I was having a conversation with someone who isn't really into politics. They had a busy life (due to super long days at work - not brunch parties, partying, and beach getaways) so politics had remained peripheral. Being only partially informed, and aware of the fact, they didn't feel comfortable engaging in what they recognized were conversations that benefited from an up to speed understanding. But they wanted to know more. On Facebook I had recently written the following, which had caught their attention:
We teach middle schoolers not to be bystanders because bystanders make the situation worse: by not intervening they condone the action, and embolden the aggressors against the victims, or empower others not to act. From a website on the topic, aimed at young readers:
"The word bystander is one that you have probably heard before. It is used to describe people who see bullying happening, but do nothing to try and stop it. It is important to remember that these people are not usually unkind. In fact, everyone has been a bystander at some point.
Most of the time, the reason why people don't report bullying is simply because they do not know how to, or don't realize just how bad bullying is. They are also often scared of the bully, and fear they will end up as a target.
It is important to remember that you do not have to face the bully alone, as most people don't like bullying. Share this information with your friends, and stand together to put a stop to bullying once and for all."
People who say they are "not into politics" and accordingly fail to act in light of crisis - you realize you are bystanders, right? I mean, if we can get middle school students to understand that you can't stay quiet on the sidelines, why then, when it comes to political aggression, can't adults be held to the same standard as eleven year-olds? Tuning out politics is like not making eye contact with the victim being harassed on the train, or walking by the person slumped over on the sidewalk. Easy to do, and tempting, but it emboldens others to avoid confrontation as well.
If you've been a "political bystander" in the past: no judgement. As it says above - we all have been a type of bystander at one time or another. But please consider getting involved in the 2018 midterm election. This is actually *easier* than confronting the sketchy guy on the bus - you're just casting an anonymous ballot that can help alleviate pain for millions of people, including perhaps yourself.
The choice not to get involved, though, carries the moral burden of having turned a blind eye to that suffering: The babies separated from their mothers. The citizens deported despite being born on American soil. The citizens whose island was left without power, or adequate federal response, for a year. The environmental damage that effects every single one of us. The deterioration of our education system that will devastate a generation unless reversed quickly. The systematic disenfranchising of American POC. The tax plan that will make it harder over the next decade for middle class families to put food on the table, and increase paycheck-to-paycheck living. The erosion of a free press that endangers the lives of journalists, like the five workers at a Maryland newspaper who were shot dead just a few months ago. The protesters who are risking their lives, and dying, to stand up to *white supremacy and fascism* when on display in places like Charlottesville - something we all used to take for granted as being abhorrent to civilized values.
Choosing to sit this midterm election out, to be a bystander, is an *active* choice to condone the continuation of this culture, and the pain it has wrought - and further encourage this suffering with your silent mandate. Don't be a bystander. Have the moral fortitude of a sixth grader.
We teach middle schoolers not to be bystanders because bystanders make the situation worse: by not intervening they condone the action, and embolden the aggressors against the victims, or empower others not to act. From a website on the topic, aimed at young readers:
"The word bystander is one that you have probably heard before. It is used to describe people who see bullying happening, but do nothing to try and stop it. It is important to remember that these people are not usually unkind. In fact, everyone has been a bystander at some point.
Most of the time, the reason why people don't report bullying is simply because they do not know how to, or don't realize just how bad bullying is. They are also often scared of the bully, and fear they will end up as a target.
It is important to remember that you do not have to face the bully alone, as most people don't like bullying. Share this information with your friends, and stand together to put a stop to bullying once and for all."
People who say they are "not into politics" and accordingly fail to act in light of crisis - you realize you are bystanders, right? I mean, if we can get middle school students to understand that you can't stay quiet on the sidelines, why then, when it comes to political aggression, can't adults be held to the same standard as eleven year-olds? Tuning out politics is like not making eye contact with the victim being harassed on the train, or walking by the person slumped over on the sidewalk. Easy to do, and tempting, but it emboldens others to avoid confrontation as well.
If you've been a "political bystander" in the past: no judgement. As it says above - we all have been a type of bystander at one time or another. But please consider getting involved in the 2018 midterm election. This is actually *easier* than confronting the sketchy guy on the bus - you're just casting an anonymous ballot that can help alleviate pain for millions of people, including perhaps yourself.
The choice not to get involved, though, carries the moral burden of having turned a blind eye to that suffering: The babies separated from their mothers. The citizens deported despite being born on American soil. The citizens whose island was left without power, or adequate federal response, for a year. The environmental damage that effects every single one of us. The deterioration of our education system that will devastate a generation unless reversed quickly. The systematic disenfranchising of American POC. The tax plan that will make it harder over the next decade for middle class families to put food on the table, and increase paycheck-to-paycheck living. The erosion of a free press that endangers the lives of journalists, like the five workers at a Maryland newspaper who were shot dead just a few months ago. The protesters who are risking their lives, and dying, to stand up to *white supremacy and fascism* when on display in places like Charlottesville - something we all used to take for granted as being abhorrent to civilized values.
Choosing to sit this midterm election out, to be a bystander, is an *active* choice to condone the continuation of this culture, and the pain it has wrought - and further encourage this suffering with your silent mandate. Don't be a bystander. Have the moral fortitude of a sixth grader.
So that was the context. Someone was asking me, identifying as a sort of moderate who preferred avoiding labels, about politics, and wanted to know more.
My statement was simple: I support human dignity and expansion of rights, minimizing suffering, and am willing to vote against my interests to help others, and often do. This "voting against my interests" is to me just a basic facet of society. I don't have a preschooler, for example, but I'm happy to pay more in taxes so someone else's four year-old has a better start in life. That's just...moral.
The conservatives instead seem to me to be short-sighted and selfish, voting for their immediate self-interest, like their bizarre free-market cultism, at the every turn. That was my characterization at the time of the conversation.
Afterwards, though, I was struck by something: How often have I criticized Republicans for voting against their self-interest? Many, many times. And I then realized it's more subtle than my initial portrayal, since GOP voters often support measures that are so obviously against their best interests. As such, here's the more nuanced version:
Liberals (these days, in the United States) vote against their self-interest in ways that help and support the neediest, and the most vulnerable. Conservatives (these days, in the United States) also vote against their self-interest, but to help the entrenched moneyed powers stay wealthy and empowered.
Both sides of the aisle can set aside their own narrow views, and, while there are a lot of them, we're not a nation comprised entirely of NIMBYs. The yawning divide between our charity, though, is not whether we use our vote to make life more difficult for ourselves, but instead whom we choose to benefit with it: the sick, the wretched, and the poor - or the lobbying elite? The liberals see their disinterested view as moral and/or more advanced: by helping others we all benefit as a society, plus it's just the right thing to do, helping the needy.
However, this does not address the reasons why Conservatives so often self-inflict these wounds. I have no doubt misinformation and willful ignorance both play a part, but not, I don't think, the entire role. Actual ignorance is of course an issue, leading to voting patterns of bigotry and the like. The flip side, mentioned previously, is when Conservatives vote for a narrow, immediate self-interest, at the expense of harming their fellow citizens. This is also morally bankrupt for Liberals, since your happiness is not worth increasing others' suffering. Can we get Conservatives to get on board with these fundamental ethics? I don't know. I remain hopeful for them:
"But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas."
"But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas."
No comments:
Post a Comment