There is an idea, or perhaps several that I’ve been struggling with for the past few years. The election of Trump has certainly elevated my thoughts on this matter. It started as the issue of political correctness became controversial. There were starting to be more and more rumblings that things had gone too far. Not just from conservative pundits who complain about every ounce of liberal criticism, but from liberals as well. Often from satirists and comedians whose life’s work comes from criticizing conservatism and extreme right wing values.
It seems, in my own experience, I start to see more and more people on the left become abusive of the people on the right. It doesn’t even seem like it’s because they’ve been offended first, but are being offended for other people, and thus feel justified in shaming others. Now perhaps we have always had a group of people who have been quick to take offense, and that this age of social media has simply brought such people to the fore. Just as social media has been quick to enhance a culture of shaming which probably already existed. Perhaps the allure of being able to shame people anonymously and with greater volume is too great for many of us to resist. Keep in mind,I am not just making a criticism of people on the left here. Because for all their talk about “liberal snowflakes”, if the right was just this “let it slide” group of people who just kept their nose to the grindstone, I think social media would look much different.
The idea that has been bouncing, increasingly more violently in my head, is to what degree we create the monsters we despise, and to what degree to we become them ourselves. Many of us have listened to or read analyses by various pundits and scholars about how right wing movements are on the rise and there are some who would blame this on the left. Part of this could be in support of neo-liberalism, but some have suggested that this is due to a more aggressive liberalism that is trying to force a certain viewpoint on others. An example of that is written in a critique of a New York Magazine piece in Salon. Look I don’t want to make this another self-examination piece where I am going to blame the left for the ills of today. I am not going to let off the hook harmful ideologies on the right which have no place in civil societies either. It’s well documented that the right has used fear and misinformation to exploit people and for the most part I feel like the left is simply trying to react to increased levels of irrationality, but not necessarily in a rational way. Politicians are of course not the only ones to use fear to persuade people. Corporations and the media all do it as well, and so to a certain degree all of us live at a certain level of fear most who are my age or older didn’t grow up with.
I worry about universities becoming places that disinvite speakers due to social media pressure and protests from students. Such things are certainly a function of the corporate model that universities are being run as also, but it is a concern that students would be so upset to hear what someone they disagree with has to say to actually prevent that person from speaking. This article is from 2016 and only in the U.S. but it is happening in the UK as well. This year we had protests turn violent at Berkeley because of professional provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, and a twice this year a pro-police speaker, Heather MacDonald had talks canceled or dangerously disrupted and was unable to give her talk. I believe bad ideas fester in the dark. I would rather have bad ideas challenged in an open forum. Allowing people to speak at universities doesn’t legitimize their claims, it tells young people that in the real world you are going to face a diversity of views and people that hold them and that you must be able to absorb them and answer them with rational and evidentiary arguments.
Today, I listened to a podcast, and heard yet another critique of Merkel (from a liberal) for letting in so many refugees and that this is the fuel the right-wing parties need to take over many European nations and possibly lead to the collapse of the EU. Even if Islamic terrorists acts are small in comparison to the amount of good that helps the refugees opening borders so freely is dangerous. The overarching argument being that so much compassion leads to a blind spot, where political moderation would be more prudent for long term stability. From a political standpoint, I find it hard to disagree perhaps, but as an individual who also recognizes the cost of not helping people who are suffering it leaves me feeling helpless. If compassion leads to the rise of nationalism and racism, and I believe in the value of compassion as one of our most valuable human traits, then I must at least ask the question, “Is it enough if our heart is in the right place?”
Since I believe we can live in a more compassionate society, and that human society has trended towards greater compassion, I want to be able to see that movement continually. Maybe in the long arch of history it is our fate to take two steps forward and one step back. And these back steps may be half a human lifetime. Furthermore, perhaps in some places things go back for longer, while other countries that were back start to move forward. So globally we may still be moving forward, but all moving at different rates. The fact remains, that as an individual, while I can be pleased that the average moves forward, I still am not content to let the society that I most directly live in fall back. What can I do? How must I behave? And how can I promote positive behavior in others?
