Masking
Many a neurodivergent person is familiar with the concept of masking. It’s when you hide (parts of) who you are to conform to a group. Usually, this is in relation to all of society; hiding your neurodivergency to pass inside society and be accepted at some level.
I would argue that the same structure exists in leftist circles via dogmatism. Dogmatism is the act of where viewpoints already held are seen as correct, with any deviation from that being seen as incorrect simply by being a deviation.
The Cause
It’s something that exists very heavily inside leftist circles, and I understand why: it’s a high stakes movement and what we are fighting is a massive order which hurts, abuses and kills many who exist. We want to do the best we can. However: this assumes that the ideas we hold now are the only good ideas and that any other ideas are thus wrong and have to be fought.
It’s also a result of capitalism co-opting and deradicalising movements where ever it can, like has happened with feminist and LGBT-rights movements in history. So in a sense, it’s a form of self-defence, trying to stop those who would wish to destroy the left or use it for personal gain.
My Experiences
I have experienced it myself too. On Medium, I usually write about my ideas on leftist issues which fall outside the usual leftist dogma, like on pacifism and the European Union, and I have faced abuse for these analyses and ideas myself. I would not be an anarchist but instead a liberal, counter-revolutionary, any leftist swear word you can find.
Being called that is super tiring and really, quite abusive. It’s gate-keeping an ideology based on a disagreement or a difference in praxis and then taking that to a level of personal attack. It’s emotional violence in response to disagreement and an action in contradiction with anarchist principles. How can we be anarchist if we force our ideas upon those who disagree through violence?
Ableism
This structure is very much an ableist one. It assumes that people should conform to an ideal, which the group upholds, and those who can’t keep up the mask of conforming to the dogma fall outside the group and face violence.
However, the idea of everyone being able to conform to it, is in itself a hierarchy based on ability. That those who are able are “good”, and those who are unable are “bad”.
To conform is to give in to the structural violence of the mask, of having to hide your ideas in fear of violence against you. If you conform you, however, have to face less direct violence. Not conforming is giving in to getting the direct violence performed against you, so the structural violence is lessened. The pacifist solution is to abolish the mask.
Abolishing the Mask
How would one go about abolishing the mask? It’s creating an environment without fear of hatred. Thus, a healthy environment where having a bad take doesn’t mean immediate violence and where disagreement is accepted. If one has a bad take (in regards to intersectionality and/or marginalised people’s issues) and realises and apologises, it shouldn’t be held against someone. (if they don’t, feel free to deplatform or whatever, fuck brocialists and others who defend oppression)
If someone disagrees on praxis and philosophy, debate should be encouraged, but there should also be clear consent in the matter. Leaving the conversation should be very much possible and there should be others to deescalate situations if a debate becomes too fierce. Insults shouldn’t be allowed in such discussions. We are all anarchists, after all, and a disagreement doesn’t stop that from being the case. (We should be careful to avoid tone policing though)
Violence is bad, y’all. Let’s get along and like, be nice to each other? Hug it all out? Hugs are good. I like hugs. If you read this and want a hug, I’ll give you a hug.
Love (and hugs!), Ina
