Posts Tagged ‘activism’

“ACTIVISM”

February 1, 2026

*

Ricardo F. Morín
Landscape II
18″ x 24″
Oil on board
2000

Ricardo F. Morín

February 1, 2026

Oakland Park, Fl.

The word activism now functions in public language as a device for disqualification rather than description.  It appears when someone protests, reports, or questions how power is being exercised.  The word does not explain what occurred or whether rules were followed.  It assigns suspicion to the person who speaks.  Once the word enters a sentence, attention shifts from facts to motive, and inquiry is halted before it can proceed.

This linguistic use of activism depends on presenting the existing order as beyond legitimate question.  What already exists is described as normal, lawful, and necessary.  What challenges it is labeled activism.  The structure of the sentence assumes that authority does not need to justify itself, while those affected by authority do.  Language thus distributes legitimacy in advance and shields power from explanation.

Recent executive orders on immigration make this mechanism concrete and visible.  Policies once described as border enforcement have been extended deep into the interior of the country.  Federal agents now operate in cities, towns, workplaces, and private homes far from any border.  This shift is not merely about location.  It changes who is exposed to the power of the State and under what assumptions.

Interior immigration enforcement now treats distinct categories of people as interchangeable in practice.  The stated objective is to arrest people with criminal records and to take custody of those already detained.  At the same time, operations are designed to collect anyone present, nearby, or loosely associated.  Non-criminal residents are taken alongside those accused of crimes.  Long-term residents, elderly people, workers with families, and even citizens are drawn into the same encounters.  Legal distinctions remain on paper but collapse in execution.

This operational blending is presented by authorities as coherent, but its coherence is asserted rather than demonstrated.  Arresting a person convicted of a violent offense and detaining a neighbor with no criminal history are described as parts of a single mission.  The language suggests unity and purpose.  In reality, different objectives are combined for scale, not clarity.  The result is that no one can know where enforcement ends, and uncertainty itself becomes the governing condition.

Profiling supplies the practical method by which interior enforcement sustains itself.  Away from the border, agents cannot rely on crossings or documented violations.  They rely instead on appearance, accent, location, or association.  People are stopped not because of what they have done, but because of what they are assumed to be.  Citizenship, residency, and legality cease to function as reliable protections at the moment of encounter.

Community response emerges when these practices become visible in daily life.  In places such as Montana, residents have watched neighbors taken from their homes in early hours, elderly people removed while barely dressed, children detained alongside adults, and towns unsettled by large federal deployments.  In other parts of the country, citizens have died during enforcement operations.  As such events repeat, they cease to appear exceptional and begin to register as conditions people are expected to endure.

Public protest arises from this recognition of harm rather than from ideological performance.  People gather, speak, and demand answers because something familiar has been crossed.  Their response is rooted in what they have seen and experienced.  Yet this response is often dismissed as activism, a term that avoids addressing the conduct that provoked it and instead questions whether reaction itself was permissible.

The label activism redirects responsibility away from state action and toward civic response.  The word does not ask whether enforcement was lawful, proportionate, or humane.  It asks whether people should have objected.  In doing so, the conduct of authority recedes from scrutiny while dissent becomes the subject of judgment.  Accountability is reversed.

The same linguistic device is applied to journalism that documents these events.  When reporters record raids, publish testimony, or show images of arrests, the work is sometimes dismissed as activist reporting.  The accusation is not that the facts are false, but that they were assembled with improper intent.  Accuracy is displaced by suspicion, and the act of documentation itself is treated as a breach.

This pattern of language gradually alters how democracy is understood.  Democratic life depends on questioning authority, reviewing decisions, and objecting when harm occurs.  Under the grammar of activism, these actions are treated as disruptions.  Quiet acceptance is praised.  Scrutiny is framed as excess.  Stability is elevated above fairness.

The ethical consequence of this shift is the denial of ordinary civic agency.  When workers, parents, and neighbors are told that speaking up makes them activists, they are no longer addressed as reasoning citizens.  They are treated as obstacles to be managed.  Authority ceases to explain itself and instead asserts continuity as its own justification.

A narrowing definition of national belonging advances alongside this linguistic shift.  Belonging is measured by silence.  Loyalty is measured by compliance.  Difference is treated as threat.  Supremacy enters not through open declaration, but through repetition, as people are asked again and again to accept what they are no longer permitted to question.

A plural society cannot endure under a grammar that treats challenge as deviance.  Such a society does not depend on shared origin, culture, or uniform belief.  It depends on the recognition that no single group owns the meaning of the nation.  When language is used to dismiss those who expose harm or demand explanation, democracy is not defended.  It is quietly redefined against the people it exists to serve.



“Echoes of a Decanter”

March 5, 2025

*

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 0005.jpg
Decantation [2003], CGI by Ricardo Morín
Decantation [2003], CGI by Ricardo Morín

*


The air inside the old factory was thick with dust and conviction.      They had scrubbed the floors, repainted the walls, and reclaimed the space from its past, but the scent of rust and oil still lingered.      It smelled like work—like history.

