Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk I was disappointed or let down by a few online communities I frequent, and it made me wonder just what (if anything) I should have tried to do say or share in those communities. It's difficult for me to find the right words to describe what I was witnessing, it seemed not exactly celebratory but at the very least sneering about someone being assassinated.
Today as my thoughts come together somewhat I believe I am reinforcing something I've said before (even on this very sparse blog).
The "two sides" in our country do not understand each other, and the misunderstanding is on a fundamental level. Ironically, I believe "both sides" would agree on many values and issues, and even (if they were willing to discuss) on most methods (obviously there are a few hot-button issues where the divide is very real, but on most things we would probably agree).
Where the misunderstanding manifests greatest is on motivation, in the sense of personal values or virtues. Motivation to change in one direction or the other, or the kind of motivation that is deterrence.
One side believes the other side will be deterred by violence or aggression. By shooting or stabbing, intimidating or harassing, they expect the other side to stop pressing for values or virtues. So they shoot and stab and harass. This is (probably) because it is violence or aggression, intimidation or harassment that works against them, and would make them back down or even change their mind or ways.
The other side believes the "first side" in this description will be motivated or deterred by encouragement or shame, by example or explanation of facts. It is believed that, by extolling virtue and living as an example their political opponents will change their ways and adopt the virtues in question, or by shame suggesting that the first side is "not normal" they'll guilt themselves into adopting norms. But the "first side" does not WANT to be normal, they revel in the concept or idea that cultural norms are being challenged, and will actually continue further down a divergent path as a result. Again, this is (probably) because it is encouragement and shame, and explanation of facts, that influenced the "other side".
Both sides are using the levers that would work on themselves, not the levers that would work on others.
Obviously, from my perspective, the use of encouragement, explanation, facts, and even shame is very much more preferable than violence and harassment. I'm not advocating outright violence, but I am suggesting that telling people they're "not normal" when they SEEK abnormality (I would say an extreme pursuit of the wrong elements of individuality) is not going to work either.
No comments:
Post a Comment