Political movements, particularly liberation movements, have come to define the 20th century. People observed the formation of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the League against Imperialism, and the United Nations, amongst other institutions and organizations. NAM was founded in 1961 in Belgrade, advocating for a “middle way” for developing nations; thus, not aligned with Western and Eastern power blocs. As of 2012, there are 120 member countries in the movement.
With the process of decolonization underway, some very important questions were being raised in the developing world. The most pressing issue was how to ensure that remnants from a country’s colonized past were thrown out in favour of a flourishing democracy enriched by the struggle of independence. However, towards the mid-20th century, the collective was being broken down due to the emergence of culture-based democracy. As an example, the Indian democracy was turning out to be different from the Egyptian democracy by virtue of culture and the rise of nationalism. The borders between nations suddenly felt real and threatening. The lesson that all of us can learn from this is the importance of collective consciousness in any liberation movement.
Photo Credit: Rodjak via Deviantart cc
In my view, it is not enough to just understand socio-economic-political differences amongst people as it is also crucial to keep that understanding in mind while calling for a change in the existing order. This is where a collective consciousness can begin to form and grow. Most, if not all, “successful” movements explicitly recognize the differences that flow within a particular society and incorporate those differences as a force to transform the existing system. On the other hand, all “unsuccessful” movements—those movements that do not transform the current order of the societies in question—are usually tilted in favour of the more powerful and this misbalance reflects not only in the failure of the movement, but, in the long run, it shows up as unhealthy discontentment amongst people in a society.
Take the Arab Springs movements of 2011, particularly in Egypt. The protests on the street challenged the regime in a way that it wasn’t used to. Soon, however, the people’s movement was overtaken by a more “powerful” group: a political party called the Muslim Brotherhood. They became the unelected, unofficial spokespersons for the people, mediating between them and the regime. Thus, the common man was removed from the dialogue, resulting in a great deal of discontentment, not just with the regime of Mubarak but with the Muslim Brotherhood too.
The formation of a collective social consciousness was broken down, and thus class analysis was forgotten about. The Muslim Brotherhood didn’t want to engage in class analysis or be involved in developing a collective consciousness without referring to hierarchy—it was an opportunity for them to potentially become the ruling party of Egypt. Thus, the power dynamics were tilted and what followed in Egypt was not a scenario that people had desired for and it is far from it at present.
The thirst for power besieged the collective force of the people of Egypt, and this is something that isn’t just true for Egypt, as a short look into history would tell you. In the name of nationalism, democracy was lost. In the name of culture, the force of the people was lost. However, one cannot lose hope for as long as there are people who are class conscious, there is always a chance for a renewed liberation–a rebirth.
The post Political Movements and Collective Consciousness appeared first on Culture Shock.