S​OCIAL​ ​INVESTIGATION

Activists will often take up an issue and try to

convince folks around them of its importance. When
they see that not a lot of people are actually interested
they get disheartened and think that people are not
interested in social change, and that such efforts are
pointless. “It’s not the right time,” or “People are
sheep, they don’t care about anything.” That’s
possible.

But it’s also possible that: i) the activists targeted the

wrong group of people; ii) the issue activists took up
were not immediately relevant to the people being
targeted; iii) the issue was not being framed in a way
that felt relevant; iv) it was brought in from above
without organically developing in relation with the
people themselves.

For example, a person once talked about how she was

doing an NGO internship at Regent Park to create
“social capital” so that people will “cooperate” with
one another and achieve “civic participation” and thereby change things. She said her local
community partner was a man who seemed uninterested, who did not think the program was going
to work or achieve much. She felt his mindset of “things will never change” was the main problem.

In actuality the problem was her liberal-bourgeois view of politics and participation, and her view
that this man’s unwillingness to engage in some sham NGO-run “civic engagement” process was a
sign of his “apathy” or “indifference.” Perhaps he knew well that nothing would change by
“engaging” in her program. Perhaps this brother is already
engaged in a deep way in the politics of his community.
Perhaps the “social capital” that this NGO worker was trying
to peddle was irrelevant to if not hostile to the people’s
struggles he was once connected to back home. Or perhaps
this brother grinds through his job just to make ends meet,
and this type of “politics” and “civic engagement” has
nothing to offer by way of addressing his family or
community’s needs or grievances.

It did not appear as if the program had investigated what

various groups of people in Regent Park thought, what their pressing and long-term problems were,
what their desires and hopes were, how they felt about existing government or NGO programs, what
forms of organization and cooperation already existed, and what their achievements or limitations
were. In all likelihood, this NGO probably didn’t care about the answer to these questions either.

1
People are not simply tumbleweeds drifting around until someone comes and delivers them to
freedom, participation, development or anything else. We should not see ourselves as heroes and
saviours with enlightenment on our side. We should not see people as objects, waiting to be acted
upon. People are actors, and they will be the subjects of their own liberation—or there will be no
liberation at all.

Social investigation​ is important for activists because it forces us to ask ​what is to be done i​ n
relation to​ what people need a​ nd/or ​what people are already doing.​ We assume neither that we as
“activists” have all the knowledge necessary to get rid of oppression and exploitation, nor that the
oppressed and exploited masses will naturally rise up and get rid of imperialism and capitalism
(otherwise, that would have happened a long time ago).

Social investigation is thus an orientation more than any one

method. It is about ​humility​ and about constantly learning, about
developing our own politics in dialectical relationship with
actually existing realities, and focusing on the needs and
movements of the people rather than pre-determined ideas in our
heads. We must investigate problems to help produce solutions.
That is the only way to bring people on board in order to defeat
capitalism.

Nevertheless, there is some need to outline some pointers and

methods that may be fruitful for our work, especially in Toronto
and Canada. For one, who are these oppressed and exploited?
Who are the oppressors and exploiters? Who are our friends, and
who are our enemies? And once we identify our friends, how do
we work with them?

We need to understand who our friends and enemies are in a

general​ sense, for which we may study a broad ​class analysis​ (see
​ NALYSIS​). But when we get more specific,
study guide on C​LASS​ A
we find that “friends” like the labour movement’s bureaucratic
leaders may be in league with the “enemies”—just because someone is in the working-class does not
mean they will naturally be progressive. So we need to be ​specific​ when we are actually on the
ground in any situation, and look for concrete ​contradictions​ that can help us best determine how to
organize.

Socal investigation is about looking for different kinds of contradictions; whereas organizing is
about working with, through, in and around contradictions.

Types of contradictions

Different types of contradictions will require different forms of intervention. Contradictions can shift
and change, because they are in constant motion, they are always developing.

2
1. Indirect versus direct

A contradiction is an opposition, but not necessarily a direct contradiction of two things or entities (a
“contradiction” may in fact involve many opposing and reinforcing forces and processes). For
example, the existence of a vast mass of unemployed or underemployed people on one hand, and a
small capitalist class with enormous wealth on the other, is a contradiction. However, it is an
indirect​ contradiction, between the capitalist system/state that constantly produces unemployment
and the masses.

A ​direct​ contradiction is more specific and exists, for example, between an employer and
employee—the employer wants to increase profits, the employees want to increase job security and
wages; or between a landlord and tenant—landlords want to increase rent and reduce costs, tenants
want reduced rents and better repairs. These are still contradictions produced by the capitalist
system, but now we can identify more directly the agents of exploitation/oppression.

