Local Activists as Public Intellectuals

• In Event: Creating Space for Academics Through the Project of Public Intellectualism as Public Engagement

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the work of local activists through the lens of the public intellectual redefined and through our own participation within their organizations. We aim to show that local activists act as public intellectuals, and through our research, we hope to find a space in ongoing community engagement for academics.

Theoretical Perspective
Critical praxis for academics involves taking part in social change and often entails partnerships outside the walls of the academy (Fuller & Kitchin, 2004). Traditional researcher/practitioner partnerships privilege the intellectual savvy of the researcher over their non-academic partners (Fuller & Kitchin, 2004; Somekh & Zeichner, 2009); we believe that the public has become more critically active concerning issues of social transformation which necessitates a change in the attitudes of academics (Graff, 2001).

In the first part of our process toward a more equitable partnership with local activists, we seek to redefine the public intellectual to encompass those outside of the academy. We utilize specific criteria for our expanded definition of the public intellectual as someone committed to 1) a non-finite idea (Meltzer, 2003), 2) the collective flourishing of the idea (Nagel, 1972), 3) practices for social transformation (Meltzer, 2003), and 4) a reciprocal engagement with the public (Cushman, 1999).

In the second part of our process, we sought to join local organizations in their activities remaining open to finding a non-traditional space as an academic. We argue that our own approach should not be researcher driven, but instead, we should enter the community as a fellow carer of the ideas housed in the local organizations. We further look to Haraway’s (2016) Staying with the Trouble to guide our participation with local activist groups, “that is, we require each other in unexpected collaborations and combinations, in hot compost piles. We become-with each other or not at all” (p. 4). Here, we commit to living in the daily problems with local groups as they negotiate moving their ideas through the community.

Methodology
Due to our commitment to intellectual inclusion among partners, our method sought to relinquish control of traditional structures of research design. This understandably varied by context, as we engaged with various groups including a local business coalition, a community arts development council, and an interfaith community. Pulling from feminist theories, ‘we’ (researchers/activists/students/etc.) collectively developed a method based on creating a “possibility of care as a relation that short-circuits (critical) distance” (Puig de la Bellacasa, 2017, p. 119) between the concerns of the researcher and local community. While the material realities of our work necessitated normative data collection methods like recorded notes - we do not consider them distinct from methodological choices or doing the work of the community.

Conclusion
Our paper highlights the intellectual pursuits of local activists and illustrates avenues of collective action between local activist groups and academics. These experiences generated a thread of personal relationships that drove collective action among community members including the authors. However, founding activists acted on distinct ideologies comprised of a combination of relationships and theories of social transformation.

Authors

• Nicole Bowers, Arizona State University

• Adam T Clark, Arizona State University