Thoughts on Solidarity

"Such pledges, however, can be empty. Guevara missed the Tricontinental. He left Cuba for Africa, where he had begun to explore the possibility of joining the revolutionary movements in the Congo. In a letter to the Tricontinental, Che asked the hardest question of all: What is the value of solidarity when the imperialist guns were not challenged? 'The solidarity of the progressive forces of the world towards the people of Vietnam today,' he wrote, 'is similar to the bitter irony of the plebeians coaxing on the gladiators in the Roman arena. It is not a matter of wishing success to the victims of aggression, but of sharing his fate; one must accompany him to his death or to victory.'"
- Excerpt from A People's History of the Third World: The Darker Nations by Vijay Prashad.

In other words, how do we construct solidarity as mutual liberation as opposed to passive and weightless words without critically examining things such as privilege? For example, is it adequate for feminist male allies to claim solidarity without actively being invested and active in deconstructing and challenging the structure of white male patriarchy and thus critically analyzing their own male privilege?

In my opinion, it is not enough for me as a male to say I am against patriarchy but continue to perpetuate patriarchy through my actions. Saying I am against patriarchy and standing with my sisters who are in the struggle to liberate ourselves from such a structure means also being active in deconstructing patriarchy in my own self.

This is essentially what Che Guevara is saying in his letter to the Tricontinental. Solidarity is proactive, not passive. Words of our comrades cannot fall on deaf ears.

But at the same time, how do we make this work within the frame work of from each according to ability and to each according to need? Is it unreasonable to fight all battles? Is it truly liberation if we don't address the unique struggles of different peoples of the world?