By Kien-Ling Liem, Trinity College Student
Performative activism is a very common and widespread term in today’s society. With the rise of awareness of social injustices, people have been using social media as the key way to spread information, whether it be real or not. It is defined as ‘a pejorative term referring to activism done to increase one’s social capital rather than because of one’s devotion to a cause’. Activism itself is a great way to help out marginalised communities, but there is a very blurred line between real allyship and performative activism.
Perhaps the main motivator of performative activism is capitalism. Over the years, capitalism has reduced many important movements into a display for popular gain, and therefore money. A great example of this is ‘eco-friendly products’: guilt tripping regular individuals, who as a whole cannot completely fix the issue of climate change without larger corporations reducing emissions. Industries tell us we must ensure our carbon footprint does not impact the world, when in fact they are the ones releasing thousands of greenhouse gases every day. This has integrated itself into society, and makes individuals ‘take part’ in movements without actually contributing anything for social approval or endorsement. Companies often use this as a way to get sponsored, or as a marketing strategy.
What's tricky about performative activism is that it seems productive, it seems like you’re helping. But you could actually be part of the problem. An interesting example of this is the recent Black Lives Matter movement: it was unfortunately viewed as a ‘trend’ by a large majority of the public, and thus treated like one. People were posting black squares on their Instagram feed with the hashtag #blackouttuesday to show their ‘solidarity’ with the movement. Sure, it seems effective. But what did they really do, besides post a single black square? Did they take part in the conversation? Did they protest? Did they really reflect on the situation and their mentality? In my experience with the people around me and the movement, 80% of those who posted this square did not actively help. It was forgotten in the next few months. Their mentality never changed. For most of us, this was a wake-up call. For them, it was an opportunity.
As stated previously, large corporations very easily take advantage of movements. It's no secret that in today’s world, refusing to accept things like women’s rights or the LGBTQ+ community can lead to someone being ‘cancelled’ - and this can be bad for companies. As I’ve learnt in economics, a company’s largest motivator is profit; a firm will be willing to do anything for it, including putting on a façade in ‘support’ of movements like feminism just to appear modern and approachable without putting any of the work in. Sure, they can endorse these movements, but what are they really doing? It's just words. In some ways, this can be more dangerous than individuals or companies who openly admit to not associating with these movements, because those who do publicly ‘support’ communities gain approval for being the same as those who don’t. They do the absolute bare minimum, yet benefit from it so largely.
Performative activism is essentially the same as being silent, and those who choose to stay silent choose the side of the oppressor. As individuals ourselves, we must put our media literate lenses on and filter through activism that’s performative versus activism that actually benefits society. We are all still learning – despite the mistakes we make, it helps us be better allies in the future.
Do more than just post a black square.
A heavy article and well said.