I always knew I’d be a protestor. I grew up in a household where Stephen Colbert and Keith Olbermann were always on TV, where Thanksgiving dinners were spent discussing politics. One of my first clear memories is of my dad swearing at the TV in 2000 as Bush collected more and more electoral votes. Political heat was no stranger in our home.
I’ve always imagined protesting as “sticking up for the little guy,” so to speak; I thought I’d be fighting for LGBT+ rights, or immigrants and refugees’ rights. But when Trump was elected, things got personal.
Within minutes, Trump grabbed at the throats of “sanctuary cities,” of Planned Parenthood, and the Affordable Care Act. My mind turned to my mother and to my sister, who suffers from a chronic illness called POTS. It turned to my friends and me, who rely on the ACA’s policy allowing us to stay on our families’ health insurance plans until we turn 26. It turned to my grandfather, a refugee from Poland who survived the Holocaust because of our incredible melting pot. And I knew I had to fight.
Going to the Boston Women’s March was incredible. Even the walk to the Boston Common was exciting. People were blocking the streets, pushing old friends in wheelchairs or carrying little ones atop their shoulders. Their signs were funny, sentimental, or calls to action. And I had never seen so many people before; later, I learned that I was one among 175,000 marchers in Boston alone.
I think the speech Senator Warren gave at the March best summarizes the event: “…we believe that sexism, racism, homophobia, and bigotry have no place in this country,” she said. “Black lives matter; diversity makes our country stronger. We believe that equal means equal and that’s true in the workplace, it’s true in marriage, it’s true every place.”
While I expected this to be an angry march, something a little closer to a riot or a protest, all I saw was people loving each other.
Strangers were high fiving other strangers whose posters held messages that resonated with them. People moved out of the way easily, quickly, and without complaint to let handicapped marchers through. It became very clear to me that this was a celebration. We were here because we were proud of ourselves and of each other in our diversity.
Sarah Mensch, Research Assistant, Graphic Designer, is a psychology major at Boston University. She is thrilled to be working on a Directed Study focusing on the effect of the media on gun violence under the supervision of Dr. Malley Morrison. When Sarah graduates, she aims to go on to graduate school to earn an MSW and become a therapist. In her spare time, Sarah enjoys pursuing her minor in Deaf Studies, photography, and exploring Boston
Another one of Sarah’s favorite photos from the March:
In today’s terrifying world, where unprincipled power mongers manipulate fears to enrich themselves, and cajole their frightened followers into hatred and aggression, it is a challenge to counterbalance their moral disengagement with moral engagement; however, this is a challenge that should be accepted by everyone who cares about life on this planet.
Countering racist and dehumanizing rhetoric with reasoned arguments is one response to forms of moral disengagement that threaten the lives and well-being of inhabitants of this earth ). Another approach is to humanize , and re-humanize, the scapegoats that fear mongers invoke to drive often desperate people into action against other often desperate people.
BeyondIntractability.org has identified a number of strategies for increasing the ability of people to humanize their presumptive “enemies.” These strategies include:
Teaching about stereotypes
Promoting empathy
Encouraging dialogue
Focusing on commonalities
Facilitating cooperative projects
Providing education on the negative effects of propaganda
Establishing media that provide alternatives to the media that justify and promote violence, and ultimately
Helping conflicting parties build trust, work for constructive resolution of differences, apologize, and seek reconciliation.
In threerecentposts , Charles Eisenstein has done a magnificent job of sharing stories that contribute to humanizing players on both sides of the Standing Rock pipeline protest. Develop some stories of your own to share with human beings who may seem inhumane to you, or who support politicians whose views you may consider inhumane.
Being an activist is a great goal. Resist attacks on peoples and environments, resist injustice, but also be alert to any tendencies you may have or the people you admire may have to dehumanize people who have ways of thinking that seem dangerous. It is difficult for groups to come together to address the very real threats to our future when people on both “sides” consider the people on the other side to be subhuman monsters. Listen to Eisenstein. Empathisize. Humanize.
For an inspiring example of activism designed to humanize, read the article at Huffington Post . Empathy and perspective taking are essential to humanizing; kindness probably is too.
Engaging Peace began its blogging career by introducing the ideas of psychologist Albert Bandura about moral disengagement and moral engagement . Moral disengagement involves unconscious mental processes that enable otherwise good, caring people to act in inhumane ways—often as a result of deliberate manipulations undertaken by leaders pursuing their own self-serving agendas. Moral engagement processes, by contrast, enable other good, caring people to summon the strength, courage, and moral fortitude to resist the abundant pressures in our societies to behave cruelly and inhumanely.
In the wake of the misery, the anger, the blaming, the fear, and the despair that characterized this election year—along with the elation of some people at the outcome–I am embarking on a quest to review, in a series of brief posts, the mechanisms of moral engagement that might help this country heal its wounds and move in the direction of peace and social justice.
As explained in an earlier post , “Moral engagement requires moral agency–active engagement in resisting pressures and justifications for behaving inhumanely, and proactive efforts to engage in and promote humane behavior. Key contributors to moral agency include humanizing the other, and empathizing with the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the other.”
Principled moral arguments are dramatically different from the pseudo-moral, spuriously “moral” justifications that some people advocate to convince others that, for example, deadly warfare is the best way to make the world safe for democracy or that assassinating a few potential terrorists is ethically superior to maybe, possibly, perchance risking the lives of thousands of innocent victims (and laws, human rights, and Constitutions be damned!).