An important part of my journey in life was to understand the brain. My inspiration for doing so occurred when I met with people who had diametrically different world views, and where no amount of evidence would sway them. That journey was a great one and it gave me a greater understanding of how people come to believe the things they do. But I still find that in the everyday things we generally want the same things, and that we are all quite similar, so I find myself wondering how common ground is to be found. I guess, it is just who I am that I can’t give up on the idea that we are all human and that we have more reasons to work together than to work apart. And so it is this lens that I find myself wondering, “Even if some minds can’t be changed, how do we make sure that the problem doesn’t get worse?” It seems to me that 20 years ago, someone like Trump would have been laughed at to the point of just being a lopped off as to one of those crazy eccentrics who runs for president but nobody takes seriously. Many of us were of that very mindset in the primaries, myself included. But it also seems to me that the left has changed as well. I don’t remember a group of people on the left that behaved the way we have seen either. I don’t remember universities preventing speakers they disagreed with from speaking. I certainly don’t remember riots over it. I don’t remember the name calling and the shaming, and the dehumanization of people we disagree with.
It’s perhaps a chicken and the egg, but it seems like as the divide has grown such that the fringes grow too. In my mind I see this being plausible as a normal statistical distribution morphs into a bimodal one. Have the terrorists been winning? Sending the west into a spiral of fear, where the existence of one extreme, requires that we oppose it with another? Is the “alt-right” a response to an “alt-left”? Or vice-versa? Are most of us just living in such a state of fear that we, on average, feel a greater need to be part of a certain camp, where it’s “us” against “them”?
There was an excellent little article by George Orwell I read a few months ago, that he wrote in a London newspaper on fascism. A word we’ve seen a lot lately and reading this article made me realize how easily the word was thrown around then too. In trying to define the word, the most common definition that he thinks people could agree with is bullying. I think if we’re honest with ourselves we can think people who fit the description of a bully, and they aren’t all on the right. I’ve heard the political spectrum described as a horseshoe and that there is a place that the left and right meet, and that’s at fascism. Communist Russia and Nazi Germany might have come from different political philosophies, but I think we can agree that the style of governance was very similar in its oppressiveness and cruelty. The fact remains that no matter how right someone might be the way in which we deliver that truth matters. If I say it is better for you to be kind. That statement is true. But if I, in convincing you, try to shame you, push you around, call you names, surround you with a bunch of my friends and make threats, I think the importance of kindness would be lost. Yet this is the kind of behavior we see every day: people on both sides being jeered at and dehumanized for being wrong about something. There are too few attempts to educated and reason. Plenty of getting angry and ridiculing others. I maintain the belief that rightness divorced from empathy is ultimately unhealthy, even poisonous at times. We’ve all been wrong about things, and at times we’ve been ignorant or misinformed about some pretty basic information. We’ve also been guilty of letting our emotion override our rationality. This is part of being human. So even when you believe that someone is wrong about something, even dangerously wrong, it doesn’t make them any less human. We have easily duped and plastic brains that are subject to the influences in our lives.
As I quoted recently in a post about Sam Harris’ thoughts on Trump, we have two choices in influencing others: conversation or violence. Is shaming and ridicule conversation? Or is it more of a violence of the mind? Even if we can say it is still not violence, it feels like unproductive discourse that will make violence more a necessity. I am not a pacifists to the point of saying violence is never the answer, but I am constantly going to be looking at how we can avoid it. Free speech, provided it is not inciting violence, is one of our most important values. It is the one value that allows us to self-correct peacefully, and challenge ideas that cause harm.
I am not sure how this post will be perceived. Whether it appears balanced in its criticism. I guess, it seems to me, that fascism is growing in both political directions and that somehow they are a reaction to each other. A reaction to fear perhaps, and as fascism grows the fear gets worse. Can we find a way out of the positive feedback loop? Maybe the other guy started it, but as the divide grows that origin seems to matter less than trying to figure out how to end it. As a liberal rooted in all people enjoying basic human rights, I wonder how we defend those values while loving those who attack such values at the same time so that they know those values can improve the quality of life for all. But one thing is sure to me, if we can’t live by the values we claim to embrace, then a progressive liberal society doesn’t seem achievable.