I worry that the effort spent on specificity on those that claim allegiance to a destructive and violent movement, takes away from the energy required to focus on those hurt by that violence.
There’s no doubt that some Nazi soldiers were kind, and loving in private life. But would it have been it too much to ask those being harmed by the Nazi regime to pause and distinguish one soldier from another? Is that emotional labor something we can reasonably ask of the wounded? The camouflage of collective violence often protects the individual perpetrator far more than it ever protects the victim.
This post has really caused me to pause and reflect on the ways I’ve been caught up in fear of my neighbors; a fear rooted in their allegiance to a larger idea, without actually knowing them as a person. At the same time, I don’t know if I’m taking a risk by not assuming they live by the creed they claim.
The emotional labor of making careful distinctions shouldn’t always fall on the shoulders of the wounded, but if not us, then who?
I’m also reminded of something adrienne maree brown writes about; how those who cause harm are carrying harm themselves. Not to excuse the damage they do, but it does mean we stop lazily, and harmfully, casting them as monsters. When we see them as human shaped by trauma, fear, disconnection, and harmful systems, possibility opens up. Not just for them, but for us.
If we can hold people accountable and hold space for their healing, we create conditions where real change is possible, not just punishment or exile, but actual growth. That requires a kind of courage that I’m still learning. Because it’s easier to write people off. It’s harder to stay in the mess and believe in their capacity to become someone else.
The fear, betrayal, and grief on "the other side" often goes unacknowledged. I don’t always know what to do with that. But if I want to be serious about truth and specificity, I can’t ignore it. That pain is part of the story too, and likely part of a path forward.
Thank you for this. In recent months, I've found it important to tell people in my classroom that, had the internet been available to me as a teen and early twenty-something, I might very likely have published sentences that could prevent me from being employed as an educator now. I say that to note that I can well imagine getting compensated and lauded for speaking and behaving the way Mr. Kirk did and sinking deep into the arrangements that incentivized him to keep at it. I hope the space for healing and change that eluded him on this side of the flatline is available to him in abundance now.
DAVID: Some wonderfully thoughtful and sensitive points here. Thank you! I, however, think that the most important point is this: Every human being remains, at the deepest level of their being, an eternal spirit, still lovely, kind, gentle, generous, peaceful, intelligent, caring, and beautiful in every way…..Just the way our Father created us. Jesus saw it, but only a few of his followers do. I really want to be among them. Am I? Are you? Can we see beyond the FACE that people develop to the Deep within? We mostly can’t even see our own Deep within, let alone the Deep within in others. I named my first album DEEP CALLS TO DEEP for a reason. I just don’t know what it is:).
I have been reflecting on this the last couple days. It is good, and it is something i want to believe and related to the idea of good faith I have reflected on in This Is Water by David Foster Wallace
But a decade past my student years I find the repetition of wrong, coarse, or even evil arguments to be tiring to refute each specifically. Graeme Peel i think gets at a similar instinct to mine. I can't help but think for example that in discussions each repeated arguments about dei to defend blatant racism or insistence on context of blatantly wrong statements are sea lioning. I want to live in a world where even people I disagree with I can take in good faith, but i simply don't believe i live in that world
I worry that the effort spent on specificity on those that claim allegiance to a destructive and violent movement, takes away from the energy required to focus on those hurt by that violence.
There’s no doubt that some Nazi soldiers were kind, and loving in private life. But would it have been it too much to ask those being harmed by the Nazi regime to pause and distinguish one soldier from another? Is that emotional labor something we can reasonably ask of the wounded? The camouflage of collective violence often protects the individual perpetrator far more than it ever protects the victim.
This post has really caused me to pause and reflect on the ways I’ve been caught up in fear of my neighbors; a fear rooted in their allegiance to a larger idea, without actually knowing them as a person. At the same time, I don’t know if I’m taking a risk by not assuming they live by the creed they claim.
The emotional labor of making careful distinctions shouldn’t always fall on the shoulders of the wounded, but if not us, then who?
Thank you David.
I’m also reminded of something adrienne maree brown writes about; how those who cause harm are carrying harm themselves. Not to excuse the damage they do, but it does mean we stop lazily, and harmfully, casting them as monsters. When we see them as human shaped by trauma, fear, disconnection, and harmful systems, possibility opens up. Not just for them, but for us.
If we can hold people accountable and hold space for their healing, we create conditions where real change is possible, not just punishment or exile, but actual growth. That requires a kind of courage that I’m still learning. Because it’s easier to write people off. It’s harder to stay in the mess and believe in their capacity to become someone else.
The fear, betrayal, and grief on "the other side" often goes unacknowledged. I don’t always know what to do with that. But if I want to be serious about truth and specificity, I can’t ignore it. That pain is part of the story too, and likely part of a path forward.
Thank you for this. In recent months, I've found it important to tell people in my classroom that, had the internet been available to me as a teen and early twenty-something, I might very likely have published sentences that could prevent me from being employed as an educator now. I say that to note that I can well imagine getting compensated and lauded for speaking and behaving the way Mr. Kirk did and sinking deep into the arrangements that incentivized him to keep at it. I hope the space for healing and change that eluded him on this side of the flatline is available to him in abundance now.
DAVID: Some wonderfully thoughtful and sensitive points here. Thank you! I, however, think that the most important point is this: Every human being remains, at the deepest level of their being, an eternal spirit, still lovely, kind, gentle, generous, peaceful, intelligent, caring, and beautiful in every way…..Just the way our Father created us. Jesus saw it, but only a few of his followers do. I really want to be among them. Am I? Are you? Can we see beyond the FACE that people develop to the Deep within? We mostly can’t even see our own Deep within, let alone the Deep within in others. I named my first album DEEP CALLS TO DEEP for a reason. I just don’t know what it is:).
Thanks for sharing your feelings with us, Lenny. At least for now, I don't have anything to say about what you refer to as "the most important point."
Thank you. I love this
Thank you!
I have been reflecting on this the last couple days. It is good, and it is something i want to believe and related to the idea of good faith I have reflected on in This Is Water by David Foster Wallace
But a decade past my student years I find the repetition of wrong, coarse, or even evil arguments to be tiring to refute each specifically. Graeme Peel i think gets at a similar instinct to mine. I can't help but think for example that in discussions each repeated arguments about dei to defend blatant racism or insistence on context of blatantly wrong statements are sea lioning. I want to live in a world where even people I disagree with I can take in good faith, but i simply don't believe i live in that world