4 ms·

Different and opposing groups work together to find a common solution all the time. You can be different and work in a group and it not be antagonistic. This "u

Different and opposing groups work together to find a common solution all the time. You can be different and work in a group and it not be antagonistic. This "us v. them" mentality is fostered by people who don't want to contribute with people who are different, they want everyone to assimilate into "their way." Take the "black lives matter" movement. If we followed the OPs advice, they should just protest that "all lives matter" instead, which is precisely what their opposition is doing (e.g. blue lives matter, all lives matter), to diminish their campaign. I understand how it can be annoying to be labeled or be associated with a group, even if you don't want to, but this problem is not going to be solved if it's not identified and that is what is going on. I think she's just reading too much into it.

hosh 9y ago
This is something my friends and I were talking about privately for a while now. One of the things that came out of it was something summed up by one of my friends -- stop founding movements, start founding communities. Modernism (and I'm talking as far back as the early 1900s, and arguably, even earlier than that) has eroded our sense community. Our communication tech has, over the past few centuries, have allowed people to talk to each other at greater physical distance while at the same time, created more emotional distance from each other. While modernism might have produced great advancement in science and technology and challenged traditional dogmas, it also threw out a lot of what we needed from those traditions. Community-building is one of them. Movements that are trying to raise awareness on problems and change don't always have a clear idea on what happens after the fight is over: can you imagine still living, working, and playing with those people after all is said and done? Take "Black Lives Matter", or even "All Lives Matter". People voice their deep concerns, the ugly things get aired out. And after all of that, can you see yourself living next door? Your children playing and going to school together? Going to the pub after a town hall meeting? Barbecue at the park on a summer day? Borrow each other's tools? Asking each other for advice? Taking in one of the kids after school because your neighbor is busy that day? Or do you get a sense of fear, disgust, resentment, contempt, or despair?
- eeeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago
  I get none of those reactions. BLM are simply asking for equal treatment, not special treatment. Considering the "all lives matter" movement, if you can call it that, is more of a spiteful and petty response to BLM, I'm not sure it's a great example. A movement does not need to devolve into "us v. them" and cause those kind of responses you list. The only reason BLM would be offensive and cause those reactions is if this statement is offensive to your being -- black people having equal rights as white people. The "black lives matter" movement is a great example of a movement being required because they have been shut out of a "community" that already exists. That community being their actual community they live in. The community is the problem. All those things you have listed -- fear, disgust, resentment, contempt, despair -- are things black people have experienced against them at the hands of our government/police and that is why BLM exists, and that is why a movement is needed to change the community. Just like the civil rights movement, which is not over. I agree many movements do not have clear goals, but that often speaks to their poor leadership (e.g. occupy wall street), not a problem of movements in general or their grievances. Look at the civil rights movement. I think movements often arrive because the community has failed them. I would be interesting in hearing more practical examples of how a community would better solve some of these problems (or historical 20th century problems) over a movement, or what that distinction truly is or means. Definitely curious!
  - hosh 9y ago
