The Challenges of Feminist Citizenship: An Interview with Anannya Bhattacharjee

Anannya Bhattacharjee's 1996 article, "The Public/Private Mirage: Mapping Homes and Undomesticating Violence Work in the South Asian Immigrant Community," opened up new ways to think about women in community and the link between enforcement violence as manifested by private and public actors. This interview with her was conducted in New York City on June 6, 2003.

LR: You were in Boston a few months ago, on March 29, to give the keynote address at the New England Women's Studies Conference, shortly after the United States began its invasion of Iraq and while a large anti-war rally was taking place directly across the street on the Common. Addressing feminist citizenship in a changing world order, you noted that the nature of that change was particularly difficult to gauge at that moment. Now, several months later, do the dynamics of change have greater definition for you?

AB: I think first it will be useful to just talk about the word "citizenship" because in today's world of global migration we need a concept of citizenship that goes beyond a legalistic definition. Within the United States, given the wide spectrum of people who inhabit the immigrant communities—ranging from undocumented immigrants to people who are legal residents or who have legal citizenship—citizenship should have a broader meaning. We are also living through a time of increased, indeed draconian, restrictions on democratic participation. To counter this trend, we have to infuse the spaces that we are already in with citizen participation. By citizen participation, I do not mean only a token participation as in the votes we cast every few years or the false choices we have as consumers. I am talking about engagement that democratizes the various aspects of human existence making it possible for us to define a society at local, regional, national, and global levels based on transparency, accountability, equality, justice, respect for life, and peace. This would counter the current government trends toward greater secrecy and mystification in the name of national security.

LR: The increased emphasis on national security in the United States and the tightening of national borders has problematized "citizenship" as a usable word, and I noticed that you were using "engagement" rather than "citizenship."

AB: Yes. And if we want to build democracy, it's important for us to realize that voting is just one aspect of a democratic society. Just as it is not viable to say that if you don't have a passport then you are not a citizen, it's not appropriate to say that since you cannot vote you are not a citizen. To me the concept of citizenship extends to undocumented workers who have the right to engagement and participation to determine the conditions they live in and this goes far beyond just casting votes during elections. Electoral processes and political campaigns are of course important watersheds. However, if citizen action and participation are geared solely towards candidates and their campaigns, then citizen participation will wither away over time. This is especially true in the U.S. where electoral activism is limited to two parties with relatively little political difference between them and where new parties are not being generated out of mass movements.

LR: You often speak of your experiences at the World Social Forum where new forms of engagement and social organization from Latin America have gained visibility. One concept that excites me as a concrete juxtaposition to neo-liberal models of economic growth is what I think is called "community budgeting." Is anybody in the United States experimenting with that?

AB: One term for it is "participatory budget process." Organizing to determine the use of resources is key to self determination. Resources can mean many things but budget is one of them. However you define your community—neighborhood, block, county, state, nation, even the globe—budgetary decision-making is...