Given the present political situation in this nation, the rise of the far-right and it's grave threat to our civil liberties, as well as the Empire's assault on people and institutions of other nations, i hesitate to launch into some sort of potentially diversive polemic here. Eating our young while the forces of darkness continue to consume all branches of government is a real bad idea.

So, rather than go on and on about how elitism and the very real existense of gatekeepers on the Left alienates the very people who could help turn our dreams of social and ecological justice into reality, i'd simply like to call upon progressive activists who happen to have a high-profile or be in positions of power to reflect on their own actions and approaches to activism. I'll reserve the title above and a long essay on the subject for better times, perhaps after we rid our nation of the forces of darkness.

Meanwhile, perhaps such reflection should begin with some soul-searching questions like: How inclusive are you in your work? Are you inclined to ask your co-workers and fellow activists their opinions? Do you strive to always give credit where credit is due? Is your ego in check? Do you belive some activists opinions and efforts are more important than others? What sort of guage do you use to make such conclusions? What are the ramifications of so-called leadership in a radical democracy?

I think we can ask and answer such questions (and i'm sure readers have additional ones in mind) with an air of mutual respect and consideration without going for each others throats; in fact it's crucial that we do given the stakes. Someone on this or some similar thread brought up the old chestnut about there being no infighting on the Right. Actually that's not accurate: they're just more cautious about when and where their differences surface. Granted, their natural propensity for hierarchy does set the stage for less public displays of disunity, but they occur none-the-less.

The tendency toward hierarchy is a human trait going back, i imagine, to tribal times. I'm no psychologist, but in some ways it seems like an extension of the individual ego: a "leader" or "leaders" becoming a sort of collective ego for a group. From there a pecking order usually develops, thus solidifying the hierarchy. Personally, i see this as an age-old problem but i'm not sure our highly flawed species is up to the task of overcoming such elitism. I's like to be proven wrong. What do you think?