Indirect contradictions can be turned into direct contradictions. For example, if the unemployed
people in an area get organized and start to make demands on the state and capital, then it becomes a
direct contradiction.

2. Latent versus manifest

Yet another distinction to keep in mind is ​latent/hidden​ contradictions versus ​manifest/sharp

contradictions. For example, as we’ve seen, a high unemployment rate in an area represents a
contradiction between the capitalist system/state and the people. But if no one is actively organizing
around it, or if there appears to be no action around it at all, does not mean that the contradiction
does not exist.

It means that the contradiction is ​latent​ or inactive/hidden as opposed to ​manifest​ or active/sharp. Of

course, that contradiction is very much active in the individual lives of the people affected by
unemployment, but the contradiction may not have become a socially organized one. Part of the
purpose of organizing can be about addressing that latent contradiction and making it manifest,
taking the indirect contradiction and making it direct.

3. Antagonistic versus non-antagonistic

One very important distinction among contradictions is between ​antagonistic​ and ​non-antagonistic
contradictions. Put simply, a non-antagonistic contradiction can take place amongts the people,
whereas an antagonistic contradiction is between the people and the ruling classes.

For example, working-class Punjabis and working-class Jamaicans in a neighbourhood may think
poorly of each other and discriminate against each other. The Punjabis will try to get jobs and
positions to their own relatives and friends, whereas the Jamaicans will try and do the same. Punjabis
may try to push Jamaicans into poorer or harder jobs on the same factory floor.

3
These contradictions are direct, manifest, and hugely problematic of course. But they are
non-antagonistic contradictions because they are among the people. They can probably be resolved
without Punjabis destroying Jamaicans or vice-versa. Instead, they have to be resolved through
understanding the roots of this ethno-racial contradiction—why does it exist? What are its material
roots? And by engaging communities to overcome it, perhaps by holding joint assemblies,
after-school camps, or other forms of struggle.

This is a non-antagonistic contradiction, because these communities don’t need to exploit or

discriminate against one another in order to be. These direct contradictions emerge as a way to
mediate the broader and indirect contradictions between labour and capital in society, but they can
be resolved by combining direct focus on the issue with bringing people into common struggle
against a common enemy that they each have even greater contradictions with.

It is ultimately the employer and capitalist class that benefits by keeping the working-class divided
and pitted against each other on basis of ethnicity-race or other divisions. The employer undermines
working-class solidarity and uses it to drive down wages, cut security and benefits, and so on. The
contradiction between the working-class and the capitalist can only be resolved when the
working-class overthrows the capitalist system. This is an antagonistic contradiction, but it requires a
different form of struggle than the non-antagonistic contradiction.

Concrete contradictions

Any social situation will have specific contradictions that you will have to identify. Here are some
suggestions for ways and places to look:

Class contradictions

It is important to familiarize yourself with the C​LASS​ ​ANALYSIS

document, for class contradictions are amongst the most
important activists will face—to overthrow capitalism it will be
necessary to ​actively unite the working-class experience spread
across various contradictions, e.g., of identities.​ This is not to say
that these contradictions—like ethno-racial discrimination
amongst working-class communities—are to be ignored, but that
they are to be worked through and combatted with a view to
building ultimate political unity. This is not simply a moral
question (“let’s all get along”), but a strategic one if capitalism is
to be overcome.

As we have noted, class contradictions can take direct forms, for

example, between employer and employee, or between landlords
and tenants, between money-lenders and the indebted, and so on.

They can also take indirect forms, typically through the ​effects​ of class. For example, working-class
neighbourhoods are more likely to have poorer educational, recreational, health, etc. facilities. These

4
kinds of problems are contradictions between the state and the people. (Of course, these problems
will also affect the middle-class residents of these neighbourhoods as well.)

