A day in the life in the culture wars

Something happened on Facebook. It bothers me a lot but it required a more thoughtful, nuanced response than possible in that medium, so here is a blog post. 

As reflected upon before, the trouble with social justice movements is that over correction and the original evil both exist, side by side. 

I fear both the old evil “-isms” AND the confrontational “calling out” mentality and cancel culture. 

Do I really have to spell out that I am in favour of equal opportunity, justice for all, etc etc? Consider it spelled out, please. I am in no way denying that racist incidents still occur and must be protested. 

AND I fear living in a climate where people approach each other with an attitude of angry suspicion, rather than an assumption of goodwill.  

Social media is making it all too easy to take a remark out of context, remove all nuance, and generate an outrage storm. 

I have this friend, with who I disagree on many things. We live in different bubbles, and take in different news sources. I am an agnostic social democrat, Ken is an evangelical Christian conservative. We are both the  Canadian variety, which makes dialogue more possible.

We will never agree on for instance abortion, climate change or the role of trade unions, but in spite of our differences there is genuine respect. 

What we do share is a desire to see honesty and truth in media. 

We will both post corrections if we have been misguided by our own side. I tend to be naive and believe what I see, while Ken has a keen eye for photoshop effects. 

I treasure this friendship.

Sometimes, when I have climbed on yet another outrage bandwagon, Ken will present  a different viewpoint. For instance in any case involving police brutality  I am likely to jump to the conclusion that the cops were evil racists.  Ken is more likely to look at what is was like for people on the line trying to uphold law and order in a tricky situation. 

No, this does not mean that he wants to either deny or excuse police brutality or racism. It does mean that he may ask: “What else was happening? Is there some grey in the black and white picture?”

Then there is this other friend. A vibrant young woman who moved to our village a few years ago.  Jo has been injecting some much needed colour, in many senses of the word, into our overly grey and white community. I have enthousiastically supported many of her initiatives, including some I have no personal interest in. 

The latest venture I had misgivings about. Do we really need an investigation into racism in the Kootenays?  I voiced my concern that excessive “wokeness” may make relationships between groups worse rather than improve them. I prefer to see people as individuals, not members of a group. Correcting historical injustices is a complex issue, let’s not get side tracked. Anyway, I expressed my reservations but gamely filled out the questionnaire. I am white and live in a progressive liberal  bubble, so what do I know?

I introduced Jo to a young woman whose mother was from Trinidad. She grew up in the region and might have more to say. 

Remember, my worries around wokeness concern OVER zealousness, not the basic ideas. On May 8 I shared Jo’s story of the day, which was about doing a run to commemorate Ahmaud Arbery, and getting disgusting reactions with this comment.

“Quite frankly, when Jo started to do an inquiry into racism in the Kootenays I thought it was like looking for micro agressions, a mentality I thoroughly dislike. I honestly thought racism was rather like smoking, hardly done anymore and those who do have to hide on street corners. 

It looks like I was wrong. So please share this and shame the assholes  who think this is who we are. Carry on running Jo.”

So far the background. Now the incident.

 

I had posted a meme regarding the murder of Ahmaud Arbery. About the need to frame the narrative. You know, the regular me on the outrage wagon.

Ken chimed in with a link to a talk by a black woman, Candace Owens, introduced with the following comment: “Here is another perspective. Not saying it is correct, just a perspective.”

Jo reacted to this and talk ensued about the credibility of the speaker, and whether it is racist to call a black person with conservative views an Uncle Tom.  Jo interpreted Ken’s words a certain way, he protested that is not what he meant, it went on and on. 

This dialogue took place between two people who had never met.

I took no part in it but finally said:

“Jo Law Jo,  I  know  Ken  well  enough  to  know  that  he  absolutely  would  NOT call  a  black  man  an  animal.  That  is  just  not  what  he  meant.  Ken  and  I  disagree  on  many  matters,  but  he  is  a  deeply  moral  man  who  believes  all  humans  to  be  equal  in  the  sight  of  his God.  He likes  to  play devil’s  advocate.  As  in,  ”Have  you  looked at this  aspect  of  the  story?”

Jo:

Ieneke Van Houten wonderful, someone’s come to his rescue...

Wish someone had done that for Ahmaud.

Ken:Jo Law me too Jo.... we agree...

Me: Jo Law I know Ken. That is all. There is enough real evil and racism to fight and we all agree on that. 

These last two comments went without reaction from Jo.

The whole exchange left me with a bad taste, but that got worse when I saw a post by Jo on her page, where this exchange was described as follows.

Jo: “So recently, I was in an online interaction with an older white male. He compared Ahmaud Arbery to an attacking animal and the McMichaels to seasoned hunters. When I called him out on it, he first became defensive saying that’s not what he meant. Then to his credit, he apologized. (Sighhh) Then he hopped right back into his analogy, but now premised with the assurance that he was not racist. I told him amongst other things that whenever I call out racist behaviour, it rarely, if ever, sinks in until another white person concurs. Then, like an answered prayer, another white person chimes in.... to excuse him and gaslight me. Ah fiddlesticks... maybe next time. 

#DoBetter

So now I am a gaslighting apologist  for a racist. 

FUCK THAT.

I shall continue to assume most people mean well.

I shall continue to speak up against the evils of both racism and creating antagonism where none need exist.

