Real activism never comes from the spotlight. Blabla Quick notes: On dominant culture and fake activists.
By: Dina Duende
Tags: Fakefeminism, Fake, Media Criticism, Activism, Dominant Culture

We are spectators of a surge in famous activists where activism is transforming into a convenient tool for fame. Honestly, I show on TV only because I have this purpose! However, real activism has never been in the spotlight, simply because it is opposing dominant narratives and they would logically not allow such interference. Therefore, even if famous people have a good intention in mind, in order to stay online they do need to comply with the rules.

So the question is: Are those famous people allowed to speak to a large audience only to cover the real authoritative nature of the media? And then how dare we ask why we have stupid people on the Saturday prime time family programme or recommended Instagram nonsense! If media is the unconventional educator of young and old, then this paradigm is teaching us very fake material which would obviously be replicated on the street. Because that’s what people naturally do — copy.

There are few tools in our current democratic state that authoritative narratives use to dismiss anything threatening. 1. The first one is creating things so powerful that you as one person, feel helpless to change because you are in a system that is way too influential. Helplessness make us quiet. From this position, you have two choices:

1.1 be overwhelmed and discuss this quietly on a table with a few friends or 1.2. become an internet activist where you have the illusion of a loud voice. What you actually have is your own filtered bubble that at least takes some of the pressure off your shoulders & help you sleep at night. In the end, what you do most of the time, is taking part of internet polarisation on the territory of this dominant narrative. We gave you your 2 square cm of invisible freedom on the internet cloud, you happy?

Oh, there is a third one. My personal opinion is that only 1.3. regional activism could create a change. By this I mean: educating and moving intentions away from the internet and taking things on a small community scale. I know it’s not very glamorous, but if everyone does that, there might be some sort of fulfillment. And yet, this new dominant culture creates new type of humanists: people who would like to help the whole world, not their neighbour. Real activism is actually much quieter that expected — it also creates a gradual change, not an overnight furore.

2. The second tool of dominant narratives I came to speak about is the one I started with. I personally find it really tricky and in fact painful.

It is undermining the real meaning of things. It is the provision of those notions disguised in falseness. A secret theft of power that stores significance and by this, creating a cultural or societal erosion, a common blur.

It could be Democracy — you have it on paper, right! The dominant figures assure you. Another thing could be Transparency — of course you have it, Zuckerburg declares on a huge conference that “the future is private”.

And yet — we are left with a bitter taste and deep down we know that although everybody talks about that massive cake publicly, none of us is actually invited to the party. Not to mention having a tiny piece. Oddly enough, things are made for people but in reality they arguably belong to them.

People are made to cooperate in a dominant culture we do not fully understand — changing our psychology(e.g. attention span), habits (e.g. spending 9 h in social media per day), values (e.g. consumerism) and so on. That narrative also created a chain of aimless jobs like social media manager or consumer operator. What was your occupation, grandpa?

And now — finally coming to the point — this fake rendering of meaning is sabotaging the very small joy left in the intelligent opposition. Dominant narratives nourish Fake Activism. So that people can helplessly sigh: Activism is not what it used to be.

You have Activism in the mainstream, what else do you want? And it is profoundly difficult to explain to the public that only the icons that touch on issues with shallow mindset are allowed to speak. I will give an example with Famous Feminism. Yes, the American MeToo movement was great but it didn’t really sustain and oppose gender misconceptions. The mainstream feminism which we see is mostly portraying Feminist stars, who claim they are strong girls who represent all of us — yes or no?

And yet, they do follow the expectations of male dominated business. They are almost naked with their bodies exposed to primitive desire. They pride themselves as being a strong female, however, they paradoxically sing against it, dress against it. In contrast, actual artists in the genre with a real cause like M.I.A are perceived as outsiders, ignored and muted. Fake feminist artists sing Baby, baby….all the lyrics are silly chat about men. In the UK, there is the recently empowered half-naked Dua Lipa and the call girl Fka twigs. Girls in real life copy this behaviour.

Even more, they claim that with their nakedness, they achieve freedom. This is not freedom, it is fake feminism.

Neither this nor hating men is fighting for women’s rights. And that’s just one example. There are many other movements that are fake.

Because Real Activism never comes from the spotlight.