#PrayForUkraine, #BlackLivesMatter, #StopAsianHate, #MeToo… Someone, somewhere, once made a post or a story on Instagram that contained at least one of these hashtags. And right after that, this specific person put aside his cellphone and continued to live in a carefree way.
If we wanted to put a label on this “phenomenon”, this would be “performative activism”. However, to have a clear picture of it, we need first to understand the meaning of real activism.
According to the Cambridge English Dictionary, activism is defined as the use of immediate and active action to achieve a result. These are systematic actions aimed at suspending, adapting, and redefining concepts, laws, values, and ideologies. Its purpose is to improve the daily quality of life of certain marginalized or disadvantaged groups of the population.
Thus, as “performative activism” we characterize the tendency of some people to support a cause or a movement, in order to attract fame and attention, or to even receive a monetary reward, and not because they are interested in the purpose itself or what it stands for. This type of activism usually appears in social media and is not only observed in the actions of public figures or large companies, but also in those of the average person. However, promoting our support for a movement through platforms such as Instagram or Twitter, does not have any substantial effect. Instead, it transforms the long struggle of various minorities and their quest for social change, into yet another digestible internet trend with an expiration date.
The more this phenomenon intensifies, the more people feel the pressure to react to the current events, which may often not be part of their circle of interest. Feeling guilty for not participating, they take action by informing their “followers”, using colorful graphs, images, and hashtags. These almost insignificant and ephemeral attempts of support that they make every day, negatively affect the quality of their action, thus pushing them into the trap of pseudo-activism.
How quickly though, would the whole world know about George Floyd’s assassination, if it were not for such a big online mobilization? How many people would have remained silent if the #MeToo movement did not take on the dimensions it took on social media? Whether we like to admit it or not, internet activism is a powerful tool. Information spreads faster and to a larger percentage of people. This, in turn, raises greater awareness of various issues and gives each person the opportunity to help in their own way. In addition, someone who does not have the time or patience to read articles or studies on specific issues, obtains useful information, while anyone who does not have the financial means to actively support one of them, may feel that they contribute, even slightly, to an effort for the elimination of social injustices and inequalities. Furthermore, it is safer than the traditional form of activism, as it does not force them to attend demonstrations and protests. We conclude, therefore, that in some cases cyber-activism brings positive results, enhances the action of conventional activism, and mobilizes many potential supporters.
What we need to understand, however, is that social problems do not disappear the second we stop making relevant publications, or the day the media stops talking about them. Nevertheless, they remain active and continue to concern thousands of other people around us.
A story, a post, a hashtag is not and will never be enough. I’m talking to you, yes, you who are preparing to upload to your story videos from war-torn Ukraine. And to you, that a post with a black square and #BlackLivesMatter in its description, is buried somewhere in your archived posts. Start by researching as much as you can a topic that really interests you. Listen to what those directly involved have to say, even if their views do not agree with yours. Pay attention to both sides, those who support, but also those who question the movement you intend to fight for. And fight. Because as Albert Einstein said: “If I were to remain silent, I’d be guilty of complicity”.