And now, I have wasted enough mental energy and precious time on this during prime planting season.

Postscript

Discussion on this post happened on Facebook. Originally the post contained part of the dialogue. 

Jo made the comment that I had quoted part of the conversation verbatim, but not the parts that had been most offensive. That is valid criticism, so here is the whole thing. I do not expect anyone to wade through it all. It took so long because this requires the use of a clunky laptop instead of my beloved iPad, and it is gardening season and well, LIFE.

(Meme about reframing the narrative)

Ken: Here is another perspective. Not saying it is correct, just a perspective.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10217663658447392&id=1357344502

Jo: Candace Owens is what’s known as an Uncle Tom. Black people are the only ones who get blamed for being murdered.

Ken: That is the most racist thing I've read on this thread. You suggest she doesn't have the wherewithal to think for herself? That is quite appalling.

 Candace Owens did not in any way exonerate the men and in fact she felt they should be charged. What she said was thoughtful and worth hearing. If these guys were about race there never would have been a fight for the gun this young man would have been shot outright. What they did was stupid, they should be charged. Was it racist or premeditated murder? That, I'm not sure of.

Jo: Let’s not forget that these men were not charged of anything. For over 2 months they were free after murdering a man. The video was in possession of the prosecution and still nothing. Video proof and nothing. Meanwhile a 16 year old black teen gets thrown in jail for 3 years over an alleged stolen backpack (he incidentally was never charged with anything either).

It is the system in place that allows things like this to continue as it has since America was born.

For her to say the term “lynching” is a joke and people don’t get lynched anymore, well we do. It may not always be by a rope, but it certainly is public and justice is certainly never on the side of the victim, sending a very clear message to how we are valued as human beings.

So no, I’m not racist, I’m just over people who continue to excuse the brutalization of black lives.

Ken: not yet.... I don't think you are a racist Jo. But this was not a lynching it was a citizen's arrest which is legal in Georgia. AND, it went terribly wrong. As I said if their intent was to kill him there would have been no fight. He would have been shot before he attacked. The father was in the back of the truck with a gun, he could have shot long before the tussle, he didn't. These were seasoned hunters, they knew what they could do if an animal attacked them. They thought they could have arrested him by threatening with firearms. They didn't anticipate he would fight back. Whem he did, both men were now fighting for their lives. Each feared being shot by the other.

Lynching was always about making a spectacle, it often was preceded with a slow methodical torturing before death. That was not the case here. They should be charged. What they did was stupid and of course terribly tragic.

Jo: not yet what

Ken: they haven't charged them yet. The case is still being investigated...

Jo: you just said they were seasoned hunters and likened Ahmaud Arbery to an animal. This. This right here is exactly what I’m talking about. I’m out. 

Ken: please don't read into what I said.... I didn't say that AT ALL. I said they DIDN'T treat him like an animal..... If they had they would have shot him outright... no fight would have ensured.....sheesh!!!!

just to clarify. I was in no way saying he was an animal. That was never my intent. If it came across like that I apologize.

Jo: to clarify, what “could” these seasoned hunters do if an animal attacked them?

Follow up question, what “did” they do to Ahmaud Arbery?

If the answer is the same, your intentions don’t matter. You unconsciously likened a black person to an animal. That is how you portrayed your view in your previous comment. Less than.

Did Ahmaud Arbery attack two armed men? or did he die fighting for his life?

I need you to be aware of the words you say, the “ideas” you share and if you are helping or harming. Today your words caused harm and I really just want you to think about that. I am asking you to do better.

Ken: sorry, I was trying to say because they were hunters they would naturally shoot anything that attacked them. They didnt do that with Ahmaud. If they saw him as just an animal they would have done what any hunter would do. Hunters rarely get attacked unless surprised because they shoot first. They threatened him for sure, but they didn't shoot first. When he did the unexpected and attacked them everything changed. A terrible tragedy for sure. My use of the word animal was inappropriate for this conversation. It was never intended to refer to a person.

please also consider. I gave you the benefit of the doubt when I said your original words were racist. I said after that I didn't think you were. Perhaps I could be given the same consideration?

Jo: I deal with people on a regular basis that claim they aren’t racist but then go ahead and do/say racist things. Daily. I spend time bringing awareness to people who display these toxic behaviours in hope that it will evoke positive change. I’m in a goddamn committee to this end ffs. I’ve literally never met you aside from this interaction. Regardless of my view, what I can surmise is that, contrary to your comments, at the very least, YOU do not think you are racist.

I’ll let you in on something else. I’ve been at this for a while... No one ever believes me when I call them out for saying racist shit... the only moment they start to come around is when another white person concurs...

Ken:okay well I guess there are racist people here than. That is sad because all I did was bring further information. w my character is in question while I chose not to do the same to you. I guess there is nothing more I can say. May God bless you in your future.

Ien: Jo, I know Ken well enough to know that he absolutely would NOT call a black man an animal. That is just not what he meant. Ken and I disagree on many matters, but he is a deeply moral man who believes all humans to be equal in the sight of his God. He likes to play devil’s advocate. As in, ”Have you looked at this aspect of the story?”

Jo: wonderful, someone’s come to his rescue...

Wish someone had done that for Ahmaud.

Ken:  me too Jo.... we agree... 

Ien:  .I know Ken. That is all. There is enough real evil and racism to fight and we all agree on that.

1

•