    > The only reason BLM would be offensive and cause those reactions is if this statement is offensive to your being -- black people having equal rights as white people. Yes, that's the obvious response. There is also the other responses: that you can live with white people without fear, resentment, anger, disgust, or despair. Like being able to go onto a bus and not have judgements made on you that you're dangerous or seeing fear flicker in white people's faces, and in turn, put on a blank mask because to get angry will confirm all those fears. (Disclaimer: I'm not black; I people-watch a lot). There's a mirroring effect that happens where you don't know whose fear it is, or whose fear "started" it. > I would be interesting in hearing more practical examples of how a community would better solve some of these problems (or historical 20th century problems) over a movement, or what that distinction truly is or means. Definitely curious! I would too. This is the first time I am trying out these ideas outside my circle of friends, so I'm still working out concrete examples and brainstorming with others. That was why my attempt here started with an empathy-visualization exercise to test the waters. Here's another test: in my yuppie neighborhood I live in within metro Phoenix (which isn't my first choice, but family circumstances ... ) people get very passionate about homeless people on Next Door. There are vocal people who wants to kick them out and a smaller, but just as vocal group that talks about what it is like to be homeless. Some people want to call the cops. Some people reported a soup kitchen as a homeless hangout. (There _are_ people who case homes, or things like use card skimmers to steal credit cards, or try to arrange for a busted tire in order to corner a woman driving alone; it isn't as if this place was crime-free either). Using this frame about community, we can ask these questions: are homeless and vagrants a part of this local community or not? Can you see yourself living with them? Or do you feel disgust and fear? It's best to test for emotional reactions where your personal body and your family -- especially your children -- may actually be under threat. (In the esoteric martial arts, we call this "heart living under the sword": can you _really_ maintain loving-kindness even in face of threat, danger, and aggression?)
jackmott 9y ago
>Take the "black lives matter" movement. If we followed the OPs advice, they should just protest that "all lives matter" instead, That might have been more effective, even if it isn't as fair or correct. Hard to say, but in the lead up to the the latest US presidential election, there were many movements that I absolutely agreed with that I wish had shut up for just 1 year, because I could seem them fueling resentment on 'the other side' much more than energizing their own side. The rural side of my family was in the middle of being completely out of their minds over having a black president and gay marriage made legal when media started pushing for black lives matter and transgenders in bathrooms. They revolted, and now we have a moron as a president. "Deepened the divide" indeed. This may be an evolution in my own thinking, that there can be more important things than being "right". Think long term.
- rectang 9y ago
  The Civil War begat the Reconstruction. Two steps forward, one step back.
  - larsiusprime 9y ago
    Now imagine if we could have ended slavery and found a way to resolve things peacefully without escalating into a brutal war that killed 2% of the population, with massive suffering on both sides.
    - phlakaton 9y ago
      I'm personally convinced we couldn't. The blood was already on our hands when we decided to start counting slaves as 3/5 of a non-voting person. Of course, those who passed this compromise may have been thinking: well let's not rock the boat or we won't have a Constitution! So maybe let's wait a year or five and revisit... How did that work out for them? Or the slaves?
- eeeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago
  I think the main problem with this line of thinking is that "if only they could have waited 1 year" ends up translating to 5 years, then 10, or never. MLK went through this with Lyndon Johnson, who also wanted him to wait due to political expediency. It's also a lot easier to tell someone else to wait when you're not the one that has had their rights violated. If these are truly rights and not privileges, then waiting any time at all really makes no sense. I do understand what you're saying, thinking about the bigger picture, but I think it's dangerous path. We have to accept some short-term losses for the greater good. It could be argued that Obamacare was the reason Congress was handed over to the GOP. But now look at how the discussion has changed in America about healthcare -- it's less about whether people should be covered and mostly about what it's going to cost in premiums. Just a hypothetical, but can you imagine any of the gun owners in America going along with a "just wait" strategy if Obama had banned guns?

