Organizing into a group is an effective way to bring social change. This is a presumption that both Capilano College professor Crawford Kilian and his fellow Capilano College colleague Leslie agree too. Though both Kilian agree to that fundamental idea, they disagree vehemently on whether minorities forming into groups, Kilian calls them “collectives”, is still necessary or even helpful for society at large, and how the collectives affect individuals in the collective. This disagreement becomes increasingly evident in the essay the both submitted to the Vancouver Review in 1993. Kilian first wrote an essay entitled, “Clonism Rules, Okay”. Shortly thereafter Savage submitted a rebuttal to Kilian’s essay in her own, entitled, “Future Imperfect”. In Kilian’s article, he argues organization, though effective at bringing about social change have now mostly outlived their usefulness and hinder individuals. Savage, on the other hand, argues that groups are often the only way for a minority group to exert any type of political or social power, and are still the best way for individuals to progress. Though the essays were written over twenty years ago, they are both extremely relevant today. New media outlets like feminist website Jezebel and recent news events such as the Rachel Dolezal story show that the issues of “collectives” and individual freedoms still.
Both essay discuss “collectives” at length. Collectives are organized groups, in the case of these essays, a collective specifically refers to organized minority groups such as groups of women, gays, Native Americans, and First Nations peoples. Both essays agree that collectivist groups are an effective way to bring about social change. Kilian writes that that collectives have given minority groups many rights and just the past decade. Savage concurs and goes even further. Stating that collectives have been the most effect way to bring about social change throughout history. The disagreement of course comes from they both view collectives. Kilian feels collectives have outlived their usefulness. He argues that many of the racial and minority group problems have been fixed, and so the collectives are now more worried about maintaining the status of collective elite instead of actually improving conditions. Savage vehemently disagrees with Kilian’s argument, instead arguing that collectives have been and still are the most effective way to bring about social change.
Their disagreements over the effectiveness of the collective also carry over into their view of individuals within the collective. Kilian argues that collectives actually hinder the individual liberty and freedom of its members. According to Kilian any individual member of a collective who dares to disagree with the collective’s party line is ostracized and considered a pariah by the collective elites. Savage, on the other hand argues that indiiduals would have nearly no individual rights without the collective and argues, rather persuasively that one individual cannot, and throughout history has not really affected large social change. Savage believes the individual is not only represented by the collective but in fact empowered by it.
Their feelings on the collectives has also impacted their view on democracy. Kilian argues that collectives force everyone into their own individual groups. This hurts society because themselves as member of their ow collective rather than as a member of society at large. Kilian argues that this plays into the hand of political elites who will simply to play the competing groups off of one another instead of actually trying to fix problems. Kilian argues that the politicians give the collective superficial victories, that make both the collective elites and political elites feel better but do not actually solve problems. Savage, on the other hand, believes it is a progress that politicans are paying attention to minority collectives at all. Throughout much of history politicians paid little attention to minority collectives, so the fact that legislation is being passed for the minority collective at all is a great progress. Savage believes the current situation is a good thing, and will only get better in the future as minority collectives are taken more seriously.
Both Kilian’s essay, “Clonism Rules, Okay” and Savage’s essay, “Future Imperfect” deal largely with collectives and how they affect social change. Both Kilian and Savage agree that collectives can affect social change, and in the past have been very effective at doing so. The disagreement between Kilian and Savage is rooted in how they view the effects of collectives today. Kilian asserts that collectives have been so effective in the past that they no longer have serious issues to fix, because of this, the elites in each collective are now in a position where they are more worried about preserving their status than actually helping the average member of the collective. This neglect of the average member is in turn hindering the individual’s rights. Savage takes a very different view. Savage argues that all through history collectives have been the best way to effect social and that that is in fact still true today. Savage refutes Kilian’s assertion that collectives are not hindering its member’s rights by arguing that individuals have never really been able to claim rights by themselves. Though Kilian and Savage agree with the underlying principle that collectives are effective ways to bring about change, their view differ significantly from that point on.
Works Cited
Kilian, Crawford. “Clonism Rules, Okay?” Vancouver Review. Spring/Summer (1993). Print.
Savage, Leslie. “Future Imperfect.” Vancouver Review. Spring/Summer (1993). Print.
