I was listening to a podcast as I walked a few days ago that was reviewing a study they had read about how Democrats view Republicans and vice versa. It was such a sad commentary to listen to as it unfolded. There were several questions - things like: Are Democrats trustworthy? Are Republicans humble? -- that kind of thing. And each question was asked to both sides about the opposing party. The answers, unless you're living with your head in the sand, were sad but not surprising. Into the 90th percentile, every single question was answered in the negative about people in the opposing party. All of this renewed some thoughts I've been mulling on for a long time, so I thought I'd attempt to get it written down coherently.
This tendency to view those who disagree with us in the worst possible light is likely just a dark trait of human nature in general, but I strongly believe that social media and 24-hour news cycles and our tendency to live in bubbles with other people mostly like us, have exaggerated it to lethal proportions. It's moved beyond politics (though politics has become an identity that, for many, exceeds every other aspect of their lives), and is part of our theology, our worldviews, our lifestyles -- anything we see as "different" becomes suspect and "those people" eventually vilified.
When I see a quippy meme about the party that least represents me, what face comes into my mind as I read it? As I post it? Am I considering the person I know and love, that I break bread with, that I would literally die for that is a member of that party? Or am I considering the person I do not know, that I cannot personally verify, that exhibits horrific behavior in the cable news cycle? Now consider this... when I post that quippy meme (because it almost always makes us feel better to "stick it" to the other guy), which of those folks do you suppose is reading it?
If I share posts that are demeaning or just plain mean, (but it'll get applause from those that agree with me), about people I do not agree with, either their politics or theology or lifestyles, am I picturing that person I KNOW or am I picturing the worst example I can find on the internet? And again... who is reading what I've shared? The person I love, that I work with, that sits next to me at lunch, that is watching me from across the sanctuary at church... the person that KNOWS me and knows I know them... that is who is reading what I've shared. Chances are pretty darn slim that Trump or AOC or Greg Locke or Nancy Pelosi are reading what we post. But people we love ARE reading what we post.
When I approach differences of opinion, of politics, of theology, of justice and societal issues with disdain, with mean sarcasm, with arrogance, I am doing nothing to build bridges or to persuade with kindness and gentleness. I am much more likely to be driving people further away, driving understanding and nuance further from the discourse.
Here's what I'm NOT saying:
I am NOT saying we shouldn't have hard discussions. I am not saying we shouldn't stand up loud and clear for those who are being harmed. I am not saying we shouldn't share important issues and the reasons we feel like they're important to bring into the public discourse. I am not saying that nothing is worth getting riled up about. I am not saying that peace*keeping* is ever the goal. I'm not even saying that our goal should be that we always agree.
Peace*making* is the goal - and that requires dragging some uncomfortable, even ugly things into the light of day so they can be seen for what they are and dealt with. It requires hard, sometimes uncomfortable conversations. But HOW we have those conversations matters. Do we want a conversation or do we just want to shut them down, silence the opposition? This matters as well.
I am saying we need to see people rather than issues as our primary goal. (One of my favorite follows (Carlos Whittaker) says, "Stand with people, not issues." -- this is some truth.) We need to love our neighbor at the same time as we have super hard conversations with them. We must learn to recognize that we are not loving when we "speak the truth" in ways that shut down, demean, isolate. We need to be curious rather than trying to shut people out and down. This leaves people feeling judged, unaccepted and unloved. If this is how we leave people feeling, we can call it love all we want, but it is not love. I recognize that I've been this person at times, that I come on too strong or I become too passionate and run over people rather than engage them curiously. I don't want to be that person.
My goal over the last year or so has been to carefully consider the words I both speak and post. To speak boldly, yes. To speak for justice and reconciliation, yes. To talk about the ways I've changed and why, with honesty and openness. But to never forget the actual people receiving those words and HOW they will be received. To consider whether I am speaking to retaliate, to "stick it" to the other side, to gain applause... or to actually effect better communication and ultimately, healing and change. I know I've failed at times, and likely will again (blood runs hot in my family genetics!), but I pray it is less and less frequent and that when it happens, I'll be humble enough to call myself out and apologize.
Keep in mind who is seeing the words you are writing, sharing and speaking. Jesus might have said something like, "Be careful how you post and share on Facebook and Twitter to be seen and applauded by others like you -- for THAT will be your reward in full."
No comments:
Post a Comment