From Theory to Praxis:
How to Perform Social Justice with TPC

          Holding this in mind, I propose three elements key to creating a social justice ideology with(in) technical communication: (1) Seeing our work as advocacy, (2) recognizing the historical foundation and context of the field, and (3) engaging with the discussion, actively and purposefully. Using Black Feminist Theory, Critical Race Theory, and Marxist Social Theory, we can look at the unique ways in which privilege and oppression interact and intersect with each other, and with the bodies of both audience and communicator.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
I must begin by confessing: I am not a Marxist. I don’t shy away from the term; I merely do not have the academic training and knowledge to bear the title. What I attempted to do with this analysis is apply a social, not economic, Marxist theory of class to complicate my intersectional analysis. I wondered if, in addition to the vertical axes of oppression that Black feminist theory addresses, an additional horizontal axis of class could be introduced. My attempts failed. What I learned through the attempt was (a) there is apparently no scholarship attempting similar analysis in the field, and (b) this kind of analysis is exceedingly difficult. One may be an aggravating factor of the other. Consider this, then, a call for papers. Hark, Marxists who exist in the ordinary world of technical communication, and accept this official call to action. Allow the call to bring you across the threshold into adventure.

Definition of Terms
Social justice is not a new field of study, but it is an ever-evolving one. Below you will find brief, shallow, but current (to 2022) explanations on topics that each deserve their own examination. This is how the following concepts are to be understood in the context of this paper:

Definition: Social Justice
“…social justice in technical and professional communication investigates how communication broadly defined can amplify the agency of oppressed people… this definition of social justice takes into account… identification and recognition of oppression and its root causes.” (Jones & Williams, 2017).
“Efforts at social justice recognize the historical, economic, and sociopolitical forces that promote injustices and normalize them; but, more importantly, such efforts also support and enact systems that magnify the agency of oppressed and under-resourced people and communities.” (Walton & Agboka, 2021).
“…all technical communication contexts are multi- and inter-cultural and influenced by institutions and systems of power – and distributed agency therein – and that social justice approaches to technical communication better position us in any context to better advocate for technological and scientific change in equitable ways within these contexts” (Haas & Eble 2018).

Definition: Critical Race Theory
By Critical Race Theory, I mean the academic framework of dissecting how race impacts every institution and system in our society. Part of Critical Race Theory is the concept of white washing: the idea that every race, including the ‘white’ race, has a culture and ideology that is ‘ethnic,’ even if the ethnicity of white culture has been ignored. Critical Race Theory asserts that race is a social construct, and calls for the removal of whiteness as the standard. “Critical race theory helps us to understand that all writing is subjective and influenced by our race” (Haas 2012).

Definition: Marxist Social Theory
By Marxist Social Theory, I mean examining the impact of the struggle between those with means and those without. This has been a central feature of human societies since before the concept of class consciousness. I posit that the work we do “…can only be properly understood within the wider framework of social reality because reality determines how the text will be produced. By social reality Marxists mean a series of struggles between conflicting social forces and the modes of economic production in which they engage” (Ding 1998).

An important part of Marxist Social Theory is the knowledge that every successful system in a society works to further the status quo, which is the status quo that favors the ruling class, unless it is specifically designed not to do so. Marxists believe that the State (the ruling class) must necessarily prop up apparatuses that will support it. Universities, organizations, corporations, every extension of the ruling class will serve that end. In Massachusetts, for example, the state supports a liberal public school system because it itself is Democratic and holds liberal values. All of the technical communications that are produced in that system will be created in and for that environment. “… We can point to scientific and technical communication as an ideological apparatus that creates, transmits, and perpetuates the ideology of the ruling force… the communication always reflects the ruling force’s ideology and repels other ideologies” (Ding 1998).

Definition: Black Feminist Theory
Black Feminist Theory is, in part, a response to white feminism, “or, as some scholars call it, feminism” (Moore 2018). “Black Feminist Theory is a theoretical perspective that ‘makes room’ for Black women’s experiences against a backdrop of generally exclusive white feminism” (Moore 2018). An integral aspect of Black Feminist Theory is the concept of intersectionality. As defined by the originator of this concept, Professor Kimberlee Crenshaw, “intersectionality is a lens through which you can see where power comes and collides, where it interlocks and intersects. It’s not simply that there’s a race problem here, a gender problem here, and a class or LBGTQ problem there. Many times that framework erases what happens to people who are subject to all of these things” (Crenshaw 2017).

          Using Critical Race Theory, we understand that the field cannot be free of racial bias (Haas 2012), and the State is an inherently racist organization (Moore 2018). Using Marxist social theory, we understand that the field is a deliberate part of the ideological machine of the State (Ding 1998), and that the ideologies of the State are transmitted in our work, unless we specifically design it not to. Black feminist theory compels us to examine the intersection of these axes of oppression (Moore 2018) and shows us that they cannot be ignored.

Why this work
It is unfortunately necessary to continuously address why social justice needs to be considered in technical communication. The simple answer is that technical communicators, in our service to the user, have the “position, agency, and obligation” (Eble & Haas, 2018) to ensure that our work is equitable and just. The complicated answer is that, in our present patriarchal white supremacist structure, any extant system which does not work to actively dismantle the status quo serves to uphold it (Walton & Agboka, 2021). Scholars have showed us time and again that “… in the most progressive spaces and places, the colonial detritus of racism and ethnocentrism remains…” (Haas 2012), even in allegedly objective fields.

TPC is a field which purports to uphold the rights of the user and impart knowledge in a way that is ethical and understandable to all. Since the beginnings of TPC thirty years ago, “…our scholarship and practice has dramatically transitioned – with help from the work of the humanist, social, feminist, cultural, critical, intercultural, international, and global turns…” (Haas & Eble 2018). Technical communicators should not therefore be surprised that there is a need to continuously evolve. “This recasting of the field should not be a far-fetched ideal for technical communicators. In fact, the human experience has been and should continue to be a core concern for scholars in the field” (Jones 2016). It is not time to go “from understanding technology as neutral and science as objective to understanding that technologies and sciences are culturally-rich and thus informed by ideological agendas and uses” (Haas & Eble 2018).

Even after coming to these agreements, there will be those who say that this is beyond the scope or power of TPC. I disagree–in fact, I believe not only that we can conduct social justice with technical communication, but I believe that because we can, we therefore must. “Technical communicators have the content knowledge, the responsibility, and the power and potential to address issues of social justice and equality through their research and pedagogy” (Jones 2016). We have the power of knowledge, but we also have the responsibility of privilege. “As technical communication researchers and practitioners, we can use our privilege and rhetorical skills to help equip others with new habits of mind and practice that attune them to responsible citizenship and advocacy, self-awareness and consciousness, and critical thinking” (Haas & Eble 2018).

The field is already engaged in conversations about social justice, but they are either not connected, or not enough. “Despite this promise of cultural studies work in technical communication, only a few scholars within our field are doing work specifically and explicitly at the intersections of race, ethnicity, rhetoric, and technology studies” (Haas 2012). The field is, however, starting to notice and attempt to fill this gap. “Scholars in technical and professional communication (TPC) are beginning to recognize contemporary exigencies and acknowledge that they cannot sit idly by in the midst of such sociopolitical and socioeconomic strain” (Jones 2016).

Problem Space
Technical communicators often sincerely believe in the objectivity and neutrality of the field. “We often like to believe that technical communication, like legal writing, is written objectively and is void of culture, thus making it more accessible” (Haas 2012). TPC’s ambition to be user-centered and widely understandable helps sell that belief, and white washing and the myth of objectivity creates resistance when confronting these topics. The field has, historically, ignored the ways in which “our work is saturated with white male culture” (Haas 2012). If we agree with the ideologies outlined in this paper, we must “…understand that technical communication is not neutral or objective. Instead, technical communication is political and imbued with values. Technical communication reflects certain perspectives, viewpoints, and epistemologies” (Miller 1979). Namely, the epistemologies of the State.

When confronted with this resistance, it’s important that we focus on the fact that a social justice approach would improve the field for everyone, and legitimize it to a scholastic community which is every day more concerned with equity and inclusion. “Acknowledging the social impacts of communication legitimizes TPC as a field that fully understands, appreciates, and addresses the social contexts in which it operates.” (Jones 2016).

Of particular salience here is the history of TPC. It was born in the industrial age, and from those whose highest values were of “conformity, efficiency, and effectiveness” (Haas 2012). “The field of technical communication ‘emerged in the industrial contexts’ and these historical roots, which are embedded in these industrial practices, beliefs, and ideals of the early 20th century” (Jones 2016). Those ideals were misguided then, and serve us poorly now. We see evidence of archaic values imprinted on allegedly objective matters everywhere. “Scientific and technical writing actually belongs to a tradition in which science and scientific activities have always been used to create and transmit the ideology of the ruling force” (Ding 1998). If I were to give examples here, there would be little room for anything else.

          If the field was born in the function of the State, and if that State is racist, then unless we are actively engaged with that reality, we are upholding the racist patriarchal ideologies. “As such, technical communicators must be aware of the ways that the texts and technologies that they create and critique reinforce certain ideologies and question how communication shaped by certain ideologies affect individuals” (Jones 2016).

What Technical Communicators can do
Because we are able, we must do this work. Returning to the elements that have risen to the surface of the discussion, I suggest the following action items: (1) See our work as advocacy, (2) recognize the historical foundation and context of the field and its environment, and (3) engage with the discussion, actively.

Work as advocacy: Technical communication is not merely a means of transmitting information, but an instrument of power. Someone’s interest will be advanced by our writing. Whose interest will it be? We have the capacity to shift these power structures, and the mandate to do so.

Historical foundation and context: TPC was born from the industrial revolution, in order to advance the ideologies of that ruling class, which was racist, misogynistic, deadly to the impoverished, and toxic to the planet. We know this is true, because that is true of every ruling class in every human society. Technical communication now serves to uphold the ideologies of our current ruling class, which is not as far removed from 20th century values as we wish to believe. If we don’t recognize this context, then we can’t begin the work.

Actively engage the discussion: Because of the nature of technical communication, the social justice activism “…occurs simultaneously as texts and technologies are ideated, prototyped, designed, and tested” (Jones & William 2017). It is our job to bring these issues into focus for ourselves. If we do not bring these power structures to light for, and by our work, then we can never dismantle them. “… for [social justice] ideologies to emerge, new rhetorics must be spoken, written, or otherwise delivered into existence” (Haas 2012).

Despite our ambitions, it’s never been possible to write for “everyone,” in a truly universal manner. The field has attempted to solve this by writing for the “most common denominator” or the most common audience members. As user advocates, I believe technical communicators do earnestly attempt to make themselves understandable to the widest possible audience.

However, it’s time to ask ourselves who we’re writing for when we write for the “default” user. Are we using our privilege to advocate for the user, or are we propagating the ideals of those who hold the power. There are uncountable stops on the journey towards social justice. The stakes are high, and the road is long. But the time to act is now.