▪ Where the proletari-at? One indicator of working-class status is income (although, income
does not necessarily indicate class status). You can find out what areas of the city concentrate lower
income residents versus higher income residents, along with other data on ethnic composition,
languages spoken, etc. from the ​City of Toronto​’s​ finely-tuned ​neighbourhood-level​ and broader
ward-level​ data. You can compare data from 2006 to 2011 to see how things have changed or
remained similar.
▪ Ask people about where they work and under what conditions they work. How do they earn
their incomes? Are these sufficient for their needs and desires, or do they face problems?
▪ Inquire into the conditions of rental buildings and what problems people face with
management and landlords. How are these resolved? Are there many issues or few?
▪ How do race and ethnicity interlace with class? Are working-class neighbourhoods also more
racialized?
▪ Look for payday loans shops (like Payday Loans or Money Mart or Western Union) in the
neighbourhood. Ask people about who uses them and how they work, whether they are seen as good
or bad things?
▪ Study ​Ontario Ministry of Education statistics​ on the performance of schools in
working-class neighbourhoods relative to richer schools (you will find data on the parents’ average
incomes and so on from here). But be sure to supplement these statistics by talking directly to
parents and children and their experiences.
▪ Examine the safety signs and signals (like stop signs or crossings), see if there are enough
bus/streetcar shelters, look at the state of the roads, look at bus service and how it affects people. At
all points, ask the people if they are worried about these issues, and how they affect them.
▪ How do the police engage with the neighbourhood and people in it?
▪ Compare to nearby petty-bourgeois/middle-class neighbourhoods. Ask about tensions in
between neighbourhoods.

Gender contradictions

Future documents and sessions will have more detailed gender analysis. Here, we have seen that
major problems around gender often revolve around ​reproductive labour​, most of which is
domestic and part of which is outside of the household. Women tend to do the major share of
household work, as well as taking care of children and elders. For working-class women in particular
this becomes a double burden when they often also work outside of the home. The lack of accessible
childcare, for example, is a contradiction between the state and the people, but more specifically a
contradiction between the state and women.

Other contradictions revolve around how men treat women, particularly contradictions that involve
domestic/sexual violence. However, this contradiction is not simply limited to how a husband may
treat a wife, but extends far beyond into society—often dovetailing with notions of “privacy” or
“honour.” Women who seek help may not find shelters, or may find that shelters are dangerous;
those separated from husbands may find it hard to find work, and we should know that welfare is
insufficient for rent and food, especially with children; food banks may have serious problems,

5
including expired food or food that does not conform to dietary restrictions; NGOs and state services
may be top-down and not very helpful; immigrant women may not have access to skills and
knowledges necessary to navigate society on their own, or to find jobs (if such jobs exist in the first
place); court cases and legal processes may be long, onerous and financially draining.

These are examples of some contradictions that revolve around gender, and they are complex: men
vs. women, the state vs. women, community vs. women, NGOs vs. women, and so on. The key is to
refract these back through a class analysis and be attuned to the specificity of women’s needs as
points of intervention—the kinds of intervention where working-class women can take a leading role
in their own liberation. But they also have to be related back to the general problems of the division
of labour in a capitalist society, for women’s problems are inherently related to these broader
structures.

Here we have just noted a couple of examples of the many ways that contradictions around gender
manifest. Women may also face serious problems at their workplace. There are also other aspects of
gender/sexuality that are not covered here: homophobia and transphobia, for example.

Ethnic and racial contradictions

Future documents and sessions will focus more closely on racism and racialization. Racism has to be
understood in class terms if it is to be understood deeply. Liberal anti-racism reduces racism to a
problem of tolerance, understanding, interfaith dialogue, etc. Identity politics anti-racism often
reduces racism to the attitudes and behaviour of individual white persons—or lighter-skinned people
rather than darker-skinned people. But the benefits of being white do not apply to all whites equally,
nor do the problems of racism affect all people of colour equally.

A middle-class person of colour will face racist jibes and cultural insensitivity, and will face
institutional racism, for example, being at a disadvantage in getting hired with respect to a better
qualified white person. However, working-class people of colour face those problems and many
more—they tend to live in working-class neighbourhoods with poorer facilities and problems (see
above). One of the fundamental problems of racism in Canada is that people of colour are more
likely to be working-class and poorer than white people.

Ethno-racial contradictions can be generalized or

specific. For example, Islamophobia or anti-Black
racism are often seen in generalized forms, used by
capitalist classes for a variety of reasons—often to
push a “law and order” agenda and boost police
forces, or for broader “national security” agenda that
involves militarization. These may also take the form
of anti-immigrant policies and discourses.

Ethno-racial contradictions can also be rather specific, as in the example of Punjabis and Jamaicans
in a neighbourhood facing tension. Sometimes this may be a tension between one neighbourhood,

6
perhaps of better-off white persons, and another of more working-class racialized peoples, with the
better-off neighbourhood having better facilities, and so on.

General racism, such as that of certain supremacist groups, can also become specific, for example
when the Jewish Defence League, Christian Heritage Group and Canadian Hindu Advocacy (three
fascist groups) united and picketed outside the Valley Park Middle School in 2011 against Muslim
prayers in school; or more recently in 2014 when Immigration Watch Canada printed and distributed
racist flyers in Brampton against Punjabis/Sikhs.

