Remember, we don't
have to agree with everything to not be enemies. Diplomacy requires
stepping away from "you are either with us or against us"
mentality, or insisting that people are perfect before engaging with
them on a meaningful level.
When talking of US / Russian relations, we criticize only
the US because:
- this is what we can change, and
- this is what Americans tend to either be unaware of or blatantly dismiss or ignore.
If you engage in
politics in the US you criticize the US. If you engage in politics in
Russia, you criticize Russia, etc. Blaming a declared enemy leads
nowhere. You need to look critically at what you do first, then your
allies.
I personally do
criticize certain Russian policies, but I need to form a foundation
of respect and understanding of such things before doing this.
For people who think
that certain regimes are a threat and must be stopped or think that
they are helping civilians by opposing "problematic regimes,"
I have this to say:
- Just because something is wrong doesn't mean it is not normal. Just because something is normal doesn't mean it is right. -- A point I think many people intellectually know, but have trouble grasping intuitively.
- “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” (Or however you wish to say this.)
- “Racism is white men trying to save brown women from brown men.”
- "The world is not black and white." And we are not heroes with the mission to triumphantly conquer evil.
- Basically, you don’t know what you are doing. None of us do.
Just as one of our
speakers at the CCI conference in Moscow talked about how each country has its own internal order, I
remember someone talking about a debate, I think somewhere in Canada,
where people argued if it was best to impose modern gender norms on
the Muslim immigrant population or say that discriminating against
women was just part of their culture. But both sides missed that
there was a feminist movement within the Muslim community, changing
things from within, and both these propositions hurt those whom they
intended to support.
Withing the indigenous rights movement, from indigenous activists and settler allies, activists remind people that the indigenous cultures of Turtle Island (North America) are other peoples, and that colonialism and racism come from the attempts to rate peoples and cultures as better or worse, legitimate or illegitimate, not just the dismissal of these particular nations as illegitimate. While anarcho-primitivists and others may latch on to the notion of a "noble savage," seeming in contrast to the conception of people needing to be civilized, we are reminded that this image is still racist, as these cultures grow and develop as any other. These cultures are different cultures, with their own governments, traditions, histories, virtues, and even faults, and these things don't make them any more or less valid than any other culture, and they shouldn't be fetishized just as they shouldn't be condemned and destroyed. It is this rating process itself which delegitimises a nation, not the specific rating ascribed to one, as you are insisting that there is a singular metric by which one can evaluate a culture or nation, as well as forcing a singular identity onto each population, ignoring their lack of uniformity as well as, and perhaps even more crucially, their evolution over time, which will occur even without "saviors" from outside.
Withing the indigenous rights movement, from indigenous activists and settler allies, activists remind people that the indigenous cultures of Turtle Island (North America) are other peoples, and that colonialism and racism come from the attempts to rate peoples and cultures as better or worse, legitimate or illegitimate, not just the dismissal of these particular nations as illegitimate. While anarcho-primitivists and others may latch on to the notion of a "noble savage," seeming in contrast to the conception of people needing to be civilized, we are reminded that this image is still racist, as these cultures grow and develop as any other. These cultures are different cultures, with their own governments, traditions, histories, virtues, and even faults, and these things don't make them any more or less valid than any other culture, and they shouldn't be fetishized just as they shouldn't be condemned and destroyed. It is this rating process itself which delegitimises a nation, not the specific rating ascribed to one, as you are insisting that there is a singular metric by which one can evaluate a culture or nation, as well as forcing a singular identity onto each population, ignoring their lack of uniformity as well as, and perhaps even more crucially, their evolution over time, which will occur even without "saviors" from outside.
From my personal experiences, I can tell you that when someone feels like their
identity and sense of self is under assault, they cling to anything,
even what they know are faults or flaws, just to have any sense that
they are legitimate, to prevent from loosing oneself. This pattern
reproduces itself on the world stage.
I remember when
the Iranian deal was reached, the Iranians from our research group
told me that the conservatives in Iran were not happy. The reason was
because with the pressure off of the society, the conservative
factions lost support.
