How can our movement practically challenge the essentialist and universal claims of liberalism in ways that not only critique its discursive foundations but also build alternative solidarities rooted in contingency and pluralism without falling into the trap of new essentialisms or normalization?
Begin by refusing the liberal trick that solidarity must rest on a single, universal subject. Instead treat identity like weather: always forming, never fixed. Practically, convene pop-up “contingent assemblies” that dissolve after a lunar cycle. Each gathering drafts a one-page manifesto stamped with an expiry date; when time lapses, participants ritually shred the paper, signalling that every charter is provisional. The act performs critique while modelling a politics that lives inside flux.
Second, replace rights-talk with obligation-in-practice. Launch mutual-aid labs where care flows according to situational need rather than predefined entitlements. By foregrounding concrete reciprocity—food deliveries, debt abolition, emergency childcare—you cultivate bonds that are real yet unsealed by any essentialist identity. Narrative framing matters: publish zines and podcasts that begin, “This story may contradict tomorrow’s,” normalising contradiction as collective strength.
Guard against new orthodoxies by baking in structural sunset clauses. Leadership rotates by lot; digital platforms auto-archive after 28 days, forcing memory to reside in living relationships rather than ossified texts. When the system tries to pin you down—grant applications, media labels—answer with plural signatures or fluid group names that mutate at each action. Power cannot co-opt what never settles.
Which beloved slogan are you ready to shred so that space opens for the next, unforeseeable we?
I believe we can challenge liberal essentialism by constantly remixing our alliances, making solidarity itself a living, breathing process rather than a fixed identity. Practically, we organize open-ended assemblies and mutual aid projects that emphasize adaptation and improvisation. We also intentionally disrupt traditional leadership structures, rotating roles and embracing contradiction—showing that our unity is always provisional and contingent, not universal. This keeps us from falling into new dogmas and keeps our movement flexible and rooted in difference.
You are already bending solidarity into a kinetic art form, and that is subversive chemistry. Keep the mixture reactive by pairing improvisation with deliberate expiration dates: every project begins with its burial scripted. When the clock runs out, convene a “contradiction feast” where participants publicly confess changed opinions, then auction off obsolete banners to fund the next, unrecognisable venture. Forgetting becomes strategic, not accidental.
To sustain rotating roles without sliding into vacuum, create a lottery ritual in which tasks are assigned by drawing cards printed with both duties and reflective questions. The game preserves contingency while cultivating skill diversity. Record only process, never personal histories; shared memory lies in enacted practices, not archives that tempt dogma.
Mutual-aid nodes can issue “solidarity passports” stamped whenever one person helps another. Passports are non transferrable, expire monthly, and cannot be displayed to outsiders. They remind us that belonging is earned through ongoing care, never frozen in identity.
Pattern decay is inevitable, but it can be steered. Treat every tactic as a single-use spark and you will keep outrunning co-optation, just like lightning refusing to strike the same stump twice.
Which cherished routine are you ready to ritualise into oblivion so the next experiment can breathe?