I posted this to the FUSN list on August 31, 2018
-----------------
Some at FUSN have expressed appreciation for some of my past posts as
thought-provoking.
Looking at the latest UU World confirmed once again a sense I have had for
some time – that Unitarian-Universalism is distorting its path by lifting one
kind of issue above all others.
In brief, identifying oppressor/oppressed pairs and redressing the
oppression has come to occupy a place that is so central that it seems to drive
to the margins all the other ways that we might improve the world, and indeed
all the things we might do to live a full life in our brief time in this
world.
Oppression is very real and worth combatting. Activists (like fundraising
letters) have always tried to convince us that theirs is the vital issue, the
crucial time is right now and the stakes couldn’t be higher. But they have taken
their turn at the podium and the rest of us have made our own judgments. We’ve
made quite a bit of progress. There is plenty more to make.
“Privilege” (and its generalized form “intersectionality”) are concepts
that have come to occupy a prominent place among social liberals. The framework
of privilege goes one very worrisome step further. It tampers with the process
of rational debate, in part by denigrating contributions from people who are not
members of oppressed groups. It claims that such people are only perpetuating an
oppressive status quo without the sort of careful evidence needed to support
that conclusion. In some forms, it can approve of interrupting orderly debates –
interrupting speech if it is deemed to contain oppressive elements. One instance
is “no-platforming” of speakers on university campuses when activists decide the
message too oppressive to be worthy of a hearing.
I do not know if this critique applies to how the issue has played out in
UU congregations and within the denomination more broadly. I hope UUism has been
an exception. The privilege framework violates UU principles, notably the First
(inherent worth and dignity), Third (acceptance and spiritual grown) and Fourth
(free and responsible search for truth and meaning), and in its full-blown form
is not consistent with any of them.
The framework of privilege reduces individuals to their membership in a
variety of categories where one is oppressor and the other oppressed. There is
no end to such categories, and activists feel justified in calling out privilege
on behalf of others. Its adherents devote quite a bit of their mental space and
energy to thinking of how everything they say or do could be oppressive to some
group. I fear people rarely stop and consider what other aspects of their lives
and values have been crowded out to make this space. I thought this book review
on the subject was thought-provoking: https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/honor-dignity-victim-cultures/
The seductive appeal of the privilege framework relies in part on losing
track of history. We could remember that all but the very poorest in the US
today live lives of material abundance never matched in any culture more than a
couple generations back. Most oppressed groups have it better than they ever
have in the past. If you see society on a path of moving always forward to
greater equality and prosperity, a laser focus on driving for more improvements
makes sense. But if you see history as an inevitable ebb and flow, a mix of good
times followed by bad, then more focus might go to trying to preserve the gains.
There are many white people of modest means and good will in the US who do not
feel privileged and exert great influence at the ballot box. One of our tasks
should be listening carefully to their concerns.
Here are a few resources that deal with these issues that I thought were
very good:
Of course it’s not for me to tell people what’s important. Each of us
decides that on our own, but I would like people who accept the privilege
framework to do so with open eyes.
No comments:
Post a Comment