When I read of
what is happening in Russia, I sense this same tone. For instance,
individuals, civilians, while they may understand certain issues
within their society and talk about it freely, if an outsider
comments on this, they will defend their country, because they know
their issues have been used as evidence that their society and
culture are illegitimate. The society, after failing to get the West
to engage with them as equals, has turned back to an Orthodox Church
which has been pushing authoritarianism in order to regain its power
over society.
I also remember when
I was young, I used to fight with my brother. I remember being in one
of these fights, and we both needed to be the last person to attack.
From that I learned that everything done to oneself feels worse than
when you do the same thing to another. People get in revenge cycles,
they need to feel on top. But I remember from martial arts class,
that everyone looses if they get into a conflict; you need to stop
the conflict before it starts. The person who bullies everyone is the
one who is weak. Being willing to disengage, to forgive, is a sign of
strength. When you truly need to engage, you need to step back,
respect each other, be honest with oneself, and try to figure out the
real conflict. Only then can you negotiate in a way which may even be
better for both sides than just getting one's way.
Nobody is perfect,
but we are all trying.
It has always seemed to me that, in the US, and perhaps elsewhere in the "Western world," many people never really put conditions in different countries side by side with accurate information or analyze conditions from a historical context. People are told their country is more democratic than other countries in a way which implicitly tells them they are a superior sort of person. The sense of superiority is so embedded in people’s way of thinking, that people often can’t notice when they are making these mistakes.
I know that I will
never be able to convince many Americans that we are at fault for
many of the conflicts we are in, or that certain leaders are not
evil, but I can tell you this:
Whoever is at fault
for the conflicts, we need to end them. And we certainly need to
ensure that we never reach the point of nuclear war.
If you don't like
what China or Russia are doing, then you should want to stop the US
from doing these things.
I am aware of issues
in Russia, I just don't use them to act as if Russia is not a
legitimate country or somehow inferior to ours. We are trying and
they are trying. Sometimes people's instincts are wrong in certain circumstances, but that doesn't make that person a bad person.
Links:
This is a work in progress, like everything else I write. In some sense, these lists will always be in progress. I will start with mine, then go to other people's as this project is not just one piece, and I know that some people only care about my thoughts on the matter (and don't realize that part of this involves the connections with other's work).
Other Writings in this Series
The Need to Develop Respect and Empathy for the Enemy
This is a list of a bunch of links to other people's appeals to empathy I have found, as well as other random commentary.
This is a work in progress, like everything else I write. In some sense, these lists will always be in progress. I will start with mine, then go to other people's as this project is not just one piece, and I know that some people only care about my thoughts on the matter (and don't realize that part of this involves the connections with other's work).
Other Writings in this Series
- Travel journals, general comments, and CCI trip in particular
- Summary of series
- Some direct comparisons: Repression of Dissent, Militarism
The Need to Develop Respect and Empathy for the Enemy
This is a list of a bunch of links to other people's appeals to empathy I have found, as well as other random commentary.
- Appeals to Respect the Flat Earthers: link1, link2, link3, link4
Side Note: Al Jazeera English and Russia Today have a habit of giving Westerners outside of the limited allowed American political spectrum a voice on a mainstream English-language media channel. RT, for instance, will pick up people forced off the air for not conforming to American perspectives. With every news source, and especially opinion pieces, there are biases and issues, but there is this aspect where you need to just laugh when a news organization which includes award-winning coverage and coverage by Americans for Americans is referred to as terrorist news or Russian propaganda. Also perhaps question in which countries press freedom is actually limited. - Here are a few articles from Upping the Anti, a libertarian socialist journal of political theory and action, which include appeals to activists to respect those they claim to help.
This one includes an appeal to activists to respect working class people,
While this one in part covers what I would call "Patriotism in relation to activism."
Again, Side Note: I know at this point I will have effectively asked you to listen to and respect the point of view of Russians, Muslims, conspiracy theorists, socialists and anarchists, but, I might point out that if you do have such a hesitancy to just listen to what certain classes of people have to say, especially in what I presume is a comfortable environment, this kind of indicates that there is a problem. If you are willing to try a few more, here is the Rolling Stone article on the Boston Marathon Bomber, a sociologist talking about Trump supporters, and interviews with a former neo-Nazi who now fights fascism.
If you still like this game, I can add some for disability rights, for instance autism: interviews of the film "Life, Animated," or the struggles of an autistic self-advocate.
No comments:
Post a Comment