Race and ethnicity are also complicated by the fact that they ​cut across classes​. Upwardly mobile
people of colour will try to get a piece of the pie by representing themselves as “community
leaders,” and in this way hobnob with the mainstream political parties or engage in NGOtic activities
also to pacify the working-class bases. We also see this in a very different form amongst Indigenous
politicians who use their leadership of band councils as ways to accumulate wealth and prestige,
while doing little to change the fundamental conditions of their communities or organizing fightback
against the colonial-capitalist state.

It is therefore very important to be attuned to the contradictions ​within​ ethno-racial groups, as much
as it is to be attuned to contradictions ​between​ ethno-racial groups.

That said, investigating ethnic specificity can also be an important entry point into organizing. For
example, language training for youth (in their mother tongues) or language training for new
immigrants (in English) may be pressing needs in communities around which organization can be
built. Or, manifest contradictions may revolve around race whereas latent contradictions revolve
around class. A strategy would be to build a cross-racial organization focusing on class issues;
alternatively, building separate racial organizations that focus on class issues but work closely
together and in political unity. It depends on the situation.

Social groups and ideological contradictions

One of the most important aspects of social investigation is to

figure out what social groups already exist, what their functions
are and what their political roles are.

Future documents and sessions will focus on civil society more

closely. NGOs can be seen as registered extensions of the state,
especially when they receive state-funding—as most do. This
disqualifies them from engaging in political advocacy, and often
makes them highly defensive, e.g., seeking to stop the
Conservatives at any cost so that they can maintain their funding,
while ignoring the deeper problems of capitalism that are just as
much expressed by Liberals or the NDP. In other ways, it is
important to remember that NGO workers and social workers also
have their own material interests—their jobs, their
organizations—at stake. Overall, NGOs have to be understood as

7
mechanisms for managing people and their problems, not for solving them.

For example, one consulting firm called Public Interest appears to act in the interests of tenants in
Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC), they began to dominate a tenant group called
Tenants for Social Housing: We are not for sale. In 2011-12, for example, they opposed Rob Ford’s
cuts to public housing. Yet, at the same time, Public Interest had itself been contracted by TCHC to
conduct “consultations” which were really about selling the idea of “redevelopment” (gentrification)
to ​people​. So one imagines there was a conflict of interest or, ultimately, Public Interest was trying
to play both sides in strange ways.

Often, these kinds of organizations limit the parameters of struggle ​ideologically,​ by promoting
lobbying, petitioning, responsible tenant representation, etc. instead of questions about truly building
popular power and independent organizations of the people. They want to link them into the NDP or
the existing state structure and its “left” leaning elements. But what happens to people’s interests
when the NDP shifts to the right, or the “left” isn’t so left anymore?

Similarly, even in nominally independent organizations that are not NGOs, such as tenant
associations or unions or other groups, there will be a mixture of people who hold different views
and ideas about the world (i.e., different ideologies—not necessarily in the sense of having a
program of the world pre-worked out, but just how they understand reality). Some folks may support
the Conservatives, others the Liberals, and others yet the NDP, but they come together around a
common issue. It is always important to identify the differences in ideology, which may not seem
immediately apparent and so can take their time, and their ​material bases.​ A lot of time people say
they are pragmatic and have no ideology, but everyone has a political orientation toward or against
the class system and capitalism, or toward patriarchy and sexism, etc. For example, as we have
noted, “community leaders” will often hobnob with politicians, but politicians in and out of power
can provide jobs, support, or other incentives to their supporters and mobilizers on the ground. (This
might sound like “Third World” patronage, but it is here in Canada as well.)

Even more generally in a neighbourhood or community, it is important to inquire into the range of
political opinions that exist. For example, people (often in downtown areas) have been quick to
condemn the suburbs as stupid or ignorant for supporting Rob Ford. But, as we have noted, people
are not stupid or sheep, they must have reasons for supporting Ford, if that is what they have done. It
is always important to understand why people do what they do, why they have the ideology they
have—and this can be related to many reasons.

One important reason is class. Often, people from different class backgrounds or in different class
positions may interpret or explain their political views in very different ways. It is important to be
attuned to this sensitivity. It is entirely possible that working-class people and petty-bourgeois
people will support the same political candidate for entirely different reasons.
State – society contradictions

Future documents and sessions will focus more closely on the state. We have already outlined many
of the ways in which the state acts directly or indirectly as the source of contradiction (which is,

8
ultimately, a contradiction with the capitalist system) – schools, healthcare, infrastructure, police,
child care, and so on.

