There's a lot of talk about how divided we are as a country. And we are.
But most people who lament about the divide never even talk about the divide. They’re talking about something else.
They’re talking about tension.
Tension. Divide. Two separate things.
But most people who lament about the divide never even talk about the divide. They’re talking about something else.
They’re talking about tension.
Tension. Divide. Two separate things.
Tension is caused by a difference of opinion: I think we should be able to fire Jimmy because he’s gay, while you think that would be wrong.
Tension. Not division. Neither of us is in danger of anything.
Tension. Not division. Neither of us is in danger of anything.
The divide is caused by supremacy: I think we should fire Jimmy for being gay, then I fire him, then neither of us experience any consequence other than the tension caused by your criticism
Because our law has decided it’s OK to do that
And we’re not gay
THAT’S the divide
Because our law has decided it’s OK to do that
And we’re not gay
THAT’S the divide
Or let’s zoom out.
The government decides it’s all right for companies not to serve Jimmy because he’s gay, or to fire Jimmy because he’s gay.
So I get the idea that Jimmy’s not a part of society.
And I get the idea I can safely hit him with a brick.
And I’m right.
The government decides it’s all right for companies not to serve Jimmy because he’s gay, or to fire Jimmy because he’s gay.
So I get the idea that Jimmy’s not a part of society.
And I get the idea I can safely hit him with a brick.
And I’m right.
The divide isn’t between you and me, because if you prevail or I prevail in our argument, neither one of us is getting fired.
In fact, maybe you could get Jimmy’s job.
You might not even know how you benefited.
Your benefit has nothing to do with your opinion.
In fact, maybe you could get Jimmy’s job.
You might not even know how you benefited.
Your benefit has nothing to do with your opinion.
The divide actually exists between US—you and me—and Jimmy.
It’s not a question of belief. It’s a question of geography.
We stand on safe ground. Jimmy doesn’t.
A divide.
It’s not a question of belief. It’s a question of geography.
We stand on safe ground. Jimmy doesn’t.
A divide.
A hard and important thing to remember is: one can be entirely against empowered abuse and still be on the “side” of empowered abuse, practically speaking.
In this way, I am on the "side" of white supremacy, for example.
My opinions matter, but they don’t change that truth.
In this way, I am on the "side" of white supremacy, for example.
My opinions matter, but they don’t change that truth.
Opinions matter because if we disagree with supremacy, it creates tension, and tension creates discomfort, and discomfort makes it harder to enact supremacy and profit from it.
But opinion isn’t exoneration, and the disagreement isn’t the divide.
But opinion isn’t exoneration, and the disagreement isn’t the divide.
Among privileged people who support abuse, it’s popular to frame our cultural divide as being a matter of opinion, because it provides relief from the tension of conflict, and cover from social and legal consequences of their cruelty.
And, for those of us who are privileged but oppose supremacy, it’s a popular and tempting framing too, because it allows us to believe all we have to do to self-exonerate is have correct opinions.
So we avoid the work of dismantling the abusive system from which we profit.
So we avoid the work of dismantling the abusive system from which we profit.
I have many more thoughts about this, but this thread will get even more out of hand if I try to unpack them all.
But, when somebody says the problem with society is that we’re divisive, inspect it.
Do they actually mean the tension?
When they call for unity, ask:
Unity how?
But, when somebody says the problem with society is that we’re divisive, inspect it.
Do they actually mean the tension?
When they call for unity, ask:
Unity how?
I recommend a true unity w/supremacy that increases the tension.
A unity that confesses supremacy. The opposite of “Not all _____”
A unity where we say “Our society is driven by supremacy, and here are the ways I benefit, and here are the ways I will try to dismantle it.”
A unity that confesses supremacy. The opposite of “Not all _____”
A unity where we say “Our society is driven by supremacy, and here are the ways I benefit, and here are the ways I will try to dismantle it.”
I can’t disassociate my whiteness from what whiteness is doing to people of color in this country, but I can confess it.
I can’t disassociate my maleness from what male domination is doing to women in this country, but I can confess it.
I can’t disassociate my maleness from what male domination is doing to women in this country, but I can confess it.
I can’t disassociate my Christian faith from what the Christian church is doing in the name of every sort of bigotry in this country—all so they can disassociate themselves from any perceived uncleanness—but I can confess it.
I can’t disassociate my employment or affluence from what wealth worship is doing to poor people in this country, but I can confess
I can’t disassociate my status as a US citizen from the growing military and economic menace the US is delivering to the world, but I can confess
I can’t disassociate my status as a US citizen from the growing military and economic menace the US is delivering to the world, but I can confess
THAT is a unity I can get behind. Unify with unjust power, not to assist it, but to expose and confront it and confess its moral crimes, not from outside it but as a confessed part of it, from within, where it's built few defenses.
This confession causes increased tension
Good
This confession causes increased tension
Good
Fixing the thread.
https://twitter.com/JuliusGoat/status/1132253241469755393?s=20
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