Principled moral arguments rest on principles like the Golden Rule (“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”), Kant’s categorical imperative (“Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law”), the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, and the messages in favor of love and brotherhood in various Holy Books.
My advice to everyone distressed by the nature and results of this election is to continue to work for a truer and more complete democracy, characterized by the pursuit of peace and social justice, in a morally engaged way. This means understanding, among other things, the difference between principled moral reasoning and the pseudo-moral arguments that attempt to justify harm-doing.
A Solution for Post-Election Blues And Celebrants: A Satire in Need of Reading
by Anthony J. Marsella
The world is in shock! The anticipated outcome of the USA election did not occur. How is that possible? Everything had been set in place for a continuation of the existing Global Order, and the plans to continue to alter the Global Order in favor of those few privileged with wealth, power, position, and person. Now uncertainty! The possibility of an unsavory future for all!
The divisions became clear, hyped by a failed, flawed, and sinister media. Consider: (1) White, Black, Brown;(2) Male, Female, LGBT; (3) Young, Middle-Aged, Old, Very Old, and Unborn; (4) Refugees, Internally Displaced Humans, Immigrants, Homeless, Hopeless;(5) Humans, Animals, Insects, Flora; Urban, Suburban, Rural, Village, Survivalists. All were caught in contention, conflict, clash, and contradiction!
What could be done? I thought about this for a few moments and came to this conclusion: Everyone must learn to Tango not tangle! Yes, Tango! Inherent in the Tango are the very solutions the world urgently needs.
Consider the nature of the Tango:
Alchemy! Two as one!
Artistry in every movement!
Compelled and compulsory sensuality, sexuality!
Controlled passion!
Disciplined emotions!
Distant intercourse! (Better than distant learning)
Healing intensity!
Immediacy prayers!
Intimacy contact!
Ordered expression!
Tolerated yearning!
Enough, you get the idea! The Tango does things to dancers and viewers that need to be done to comfort, assuage, mollify, placate, and to enrage, arouse, provoke.
And then I got carried away with the possibilities. World leaders and major players must dance the Tango with each other. Imagine Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton (Yes, yes, who is my partner?), Vladimir Putin, Netanyahu, Xin Jing Ping, President Rodrigo Duerte, Presidents of European nations (whoever is in office at this time or next week), corporate presidents, military officers,billionaires, Federal Reserve System members and leaders. The list is sizeable, but finite!
Now, can you just imagine what would happen when Obama strides on to the floor, leaning slightly forward, arms at his side, to meet Putin, who is much in smaller height, but bigger in chest and ego. Obama asks courteously: “Who is dancing lead!” Putin, more knowledgeable in tangles of all sorts, replies: “Comrade, there is no lead in Tango! It is ecology!” “Oh yeah, of course! Just like climate change, and oil pipelines stuff,” Obama replies.
At this point, the music begins, the lights dim, and the world waits! A single violinist offers the first bars! The dancers stare at each other, and say: “Do not step on my shoes!” They were made in Bangladesh! Then in an intimate whisper to each other, they both say: “It is easier to make war than to dance this stuff.” In a poignant moment, both twist and snap their heads, as is required. “Ouch!” “Yy!” Drones circle overhead!
Politicians in Iceland decide the entire country will learn to Tango! “It will become our national dance!”And in Argentina, residents take to the streets dancing the Tango, restoring their soul, lost for years because of dictators. In Italy, people cry: “The Tango is like eating a stuffed artichoke.” The Greeks yell: “Oopla!” The Poles say the Tango is nice, but you can’t beat the Mazurka! Ghetto gangs in Chicago say: “Who needs order! We like the Krump! Everything moves at the same time.”
The Viennese, holding their coffee cups, say: “Nice but too passionate! We prefer the Waltz.” Finns, slightly hesitant about proximity, clothes, and Russia, say: “Maybe it would be better if everyone sat in a sauna.” And Whirling Dervishes in Turkey say: “If you added a few more spins, the Tango has possibilities.” And Strip Teasers in exotic girl bars say: I Tango with my pole! And in the Vatican, the Pope, does the Tango in the solitude of the Sistine Chapel; he recalls what he has missed with regret! And India tries to remind the others of their ancient Dancing Goddess, Shiva (Nataraja), and her cosmic dance of creation. And in Silicon Valley, in the silence of the night, robots dance: “The Robot.”
And so it goes! Efforts after a common solution reveal, no matter how good the intention and the solution, it is hard for people to escape their conditioned preferences, habits, and comfort zones. It is easier to keep the status quo.
A satire! Yes, of course! But hasn’t the world been forced to endure a satire at the hands of the world leader dance? Is it possible dancing the Tango could heal and bring reform?
Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D., a member of the TRANSCEND Network, is a past president of Psychologists for Social Responsibility, emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii, and past director of the World Health Organization Psychiatric Research Center in Honolulu. He is known nationally and internationally as a pioneer figure in the study of culture and psychopathology who challenged the ethnocentrism and racial biases of many assumptions, theories, and practices in psychology and psychiatry. In more recent years, he has been writing and lecturing on peace and social justice. He has published 15 edited books, and more than 250 articles, chapters, book reviews, and popular pieces. He can be reached at marsella@hawaii.edu.