5 ms·

Please try to defer judgement as you read this comment, it may take some turns you don't expect. Bottom Line Up Front: Progressives should rework their messagi

by csours 4y ago

Please try to defer judgement as you read this comment, it may take some turns you don't expect. Bottom Line Up Front: Progressives should rework their messaging so that it does not highlight and reinforce differences. If you look at Conservative media criticism of Progressives, you'll see a lot of Anti-Wokeness. Progressives need to understand why this criticism is so effective. Pushing the envelope makes people uncomfortable. There is a very powerful emotional drive to return to a comfortable state, especially when we feel like we are attacked. Examining the media split of the 2010's, several things come to mind: 1. Directed and funded media pushing a conservative agenda. 2. The Tea Party Movement and Trumpism. 3. The end of shame as an effective tool. To expand on the end of shame - in the past, people were more likely to change their behavior in order to avoid being called out for prejudice or discrimination. This doesn't work anymore. Another place you can see this is in the reaction to public masking requests. Shame did not work to get people to mask. Shame is very motivating, but the motivation does not always take the direction intended. If another group is willing to offer cover for beliefs or actions, then individuals will be motivated to join that group instead of being shamed. If you can find something for "ashamed" people to be proud of, they will flock to that banner. This brings us back to messaging. "Make America Great Again" just sounds like a good message, if you can divorce it from the source. People who are tired of being attacked or shamed may find comfort in that slogan. MAGA does not say anything about race or gender, which is part of why Trump found voters (a relatively small part of his voters) from minority races and women. Trump could not say that white men should be proud of being white (just think of the implications), but he could say that Americans should be proud of being Americans. ---- Now. After all of that, you may have some opinions about me, so let me tell you a little about myself. I believe that structural inequality, including structural racism and structural sexism, is very real and very damaging. I believe that individuals should practice anti-racism. I think that anti-racism training that intentionally includes shame is NOT effective or good. I don't have a strong belief that Progressive politicians are trying to shame white men, but I do see a lot of this shaming in less formal settings, and in communications and training material. Some of it may make sense in context, but it is never good. I do think that it is natural to feel some shame when we reflect on the past. I don't think we have to live with that every day forever. There needs to be a path to resolution.

jacquesm 4y ago
Isn't that a version of 'look at what you made me do'? It isn't the progressives that are highlighting and reinforcing differences, they are working (hard) to try to reduce those differences, at least in those ways that matter to a great many people. Progressives by definition yearn for progress and those opposed to it will use anything to stop that progress, any excuse is as good as the next. So no matter what progressives will do to their messaging it will never be enough.
- csours 4y ago
  "Why can't you be reasonable" is utterly poisoned as a phrase, similar to "look what you made me do". It is still important to be reasonable, and it is still important to look at how people take your messaging, even in bad faith. > they are working (hard) to try to reduce those differences, at least in those ways that matter to a great many people. Yes. > It isn't the progressives that are highlighting and reinforcing differences It is very easy to misunderstand or "misunderstand" a lot of progressive tools and messaging. Insisting on pronoun checks or insisting on defining someone's race as part of a drive for racial equality by necessity highlights differences. That can feel uncomfortable to anyone. It is easy to exploit that discomfort. I'm not asking for people to stop or minimize things like identifying their pronouns. That should be normal. But ... you can't insist on it. You can't force someone else to go along with it. They have to choose to participate. Progress happens when individuals decide that it's worth their time and effort to push for equality. If the messaging pushes more people out instead of advancing equality, then the messaging is not good. Most political messaging is more motivating to people who are already part of the movement (no matter what movement) than to outsiders. The Progressive movement by definition needs to motivate people who are not already aligned with a particular goal.
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    I think a big part of that is simply thinking that it all requires a response. It doesn't. I forget people's names with abandon, ditto their preferred pronouns and I'm sure they'll correct me if I get it wrong. I have a friend who changed their name and even after a decade I will still occasionally call him by his old name, not because I don't respect him (I do, very much so) but simply because I wasn't wired to see names as dynamic but static and I always have to think of him as 'x who changed his name to y' rather than 'just y'. The whole thing to me feels as though there are a lot of people making a fuss about absolutely nothing just so they have something to make a fuss about. To drive the divide you need that fuss, not the request to change pronouns or to try to strive for racial equality. Those make sense, and if someone really disagrees with them then they won't be able to stop society changing around them. Which is a lot of what this is all about: people rejecting change simply because that wasn't the world they were born into and they think that it is in their power to reject change in the environment. They're living dinosaurs who will eventually be overcome by history, even if they have their occasional spasms.

by csours 4y ago

jacquesm 4y ago

Isn't that a version of 'look at what you made me do'? It isn't the progressives that are highlighting and reinforcing differences, they are working (hard) to try to reduce those differences, at least in those ways that matter to a great many people. Progressives by definition yearn for progress and those opposed to it will use anything to stop that progress, any excuse is as good as the next. So no matter what progressives will do to their messaging it will never be enough.

csours 4y ago
"Why can't you be reasonable" is utterly poisoned as a phrase, similar to "look what you made me do". It is still important to be reasonable, and it is still important to look at how people take your messaging, even in bad faith. > they are working (hard) to try to reduce those differences, at least in those ways that matter to a great many people. Yes. > It isn't the progressives that are highlighting and reinforcing differences It is very easy to misunderstand or "misunderstand" a lot of progressive tools and messaging. Insisting on pronoun checks or insisting on defining someone's race as part of a drive for racial equality by necessity highlights differences. That can feel uncomfortable to anyone. It is easy to exploit that discomfort. I'm not asking for people to stop or minimize things like identifying their pronouns. That should be normal. But ... you can't insist on it. You can't force someone else to go along with it. They have to choose to participate. Progress happens when individuals decide that it's worth their time and effort to push for equality. If the messaging pushes more people out instead of advancing equality, then the messaging is not good. Most political messaging is more motivating to people who are already part of the movement (no matter what movement) than to outsiders. The Progressive movement by definition needs to motivate people who are not already aligned with a particular goal.
- jacquesm 4y ago
  I think a big part of that is simply thinking that it all requires a response. It doesn't. I forget people's names with abandon, ditto their preferred pronouns and I'm sure they'll correct me if I get it wrong. I have a friend who changed their name and even after a decade I will still occasionally call him by his old name, not because I don't respect him (I do, very much so) but simply because I wasn't wired to see names as dynamic but static and I always have to think of him as 'x who changed his name to y' rather than 'just y'. The whole thing to me feels as though there are a lot of people making a fuss about absolutely nothing just so they have something to make a fuss about. To drive the divide you need that fuss, not the request to change pronouns or to try to strive for racial equality. Those make sense, and if someone really disagrees with them then they won't be able to stop society changing around them. Which is a lot of what this is all about: people rejecting change simply because that wasn't the world they were born into and they think that it is in their power to reject change in the environment. They're living dinosaurs who will eventually be overcome by history, even if they have their occasional spasms.