I recently got into an argument on Facebook.
Yes, I know: pointless, right?
Actually, no. I’m going to suggest that arguing on Facebook
is not pointless, at least in some circumstances.
The argument in question began with a response I made to a
misquotation of Vladimir Putin shared by this particular person. The quote in
question suggested that “minorities need the state but the state does not need
minorities,” but after a little research I found that Putin never actually said
the statement in question (though he has echoed similar sentiments at other
times). The page that originally posted the quote was an American far right
group.
Ah, the irony.
Usually I refrain from commenting on such things, as I do
not think Facebook or any other social media is the medium for an informed debate.
With my comment, I did not intend to change this person’s mind. I think this is
a mistake people often make. I am not one to shy away from debates and
arguments, particularly about certain subjects, and many people take this
readiness as a constant desire to change the opinions of those I disagree with.
This is not my intention. While I may not agree with certain views, I respect
the right to hold them.
My intention is to foster conversation. I wish to understand
why people hold their views and, moreover, I wish for them to understand why they hold their views. I understand that I
am young, and I find that many dismiss my opinions out of hand as brash or
naïve. In some cases, they are even correct. However, I have thought long and
hard about most of my beliefs, and there are concrete reasons why I argue
certain ones so vehemently. When I argue them, my goal is to challenge people
to question their own biases, even if I do not change their stance.
So, back to the argument at hand. I made a comment on the
original post pointing out the apparent nonexistence of the exact quote and the
irony of a heavily right wing page quoting modern Russia’s throwback to the
Soviet Union. The conversation quickly spiralled out of control expanding from
the original issue of “minorities” to cover Islam, Sharia Law, immigration, and
what exactly constitutes “racism.”
At times, the debate became somewhat heated. It didn’t
exactly end well.
The next day, people asked me why I bothered to argue,
especially over Facebook. Some people found it amusing and laughed at the two
of us. Mutual friends would tell me that’s “just how she is,” and that I was
“wasting my time.”
Sorry, but that is bullshit.
I’m not naïve enough to believe I will change the opinion of
this person, or anyone else I might argue with, over the internet or otherwise.
As I said earlier, I debate to make people think. Not just the person I am
arguing with, but also the people who may be watching.
It’s easy, particularly on the internet, to sit back and
ignore things that have no direct effect on us. We might not agree with certain
opinions (racist or otherwise), but to actively argue against them takes a lot
of effort and causes a lot of unnecessary friction. Best just to remain silent.
I dispute that notion.
Silence desensitizes us. When we remain silent, we are
accepting their behaviour in our own mind. If we constantly see bigotry and do
nothing but shake our heads and sigh, even that response becomes too much
effort. Next, we don’t even notice the bigotry, and soon we are complying without
even a thought of opposing, often actively engaging in it without realizing.
This is history and psychology. How do you think Hitler was
so successful at getting an entire country to ignore the atrocities he
committed?
Silence is acceptance. When one hears a bigoted remark and
says nothing, the bigots are told that hatred and intolerance are socially
acceptable attitudes. Do these people have a right to hold their beliefs? Yes.
Freedom of speech and freedom of thought are the cornerstone of all democracy. But
having the right to a belief does not make it right. This is why it is crucial
that we rally to dispute intolerant opinions: every time we remain silent,
those voices become that much louder.
I’ve found that social media perpetuates this phenomenon.
When information is easily packaged within a few lines of text with a flashy
image next to it, few people go to the effort of fact checking or disputing
negative opinions. The internet appeals to quick and easy answers, with little
effort or thought.
Which brings me back to my original point: why I stand up
against bigotry and intolerance even if I know I am never going to change the
mind of the person I’m arguing with. Simply put, I don’t want to be another
person who accepts that which I know is wrong. I want people to see me arguing,
and see that opinions of ignorance and intolerance are not acceptable. It’s
through silence and capitulation that we end up with Presidential candidates
like Donald Trump, or geopolitical disasters such as Brexit.
Standing up for my beliefs isn’t easy. Often, I feel like
I’m standing alone against a roomful of individuals. As a liberal living in
Alberta, I often am.
But the issues I am talking about are not everyday politics,
though we might like to think they are. I am not talking about taxes or fiscal
policy, or even whether the government has the right to spy on us and monitor
our communications.
I’m discussing issues that are, fundamentally, about human
rights. I’m discussing discrimination based on race, sexuality, or countless
other such excuses. All too often, many of us have a tendency to lump these issues
into the humdrum of everyday politics, tying stances to political parties and
speaking in abstractions. We forget that the discussion is about real people,
many of whom have their very lives at stake.
I have no experience as the victim of discrimination. I do
not understand what it is like to be profiled, judged, and hated based on the
colour of my skin; I have never been forced to hold my tongue about my
religious beliefs for fear of verbal or physical abuse. Many people are not so
lucky.
The way I see it, that makes it all the more important that
I stand up to intolerance. Yes, my life would be easier if I stood by quietly,
shaking my head and doing little more. But the victims of discrimination, the
people whose lives are destroyed by bigotry and intolerance, have no choice in
the matter. Why should I have the option to remain silent?
We are all human. We all deserve a chance. I just happened
to luck out as to which arbitrary borders I was born in and which particular
pigments colour my skin. The same goes for just about anyone reading this
piece. It is our responsibility to stand with those who don’t have the luxury
of choosing their battles.
To those of you who tell me I shouldn’t bother arguing
because “that’s just how they are,” I say no. As long as I see people
supporting opinions that actively encourage discrimination and inequality, I
will not stand idle. I will not sit silently when real people with real lives
are at stake. If I can encourage even one person to reflect on their own views
and maybe, just maybe, encourage them to stand with me, I will consider myself
successful.
As always, thanks for reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment