We’re always “the good guys” from our point of view. We’ve weighed up the pros and cons as best we can, we've considered the political climate, we’ve weighed everybody’s feelings (at least everybody who matters to us). Everything would be great if only the unreasonable people would fall in line.
Anyone who knows me at all knows that I have very strong feelings (and thoughts) about dehumanization. It is how governments convince their citizens to facilitate governments being the greatest mass killer, by orders of magnitude, of any entity. Typically, it taps into easily found racism or religious bigotry. WW2, "Japs". Korea & Vietnam, "gooks". Post 911 wars, "Hadjis" and "rag heads". Apex dehumanization. It's OK to kill them, they are less human than you. Not raised in bigotry I was indoctrinated to go fight "Luke the Gook" before going to Vietnam, and I was, and I used those dehumanizing words.
The practice extends to non-government inspired dehumanization. From America's long-time dehumanization of black people, you know the words, to the new dehumanization of white Americans by the "dear white people", "this white person did...", "cis men..." internet writers found in places like Medium and their sycophant followers. While not explicitly used to prepare people to go kill on behalf of governments, it serves a common purpose of divisiveness. It's hard to have compassion for these assholes which makes fighting against it difficult.
N spoke of persuasion. In my thinking, the best persuasion is the unconscious persuasion of proximity. Spend time with "𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮." Get to know them. Find common interests, become friends. These things go much farther than lectures. You will still see cultural/subcultural differences, some of which you may not care for, but you have a shot at understanding. With that, empathy and compassion are much less difficult to find.
I can't say that the people who dehumanize others do it from a place of hate. I can't read minds. It is easy to think of them as haters, but I didn't hate anyone when I marched off to war. Using my own experience, I can only conclude that it need not be hate, but the indifference to the plight of the dehumanized isn't much of an improvement.
A lot of words to express the importance of compassion and a vehicle to finding it - proximity, friendship, common experience, rather than toxic "schooling."
Dehumanization is easy. Compassion "can" be too, when you discover that the demons are human like you. There will be people attempting to prevent that. Rejecting the bigotry that comes from demonization is the path. It is said that Daryl Davis did his remarkable work through educating the Klansmen. He didn't do it with a bull horn or an internet blog. He went out, displaying his humanity and expressing his view of the haters as humans too. There is a compassion in seeing your haters as humans with bad ideas, rather than as demons. An element in his work that goes unmentioned.
"In my thinking, the best persuasion is the unconscious persuasion of proximity. Spend time with "𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.""
This is really the key. As I said to N, I've never heard of a deradicalisation story that didn't contain this crucial element. It's exhausting to hate people for *any* reason when you share space with them.
That was really wise and eloquently stated. And very important to remember when dealing with current political adversaries.
Hate and contempt are totally counterproductive. For me the model is the television version of Anthony Bourdain, respectfully breaking bread with rednecks in West Virginia or you name it, meeting everyone where they are. You don’t have to agree you can just listen to their story.
This is why HRC’s “deplorables” comment was so damaging. Many right wingers believe that she gave voice to many if not most in her Party. Talk about shutting the door!
My team was at lunch together, sending off a consultant whose project with us was ending. I was shocked at what he was saying. Despite having a western university education, his particular Saudi upbringing led him to believe some terrible anti-semitic stuff, that the holocaust never happened, and that Jews aren't really human. The dehumanization was literal! The most effective thing I asked him was, "Have you ever broken bread with a Jew?". I already knew the answer was no, and he was bright enough to grasp the implication. I was shocked that his otherwise functioning mind had never gone there before, that he was completely willing to look down on others in a truly grotesque manner.
This was someone with a mother, a loving family, and liked (before that moment). He never thought of himself as 'bad'. But there he was, somehow confident enough to put his hate out there as if it were normal.
> "N spoke of persuasion. In my thinking, the best persuasion is the unconscious persuasion of proximity. Spend time with '𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.' Get to know them. Find common interests, become friends. These things go much farther than lectures. You will still see cultural/subcultural differences, some of which you may not care for, but you have a shot at understanding. With that, empathy and compassion are much less difficult to find."
TYTY, Steve. Another *great* one. Actually, two. That article on Medium was 100%, AFAIK. And You clearly pointed out the fallacies in N's approach. He "said":
"my mental health would be wayyyy better if it were easy to live perfectly in line with my values and also if my values were all perfectly consistent and stable."
Perfection being unattainable, and confessing I can be pretty lazy myself, this about says it all. The Mahatma said (to the effect), "Happiness is when what You think and what You say and what You do are all the same thing." You identified the problem clearly, and that's when people believe "It's not hypocritical if I don't practice what I preach."
It appeared to me that N's arguments were trying to deflect from the FACT You pointed out again and again:
"But while it’s way easier (and faster), to dehumanise people than it is to persuade them, all this does is drive them further away."
I dunno if this is the exception that proves the rule, of if this is the rule. But You've mentioned previously that Darryl <can't recall last name> from FAIR deradicalized KKK people. From what I know, it was 1000% compassion and persuasion.
Small point: Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there. But that's just me. TY again, Sir!
"Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there."
Yeah, good point about "saving" people, the whole notion is condescending and arrogant. And yes, N was determined to present reasonable people as these strange abberations who found it effortless to interact fairy with people they disagreed with. Saints who it was unreasonable to expect her to ever emulate. Which is why she kept talking about "perfection."
It's just an excuse to indulge her "fighty" side whenever she wants to vent her unhappiness on "the bad guys." These simplistic polarised concepts of "good people" and "bad people" are often used in that way to be honest. As Dave says above, it's easier to justify being cruel to people once you've dehumanised them.
"𝘚𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦. 𝘚𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦, 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘶𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘚𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳."
Anyone who knows me at all knows that I have very strong feelings (and thoughts) about dehumanization. It is how governments convince their citizens to facilitate governments being the greatest mass killer, by orders of magnitude, of any entity. Typically, it taps into easily found racism or religious bigotry. WW2, "Japs". Korea & Vietnam, "gooks". Post 911 wars, "Hadjis" and "rag heads". Apex dehumanization. It's OK to kill them, they are less human than you. Not raised in bigotry I was indoctrinated to go fight "Luke the Gook" before going to Vietnam, and I was, and I used those dehumanizing words.
The practice extends to non-government inspired dehumanization. From America's long-time dehumanization of black people, you know the words, to the new dehumanization of white Americans by the "dear white people", "this white person did...", "cis men..." internet writers found in places like Medium and their sycophant followers. While not explicitly used to prepare people to go kill on behalf of governments, it serves a common purpose of divisiveness. It's hard to have compassion for these assholes which makes fighting against it difficult.
N spoke of persuasion. In my thinking, the best persuasion is the unconscious persuasion of proximity. Spend time with "𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮." Get to know them. Find common interests, become friends. These things go much farther than lectures. You will still see cultural/subcultural differences, some of which you may not care for, but you have a shot at understanding. With that, empathy and compassion are much less difficult to find.
I can't say that the people who dehumanize others do it from a place of hate. I can't read minds. It is easy to think of them as haters, but I didn't hate anyone when I marched off to war. Using my own experience, I can only conclude that it need not be hate, but the indifference to the plight of the dehumanized isn't much of an improvement.
A lot of words to express the importance of compassion and a vehicle to finding it - proximity, friendship, common experience, rather than toxic "schooling."
Dehumanization is easy. Compassion "can" be too, when you discover that the demons are human like you. There will be people attempting to prevent that. Rejecting the bigotry that comes from demonization is the path. It is said that Daryl Davis did his remarkable work through educating the Klansmen. He didn't do it with a bull horn or an internet blog. He went out, displaying his humanity and expressing his view of the haters as humans too. There is a compassion in seeing your haters as humans with bad ideas, rather than as demons. An element in his work that goes unmentioned.
"In my thinking, the best persuasion is the unconscious persuasion of proximity. Spend time with "𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.""
This is really the key. As I said to N, I've never heard of a deradicalisation story that didn't contain this crucial element. It's exhausting to hate people for *any* reason when you share space with them.
That was really wise and eloquently stated. And very important to remember when dealing with current political adversaries.
Hate and contempt are totally counterproductive. For me the model is the television version of Anthony Bourdain, respectfully breaking bread with rednecks in West Virginia or you name it, meeting everyone where they are. You don’t have to agree you can just listen to their story.
This is why HRC’s “deplorables” comment was so damaging. Many right wingers believe that she gave voice to many if not most in her Party. Talk about shutting the door!
My team was at lunch together, sending off a consultant whose project with us was ending. I was shocked at what he was saying. Despite having a western university education, his particular Saudi upbringing led him to believe some terrible anti-semitic stuff, that the holocaust never happened, and that Jews aren't really human. The dehumanization was literal! The most effective thing I asked him was, "Have you ever broken bread with a Jew?". I already knew the answer was no, and he was bright enough to grasp the implication. I was shocked that his otherwise functioning mind had never gone there before, that he was completely willing to look down on others in a truly grotesque manner.
This was someone with a mother, a loving family, and liked (before that moment). He never thought of himself as 'bad'. But there he was, somehow confident enough to put his hate out there as if it were normal.
I lived in Saudi Arabia for 2 1/2 years. Hatred of Jews was deeply ingrained.
You wrote:
> "N spoke of persuasion. In my thinking, the best persuasion is the unconscious persuasion of proximity. Spend time with '𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.' Get to know them. Find common interests, become friends. These things go much farther than lectures. You will still see cultural/subcultural differences, some of which you may not care for, but you have a shot at understanding. With that, empathy and compassion are much less difficult to find."
True that.
TYTY, Steve. Another *great* one. Actually, two. That article on Medium was 100%, AFAIK. And You clearly pointed out the fallacies in N's approach. He "said":
"my mental health would be wayyyy better if it were easy to live perfectly in line with my values and also if my values were all perfectly consistent and stable."
Perfection being unattainable, and confessing I can be pretty lazy myself, this about says it all. The Mahatma said (to the effect), "Happiness is when what You think and what You say and what You do are all the same thing." You identified the problem clearly, and that's when people believe "It's not hypocritical if I don't practice what I preach."
It appeared to me that N's arguments were trying to deflect from the FACT You pointed out again and again:
"But while it’s way easier (and faster), to dehumanise people than it is to persuade them, all this does is drive them further away."
I dunno if this is the exception that proves the rule, of if this is the rule. But You've mentioned previously that Darryl <can't recall last name> from FAIR deradicalized KKK people. From what I know, it was 1000% compassion and persuasion.
Small point: Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there. But that's just me. TY again, Sir!
"Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there."
Yeah, good point about "saving" people, the whole notion is condescending and arrogant. And yes, N was determined to present reasonable people as these strange abberations who found it effortless to interact fairy with people they disagreed with. Saints who it was unreasonable to expect her to ever emulate. Which is why she kept talking about "perfection."
It's just an excuse to indulge her "fighty" side whenever she wants to vent her unhappiness on "the bad guys." These simplistic polarised concepts of "good people" and "bad people" are often used in that way to be honest. As Dave says above, it's easier to justify being cruel to people once you've dehumanised them.
That last is sad, but true Sir. (Well, whole post was. :-)
I've been thinking about the word "Karen" for a while now. I hadn't heard there was a documentary! Thanks, I'll check it out.