However, it is also important to examine how the personnel of the state act and operate. By this, we
are referring to both politicians and state employees. How do politicians try and cough up support?
How do they react to their constituents? John Parker, for example, is a councilor who represents both
the rich, white Leaside, and the poor non-white Thorncliffe Park. He often blames the latter for ​their
problems​, or seeks to ​promote snitching​. But he also keeps getting re-elected… so why is that?

Understanding these kinds of specificities can become important for developing broader analysis and
strategies for organizing and mobilizing people effectively. Grasping contradictions is important
because the goal in organizing and mobilizing is to “unite the advanced, win over the middle masses,
expose the opportunists and isolate the reactionaries.”

Methods of social investigation

Social investigation can take on several methods. You may use face-to-face interviews, focus
groups, participant observation, neighbourhood mapping, broad surveys, or detailed questionnaires.
These are overlapping methods and can reinforce each other and are briefly described below (you
can search the Internet for more details). It might be useful to do a social mapping first, for example,
before conducting interviews, to be familiar with an area and how people engage in it. On the other
hand, interviews may enrich and clarify a neighbourhood map (maybe people avoid a certain place
and would rather go further, for any number of reasons).

▪ Face-to-face interviews:​ These can be formal/structured, where you simply read off of a
questionnaire and note down answers; or they can be more semi-structured—you have a set of
questions prepared but you are also able to let the conversation go wherever it wants to go. This is
especially great for us as journalists, we can simply talk to people about their issues as journalists
and learn a lot.

Face-to-face interviews may also be one way to complete a survey (see below), rather than
depending on people to voluntarily fill them out, just go door to door and ask.

▪ Participant observation:​ This is about just going out there and getting involved, you can
think of it as “advanced hanging out.” Observe where people are at through interaction with them,
building relations and conducting activities with them. Talk to their relatives, or go hang out at
coffee shops and strike up conversations.

▪ Focus groups:​ Here, you recruit a finite group of people (e.g., seven single-mothers) and
have a semi-structured conversation, let it flow but try to guide the conversation so that it does not
get out of hand. Record the proceedings.

▪ Neighbourhood mapping:​ ​This might involve actually making a map of people’s

neighbourhoods, particularly with reference to the facilities and services they use. What kinds of
financial institutions exist? Where are the grocery stores and halal meat shops (upscale or

9
mass-market)? Are there health facilities nearby or far away? Are there NGOs or employment
services, or temp agencies around? Where are the mosques, temples or churches and how do people
interact with them? Where are the cafes and other hangouts?

▪ Surveys:​ Generally a questionnaire that is submitted to a set of people, and they are required
to fill it out and return it somewhere. This may not be the most effective method of building
relationships and contacts, and people may not get back to you at all. Surveys also tend to have to be
short and direct (for people to want to fill them out), so are not necessarily the best way of scoping
out general trends and exploring problems.

▪ Detailed questionnaire:​ ​This is like a survey questionnaire, but with even greater detail. If
people indicate they want to share more information it might be sent to a selected set of those
surveyed. Again, if it is not conducted in person, it may not be the best way to build relationships.

From the masses, to the masses: taking social investigation back to the people

It is important that, once conducted, social investigation be presented back to the people. This is an
important way of raising consciousness, especially class consciousness.

There are several ways to take social investigation can be taken back to the people, and again, these
are not mutually exclusive:

▪ Public meetings​. Once social investigation is conducted and people are familiar with you,
they can be invited to a public meeting where the results of the investigation are presented.
Hopefully, this is done in conjunction with the people.
▪ Publication as a report.​ A systematic and detailed report can be published that generalizes
the methods, findings and results of a broader study. This can also be released at a public meeting.
▪ Article for newspaper,​ like BASICS Community Newsletter, where bits and pieces of social
investigation are summarized and published. Once published, though, the article must be shared
actively with the people represented in it—through directly distributing the paper to them, or by
actively sharing the article through e-mail and other social media. (Ideally, you would have gotten
your interviewee’s contact information!) An article could also revolve around the meeting where
there is release of a publication.
▪ Other forms of propaganda: Results of social investigation can be presented back to people in
the form of posters, pamphlets, etc.

By collecting feedback from the people on social investigation, the work and analysis can be
continuously refined. It is important to remember that there is no end to the social investigation
process, instead there is an “educate-organize-mobile cycle.”

What’s more, by presenting the results of social investigation back to the people, we can invite
collective problem-solving proposals from the people and figure out better ways to organize and
mobilize around the issues.

10
Illustrations from Stephanie McMillan (stephaniemcmillan.org)

11