Participantes, not Spectators
As participantes, we are the ones who are willing to work and struggle for change. In order to achieve equality, one has to leave the comfort of a protected classroom or the complacency of “objective” journalism and move into the reality of the outside world. In a world divided, in which conflict between the powerful the oppressed, the owners and the workers, to be “objective” is to implicitly accept the legitimacy of the structures of domination, exploitation, and privilege. To be a “spectator” in the context of struggle and conflict makes it impossible to actually comprehend and engage our society. The spectator is hardly apolitical; it is the politics of the status quo.
Our intention must be to start a movement through mass mobilization. While we are building coalitions and movements, we must also step back and analyze our actions and ideas as organizers and activists. el participante provides the space for those discussions as a strong visible forum for those who feel discontent to connect with and support the movement. Only mass mobilization gives voice and power to those who are structurally silenced, thereby forcing change in politics, the economy and society. Spectators just watch what happens. They talk about the results the next day, but they did not have any part in building the movement. When it is convenient, the opportunistic Spectator jumps on popular issues, criticizing and offering useless rhetoric. When a movement is created it has to move past discourse and discussion that is isolated from the concrete struggles. As participantes we embrace the unity of theory and practice: thought without action is sterile and irrelevant—action without directionless and undisciplined. Without action, a cause will remain theoretical, unrealized.
As a publication of the left, el participante strives to be the place for thought and debate so that concrete political struggles on and off campus can be addressed in a more coherent manner. In a world divided, we must take sides. We are not “objective” Spectators, sycophants of the status-quo. We are partisans, Luchistas and participantes.
7 comments:
Remind me whose computers you used to finish your first issue? he Spectator's? Ooh, right. Awkward.
Participation is fine. Throwing objectivity to the wayside for your publication is fine. But don't pretend like mainstream journalism isn't important, or that objectivity doesn't have its place. The authors of this blog would leap -- and indeed, have on many occasions already leapt -- at the opportunity to be published or get coverage in the Spectator.
You benefit from Spec's existence in more ways than one.
I have never benefited from the Spec.
I have never benefited from the Spec.
Sure you have -- as a foil for wide-eyed extremism.
Wow! To the first comment made, it seems like your feelings are really hurt. Get over yourself. Of course one is bound to use University resources; otherwise these resources would not be made available to students. But that still doesn't in any way imply that Lucha is an organization that stands on the side lines as a mere spectator. That is the point of the article. So take your don't bit the hand that feeds you attitude somewhere else and grow up.
it's just a play on words to make an over all point.... get over yourself!
First, a point of accuracy: the Spectator is an independent company which does not receive funding from the university, so using its resources ≠ using the university's resources. Go ahead, look it up: it's been a 501(c)(3) since the 1960s.
Second, good for Lucha! I never suggested that the group "stands on the sidelines," and I 100% support its right to practice activism. I even side with Lucha's positions sometimes -- but that wasn't my point. My point was that this article was a snide, petulant, and thinly-veiled swipe at another student-led organization from which Lucha members have benefited on several occasions. If anyone needs to 'grow up,' as you so graciously phrased it, it's the author(s) of this article.
I'm not telling you to worship at the altar of journalism -- I think the Spectator has its fair share of dysfunctions and fuck-ups -- but if you're planning to fundamentally reject the practice of objective reporting, you should also shun all of its trappings (computers, coverage, the whole nine yards). Either that, or rename this blog el hipocrita.
Post a Comment