5 ms·
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 frie
by 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 agoI 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?)
- eeeeeeeeeeeee 9y agoI don't think movements and communities are mutually exclusive, which you seem to imply (or i'm still misunderstanding). In fact, I would say the movements are often responsible for invigorating and restoring/refurbishing a community. The Lutherans, despite forking from Catholicism, actually also improved Catholicism. The civil rights movement made America better, but it was inherently adversarial because at some point you're going to have to say "hey i'm not being treated as fair as you are!" There is no way to fix a community without identifying its warts. It's like any problem, how do you solve it unless you call it out and identify it and agree mutually that it is a problem? We definitely need better communities, especially as religion becomes less popular in America and that was the traditional community before. Stable life-long jobs and unions are also leaving which are another form of secular community. So people are definitely more isolated. And if we are isolated from people who are different than us, including black people, it will make these kind of fears more pronounced as we often fear the unknown or give in to the loudest stereotypes. I also live in a yuppie neighborhood, in Denver, which has one of the highest homeless rates in the country. My view on the homeless is that I really don't mind them as a group, but some of them are trouble, just like some non-homeless people are trouble. Never had a violent interaction with a "homeless person" or felt scared by the existence of homeless people. The homeless are part of my community, they live in my community. They are people...without homes, but they are still humans. So, you ask whether you can maintain loving kindness in the face of threat/danger/aggression? I'm saying there is no such thing that exists on a daily basis. I don't fear any homeless person unless they approach me in a way that says they mean harm to me personally. I think it's important for Americans to see the homeless in our neighborhoods, ESPECIALLY us yuppies, so that we can be reminded of what a shameful failure it is that the richest country in the world still has a homeless problem this bad. And we can privatize and segregate ourselves as much as possible in our homes and parks to shield us from it, but we can't eject homeless people from a city that we have to share.