I Am Both
In the past few months there have been several instances of real or imagined injustices. Something happened that garnered worldwide attention, and in the aftermath people took sides. This "siding" normally happened in the form of a one-liner: "I am Trayvon Martin," "Hands up don't shoot," "I can't breathe," and now "Je suis Charlie."
It seems as if there is a race to identify with the perceived victim, lest you end up being grouped with the victimizer. It's almost as if we must make sure everyone knows that we are strongly in opposition to what has happened, and so we quickly tweet, wear t-shirts, or do something, ANYTHING, to make sure others know where we stand, and where we do not.
But doesn't the immediate need to choose a side only reveal the depth of the initial problem? Other than creating the age old us/them scenario (which is never helpful), doesn't choosing sides limit someone from being able to see from the other sides perspective, and therefore severely prohibit an actual pursuit of justice?
One of the problems is that it becomes cool to say, "Je suis Charlie" because everyone else is doing so. But cool has never brought about real justice. What brings justice is the boldness to wear, as it were, the clothes of the other and understand who they are.
Why not try on an "I am George Zimmerman" t-shirt and see how it fits. How about tweeting, "I am capable of the anger of those who murdered the Charlie Hebdo workers." Doing this will immediately make you a target for all kinds of vituperation and bile. In other words, it will place you in their position, and a position to begin understanding.
But I don't expect to see those shirts or tweets anytime soon. Instead we will continue picking sides rapidly, and subverting justice as we do so.
It is interesting to see media types backtrack on their identification with Charlie Hebdo once they realized that his "art" was offensively directed towards non-muslims, too. Suddenly "I am Charlie Hebdo" became "I am not Charlie Hebdo but I defend the right to free speech." In other words, once they realized that the victim was not the presumed saint he was immediately painted to be they divorced themselves from him and married a principle. Now the t-shirt probably reads, "I identify with nobody (not even myself) unless they are flawless."
But the truth is there is a bit of both victim and victimizer in each of us. We are, at the same time, the kind of people who disrespect what others hold dear, and react in violence, of a sort, when it happens to us. We are people who are victims of, and perpetuate, stereotypical behavior. We are Martin & Zimmerman, Brown & Ferguson officer, Hebdo & vengeful terrorist.
By disconnecting with one or both sides, what we are really doing is suggesting that we are not capable of what they are capable. "We are nothing like them! They are evil, we are not." But the truth is that their is a certain banality to evil. One can become what they never dreamed of overnight, if they are not equipped to handle their experiences.
We should all practice saying, "there, but for the grace of God, go I." And until we learn to say that we will continue the cycle of violence, condemnation, and separation, and we will never realize the justice that is desperately needed.
Why not try on an "I am George Zimmerman" t-shirt and see how it fits. How about tweeting, "I am capable of the anger of those who murdered the Charlie Hebdo workers." Doing this will immediately make you a target for all kinds of vituperation and bile. In other words, it will place you in their position, and a position to begin understanding.
But I don't expect to see those shirts or tweets anytime soon. Instead we will continue picking sides rapidly, and subverting justice as we do so.
It is interesting to see media types backtrack on their identification with Charlie Hebdo once they realized that his "art" was offensively directed towards non-muslims, too. Suddenly "I am Charlie Hebdo" became "I am not Charlie Hebdo but I defend the right to free speech." In other words, once they realized that the victim was not the presumed saint he was immediately painted to be they divorced themselves from him and married a principle. Now the t-shirt probably reads, "I identify with nobody (not even myself) unless they are flawless."
But the truth is there is a bit of both victim and victimizer in each of us. We are, at the same time, the kind of people who disrespect what others hold dear, and react in violence, of a sort, when it happens to us. We are people who are victims of, and perpetuate, stereotypical behavior. We are Martin & Zimmerman, Brown & Ferguson officer, Hebdo & vengeful terrorist.
By disconnecting with one or both sides, what we are really doing is suggesting that we are not capable of what they are capable. "We are nothing like them! They are evil, we are not." But the truth is that their is a certain banality to evil. One can become what they never dreamed of overnight, if they are not equipped to handle their experiences.
We should all practice saying, "there, but for the grace of God, go I." And until we learn to say that we will continue the cycle of violence, condemnation, and separation, and we will never realize the justice that is desperately needed.