Political activists are, strictly speaking, people just like anyone else. As such they suffer from the same frailties, eccentricities and foibles. While it is brilliant that we all come in different flavours and shapes there are some issues around mental health that come up in a very specific way for activists that are distinct from other aspects of our lives.
Sadly, many of us will be effected by distressing mental health problems at some time in our lives. It’s certainly nothing to be ashamed of, any more than someone should be ashamed of catching pneumonia or being very tall. As a society we need to remove the stigma from mental health problems and be more understanding of each other – although I recognise this is often easier to say than do.
It’s also a sad fact of life that while many people who are suffering do so without behaving inappropriately or aggressively to others sometimes their troubles spill over in negative ways that would never happen while they are well. Whether that’s simply falling out with people, or seeing the world through the tight prism of their issues without concern for others or occasionally simply being impossible to get on with.
This is not the case with everyone who has mental health issues by any means, but when it is it has to be dealt with sensitively with concern for everyone concerned.
Political activists that are mentally ill
I’ve got no statistics on whether political activists are more or less likely to suffer with mental health issues, my gut tells me it’s about the same as the rest of the population, but who knows? What is clear is that if those issues are directly impacting the way they interact with others there are distinct “activist” issues.
At work a sensitive employer will attempt to understand the problem, help the person seek help and may well give them leave, for their sake and their work mates. With a close friend or family member you may put your arms round them, help them financially, put up with the pain they inadvertantly cause because you love them. With those you don’t know well you may just keep them at a distance.
If you’re involved in a local Save the Library Campaign and an active member is behaving in a paranoid and sometimes aggressive way, say, it’s difficult to send them home or avoid them, and frankly it should be considering that campaigning groups should be inclusive rather than ready to exclude people at a drop of a hat. They also may well be doing lots of good work, but come as a whole and flawed human being rather than a simple leaflet deliverer or chairperson.
It’s also not appropriate for the campaign to go round diagnosing and trying treat distressed individuals. It’s not what the group is for and it is unlikely to have the expertise to do this properly. There is a duty to ensure everyone is safe, and the atmosphere remains as friendly as it can be, but beyond that we cannot replicate social services or the NHS.
Email warriors
It is also difficult to know whether someone truly has mental health issues or is simply a deeply unpleasant individual when email is concerned. Someone comparing the RSPCA to Nazis is not a firm enough footing to know for certain what’s going on at the other end of the computer line. As I said earlier the majority of those with a mental health issue will not cause any specific problem, but sometimes those issues lead them to blow up disaagreements into hatreds, or find enemies in those who are actually just members of the group trying to do their best.
I’m in favour of a hard comments policy when it comes to the internet, and email discussion groups are notorious for their noxious behaviour because the bad money drives out good. Constructive people often simply leave internet lists because of small groups of people who are prepared to treat others abominably. This is not simply a question of mental health but it is part of this.
It can be extremely distressing to find someone who is clearly in a bad way firing off comments round the nation that are abusive, unfair and often clearly wrong. Because people are kind they tend not to humiliate or hurt those responsible but it is not in their long term interests to publicly display their problems, and the darker side of their personality, in this way.
It’s also the case that they may be subjecting someone to abuse that they simply do not deserve, and the failure to deal with that abuse (whatever the cause), means the group loses productive members and demoralises others. On email lists or blogs if this is not dealt with the group can easily become toxic, so setting out hard lines from the outset protects everyone concerned and can keep the group focused on its remit.
It’s difficult because it’s difficult
The reason why political activists often have difficulty dealing with other people’s mental issues when they impact on their groups is that these are genuinely difficult questions that cannot be solved with a process or a different attitude. These groups have not (usually) caused those mental health problems, are not equipped to deal with them and yet they can’t avoid them. The person or people are in the room with them and are not going away, but we have little power to take away their distress.
Again, most of the time there is no direct problem, the depressed individual who quietly sits in the corner and volunteers to do something that they then doesn’t feel up to doing do it, or the person who drops out because they find it hard to cope with their problems and a room of politicos simultaneously are things we should be sad about, and care about, but don’t overly disrupt political activity.
The fragile member who takes everything as a personal affront, or the obsessive who thinks everything from the bin collections to the election of Obama are connected to Israel are not as easily dealt with. People should not have to be shouted at, or have lies told about them. No matter how much we feel for the person who is creating these issues we need to protect the rest of the group too who, lest we forget, may well have their own burdens to bear even if they appear to be holding it together effortlessly.
We need to look after each other in politics
This particularly goes for those we disagree with. It doesn’t mean we always have to like each other, it’s not going to happen, but when someone is the subject of lies, personal abuse or simple internet stalking we need to protect them – because it can be hard to cope with no matter what sort of front we put up.
I’ll always remember one young woman, who found her own mental distress very difficult to deal with, screaming in the face of another woman in the same group over a political conflict. I think it was because people were aware of the young woman’s problems (it was actually quite difficult to know her and not know of her problems) that she was not pulled up on it.
However the woman who was the subject of the attack dealt with it in a dignified way despite the fact she was breaking under the burden of a debilitating depression. A depression that would have made the incident even more unpleasant and difficult to cope with. She got no support because she was not making it common knowledge that she had problems, and she was not protected because the line between passionate political disagreement and personal abuse seems blurred in many people’s minds.
In my view we, as a community of political activists, need to have a conversation about the best way of dealing with these issues. We need to work out ways of helping protect everyone concerned by fostering a political climate where such attacks are not possible, but that is loose enough that mistakes are tolerated.
It’s difficult to make sure we don’t create a culture where only people “like us” can fit in while also ensuring that we create a habitable environment for those sensitive souls who don’t think they should have to put up with an “ally” screaming in their face over disagreements, real or imagined.