A World of Possibility for Us All

Among the many definitions of decolonization, one has been the creation of differences. It, arguably, has been the favorite tool of the master and one of the lasting legacies of colonization.

Today, then, it is no surprise that difference is fundamentally seen as an undesirable and negative force. No movement in the world welcomes difference; at best, they tolerate it. There is always, in the end, the formation of an explicit or implicit hierarchy, predicated on these differences.

The feminist movement (if the multiplicity of the movements can even be grouped under one) is no exception. The idea of a liberal or white feminist working alongside an Islamic feminist or a black feminist seems rather incomprehensible. Over the years, the in-fighting within those who claim to support feminism appears to be increasing, or at least constant. With such differing ideas of liberation for women, after all, how is it possible to join hands in sisterhood? Without a common enemy, why would these different groups join together to fight? As a consequence of these divergences, however, there is liberation for none. If one group of women, for instance, seems to gain at the expense of another group, or without an equal liberation of the other groups, then this liberation is inevitably fragile, and most often, temporary – “only the most vulnerable and temporary armistice between an individual and her oppression,” says Audre Lorde.

There is no denying, however, that the meaning of feminism is not the same for every person believing in it. The term ‘liberation’ itself, in fact, is quite diverse and contested. Viewed from the lens endowed to us by our colonizers, then, there can be no unity within the feminists. The oppression, rooted in contextual variants of patriarchy, is different. The liberation, from these different kinds of oppression, will look different for every person or group. What Lorde wants us to see is precisely this – there is an undeniable existence of differences within us. What she also wants, however, is for us to see that these differences ae not a problem, lest we let them stop us from finding and fighting our common oppressor. These differences can and should be harnessed as a source of creative energy, and thus become our strength.

When Martin Luther King was criticised for his direct action by his opponents, he eloquently responded via a letter that was penned down in the dark gallows of Birmingham. This enlightening text also teaches us the necessity of tension and the creative potential of differences. These are not forces to fear; rather, they are forces from which we can learn how to form a sisterhood that is above and beyond our collective biases – the first step is acknowledging their existence. It is, after all, the wisdom that Socrates imparted to us; the only way to seek out the truth.

This is what our path to liberation will look like. We cannot continue to be, as MLK said, “bogged down in the tragic attempt to live in monologue rather than dialogue.” And why should we be, when “there is room for everyone, at the rendezvous of victory” (Césaire).