Emil stood on a makeshift stage, elevated by wooden pallets stacked two high.      His voice carried across the room, each word striking with certainty.

“This is not another failed experiment.      This is not a return to old mistakes.      We are forging a new path—beyond capitalism, beyond the betrayals of so-called socialism.      This time, we get it right.”

Applause.      Nods of approval.      They had heard these words before, but this time, they believed them.

Isolde sat at the back, arms crossed, expression unreadable.      She had stood in this same room decades ago, listening to a different voice, hearing the same promise.      The factory, reborn each time, looked different, yet the space was always the same—a decanter of sorts, enclosing the same history, slowly pouring out its essence, again and again.

After the speech, as people gathered in small circles of animated discussion, Emil approached her.

“You don’t look convinced.”

“I don’t mistake passion for direction,” she said.

Emil smiled, as if indulging an elder.      “This time is different, Isolde.      We’ve studied history.      We won’t repeat their mistakes.”

She exhaled, looking past him to the crowd.      The factory hummed quietly behind them, a machine just starting to remember its old rhythms.      “You misunderstand history.      It’s not something you repeat.      It’s something that returns to you, whether you invite it or not.”

He shook his head.      He didn’t believe in ghosts.      But the air, thick with the weight of their past, seemed to hum with the same unspoken inevitability.      It reminded Isolde of something trapped within glass—preserved, yet futile in its attempts to remain unbroken. . .


The first weeks were golden.

Decisions were made by assembly.      Every worker had an equal say, an equal share, an equal stake.      The old machinery roared to life under new hands.      They printed new posters, declaring the rebirth of labor, the death of the boss.

For the first time, they worked for themselves.

But cracks, barely visible at first, began to form.

Meetings dragged for hours, circular debates with no resolution.      Some tasks were more desirable than others—some avoided the heavy lifting, citing ideological objections.      “Why should one person labor while another coordinates?”

“Because someone must,” Isolde murmured to herself.      Unheard.

Then came the first real crisis: a large order, a deadline, a need for efficiency.      The factory moved too slowly.      The assembly stalled.      Arguments flared.

“We need someone to oversee production,” Emil admitted.      “Just temporarily.”

A vote was cast.      A mediator was appointed.      He wasn’t a manager, they told themselves, just a guide.      But the balance had shifted.      The factory, like a vessel caught in an unrelenting tide, began to carry more than it could manage.

Isolde watched, saying nothing.


The mediator, needing to keep things moving, made quick decisions.      The assembly approved them after the fact.      The difference was subtle, but it grew.

Some workers were better at certain tasks, so roles solidified.      Someone had to negotiate with suppliers.      Someone had to ensure deadlines were met.      The mediator took on these roles, because it was easier.

“We need structure,” he explained.      “Not hierarchy, just order.”

Emil, exhausted, nodded.      The structure, which had once felt so free, began to settle into something heavier.      Something permanent.      Like the decanter that holds liquid—only to release it back into the world, though it never truly escapes its confines.

One evening, alone in his office—the office that wasn’t supposed to exist—he flipped through old books.      The words were familiar, but they read differently now.      He found a passage from an old revolutionary text, underlined by his own hand years ago:

“The first illusion of power is that it does not exist.”

He closed the book.      His fingers lingered on the edge of the paper, as though searching for something that had slipped away, like water escaping through a crack.


The next crisis arrived without warning.      A strike—among themselves.      Some demanded higher pay.      “Shouldn’t work be compensated by effort?”      They were equals, but some were more equal in labor than others.

Emil tried to reason with them.      “That’s not how this works.      We’re breaking that cycle.”

“Then why do you sit in the office while we sweat on the floor?”

He had no answer.

Another vote.      A restructuring.      A new proposal:      an oversight committee.      The committee became a board.      Outside investors offered financial stability.      A small compromise.      A necessary evil.

By the end of the year, the factory had become what it swore it never would.

Emil found Isolde in the break room, sipping tea.

“We tried,” he said.      “So did we,” she replied.

Silence.

“Why does it always end this way?” he asked.

Isolde set her cup down.      Her eyes met his, trapped in exhaustion, as though each glance carried the gravity of countless broken promises, like a fractured decanter.

“Because we are human.”


Years later, Emil walked past the factory.      It was thriving.      Not revolutionary.      Not a failure.      Just another business.

Inside, a new group of young activists had gathered.      Their leader, no older than he had been, stood on stacked wooden pallets, speaking with fire.

“We are not repeating the past.      We are forging a new path.      This time, we get it right.”

Emil did not stop to listen.

From the distance, Isolde watched.

“And so it begins again,” she whispered.

~

Ricardo Federico Morín Tortolero

March 5, 2025; Oakland Park, Florida