Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Erik Dierks on Rojas

In the reading, “Are the Cops in Our Heads and Hearts?”, Rojas discusses how even non-profits fall into the trap of internalized capitalism due to the sponsorship/funding that these organizations receive in order to pay the community organizers that do this as their profession.
Rojas notes that this internalized capitalism still shows up even in movements that aim to abolish said systems due to the simple fact that we currently live in a capitalist society that is driven solely by money and labor for profit. She then goes on to talk about how this in turn leads to corporate interests dictating the stances that social movements and NGO’s will have on any given issue and the way they end up organizing around that specific topic. Rojas further stresses this point through a quote from her father who stated in response to how organizers are paid by foundations via the corporate funds they receive, “Clearly they are paying you to keep you from really challenging the system, to make sure that you are accounted for”. Her father’s statement goes to show how much power corporate interests hold over us and control even how we fight back against them. For me, this quote really solidified the realization of how deep in the capitalist state even the most progressive of movements can unintentionally be because of how necessary money is in order for us to survive.  Corporations also continue to hold this power over organizations and activists and have them stick to certain agenda’s because without their funding, their livelihood is at risk. Rojas brings this up in her discussion of how short-term goals with little to no real impact and “smoke and mirrors” come into play with non-profits. She then goes on to discuss the changing of activist tactics to models that focus heavily on everyday activism and how successful this type of organizing has been in Latin America.
 I really enjoyed reading Rojas’ discussion of the different types of activism and organizing that have worked so successfully compared to the typical activist work seen in the United States. Reading her discussion of how movements can truly divest from corporate interests and work alongside non-profits rather than through them, but still actively make a change in their society such as The Zapatistas work with an NGO to create video teaching community members how to document their work and abuse that they experience from the state. After this goal has been achieved, Rojas states how the NGO would then dissolve, therefore having no direct control over the movement and its goals
While not directly related, the irony of corporate money funding movements and foundations that are actively trying to fight against said capitalist system reminded me a lot of the 2016 Democratic primaries. Specifically, it reminded me of the reasons why a large majority of millennials so actively supported Bernie compared to Hillary. Similar to foundations and non-profits that are funded via corporate interests, Hillary’s campaign was largely funded through major donations from corporate interests and represented the establishment (ex. Super pacs, wallstreet etc.) which caused people to question whether or not she would actually enact more progressive policies or stay more centralist in her policies and viewpoints compared to Bernie’s grassroots campaign that was highly funded by donations and had a long history of progressive ideals.

On page 206/207 Rojas talks about how SIIS tried to address the issues of internalized capitalism and hierarchies by removing titles and paying everyone a flat salary. However, they found this was not equitable because as Rojas stated, “paying a single person with no dependents, like myself, the same as a single mother made no sense at all.”  I’d like to further discuss how issues such as this could be addressed and possible solutions.


No comments:

Post a Comment