also means that we do prioritize those injustices which are most critical for the maintenance of the system, as well as identify those social strata, classes which by their social position will of necessity play the leading role in bringing the system down, are strategically the most important. So, for example, while the division of society into the 99% and the 1% has some usefulness, it masks the fact that the issues affecting poor people of color, part of the 99%, and the middle class, even upper middle class whites, who are also part of the 99%, are qualitatively different.
It is on this basis of qualitative differences that we conclude that working class people of color will play a leading role in the struggle for fundamental social change, while the role of the middle class, especially white middle class, must be auxiliary.