hosh 9y ago

This is something my friends and I were talking about privately for a while now. One of the things that came out of it was something summed up by one of my friends -- stop founding movements, start founding communities. Modernism (and I'm talking as far back as the early 1900s, and arguably, even earlier than that) has eroded our sense community. Our communication tech has, over the past few centuries, have allowed people to talk to each other at greater physical distance while at the same time, created more emotional distance from each other. While modernism might have produced great advancement in science and technology and challenged traditional dogmas, it also threw out a lot of what we needed from those traditions. Community-building is one of them. Movements that are trying to raise awareness on problems and change don't always have a clear idea on what happens after the fight is over: can you imagine still living, working, and playing with those people after all is said and done? Take "Black Lives Matter", or even "All Lives Matter". People voice their deep concerns, the ugly things get aired out. And after all of that, can you see yourself living next door? Your children playing and going to school together? Going to the pub after a town hall meeting? Barbecue at the park on a summer day? Borrow each other's tools? Asking each other for advice? Taking in one of the kids after school because your neighbor is busy that day? Or do you get a sense of fear, disgust, resentment, contempt, or despair?

eeeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago
I get none of those reactions. BLM are simply asking for equal treatment, not special treatment. Considering the "all lives matter" movement, if you can call it that, is more of a spiteful and petty response to BLM, I'm not sure it's a great example. A movement does not need to devolve into "us v. them" and cause those kind of responses you list. The only reason BLM would be offensive and cause those reactions is if this statement is offensive to your being -- black people having equal rights as white people. The "black lives matter" movement is a great example of a movement being required because they have been shut out of a "community" that already exists. That community being their actual community they live in. The community is the problem. All those things you have listed -- fear, disgust, resentment, contempt, despair -- are things black people have experienced against them at the hands of our government/police and that is why BLM exists, and that is why a movement is needed to change the community. Just like the civil rights movement, which is not over. I agree many movements do not have clear goals, but that often speaks to their poor leadership (e.g. occupy wall street), not a problem of movements in general or their grievances. Look at the civil rights movement. I think movements often arrive because the community has failed them. I would be interesting in hearing more practical examples of how a community would better solve some of these problems (or historical 20th century problems) over a movement, or what that distinction truly is or means. Definitely curious!
- hosh 9y ago
  > The only reason BLM would be offensive and cause those reactions is if this statement is offensive to your being -- black people having equal rights as white people. Yes, that's the obvious response. There is also the other responses: that you can live with white people without fear, resentment, anger, disgust, or despair. Like being able to go onto a bus and not have judgements made on you that you're dangerous or seeing fear flicker in white people's faces, and in turn, put on a blank mask because to get angry will confirm all those fears. (Disclaimer: I'm not black; I people-watch a lot). There's a mirroring effect that happens where you don't know whose fear it is, or whose fear "started" it. > I would be interesting in hearing more practical examples of how a community would better solve some of these problems (or historical 20th century problems) over a movement, or what that distinction truly is or means. Definitely curious! I would too. This is the first time I am trying out these ideas outside my circle of friends, so I'm still working out concrete examples and brainstorming with others. That was why my attempt here started with an empathy-visualization exercise to test the waters. Here's another test: in my yuppie neighborhood I live in within metro Phoenix (which isn't my first choice, but family circumstances ... ) people get very passionate about homeless people on Next Door. There are vocal people who wants to kick them out and a smaller, but just as vocal group that talks about what it is like to be homeless. Some people want to call the cops. Some people reported a soup kitchen as a homeless hangout. (There _are_ people who case homes, or things like use card skimmers to steal credit cards, or try to arrange for a busted tire in order to corner a woman driving alone; it isn't as if this place was crime-free either). Using this frame about community, we can ask these questions: are homeless and vagrants a part of this local community or not? Can you see yourself living with them? Or do you feel disgust and fear? It's best to test for emotional reactions where your personal body and your family -- especially your children -- may actually be under threat. (In the esoteric martial arts, we call this "heart living under the sword": can you _really_ maintain loving-kindness even in face of threat, danger, and aggression?)

jackmott 9y ago

>Take the "black lives matter" movement. If we followed the OPs advice, they should just protest that "all lives matter" instead, That might have been more effective, even if it isn't as fair or correct. Hard to say, but in the lead up to the the latest US presidential election, there were many movements that I absolutely agreed with that I wish had shut up for just 1 year, because I could seem them fueling resentment on 'the other side' much more than energizing their own side. The rural side of my family was in the middle of being completely out of their minds over having a black president and gay marriage made legal when media started pushing for black lives matter and transgenders in bathrooms. They revolted, and now we have a moron as a president. "Deepened the divide" indeed. This may be an evolution in my own thinking, that there can be more important things than being "right". Think long term.

rectang 9y ago
The Civil War begat the Reconstruction. Two steps forward, one step back.
- larsiusprime 9y ago
  Now imagine if we could have ended slavery and found a way to resolve things peacefully without escalating into a brutal war that killed 2% of the population, with massive suffering on both sides.
  - phlakaton 9y ago
    I'm personally convinced we couldn't. The blood was already on our hands when we decided to start counting slaves as 3/5 of a non-voting person. Of course, those who passed this compromise may have been thinking: well let's not rock the boat or we won't have a Constitution! So maybe let's wait a year or five and revisit... How did that work out for them? Or the slaves?
eeeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago
I think the main problem with this line of thinking is that "if only they could have waited 1 year" ends up translating to 5 years, then 10, or never. MLK went through this with Lyndon Johnson, who also wanted him to wait due to political expediency. It's also a lot easier to tell someone else to wait when you're not the one that has had their rights violated. If these are truly rights and not privileges, then waiting any time at all really makes no sense. I do understand what you're saying, thinking about the bigger picture, but I think it's dangerous path. We have to accept some short-term losses for the greater good. It could be argued that Obamacare was the reason Congress was handed over to the GOP. But now look at how the discussion has changed in America about healthcare -- it's less about whether people should be covered and mostly about what it's going to cost in premiums. Just a hypothetical, but can you imagine any of the gun owners in America going along with a "just wait" strategy if Obama had banned guns?