I’ve started, deleted, and re-started this week’s newsletter more times than I can count. For context, last week I wrote something more personal and less charged than usual, and fewer people than ever before opened and read through that one. At the same time, last week’s piece went out just before a pretty historic event happened, and so folks were definitely busier than usual that day. Either way, me talking about the need for peace appears to have not been well-received. That’s pretty ironic, I’d say, given the way the world has erupted in the past seven days.
The first time I started to write this entry, it was about the importance of speaking honestly to each other. It underwent an evolution and turned into something about speaking both kindly AND honestly to each other, and then that whole thing was scrapped as well. But my commitment to myself, to this project, and to my readers is that I’m going to publish once weekly no matter how confident I feel about a given piece’s content, so we’re doing this anyway.
I’m deeply concerned about where our country is at this point in time. I don’t know how else to put this—we need to realize that the feelings we’re all feeling are valid, no matter our perspectives. We also need to realize that we all benefit through an exchange of ideas with each other, regardless of whether we believe those ideas are deeply misguided. When we get to a place where people are deeply harmed as a result of expressing themselves, that’s not a safe, healthy or good place for anybody. Period.
In just seven short days, things have started to feel very different.
If political violence is done to someone whose views aren’t aligned with yours, who has hurt you in the past, it’s likely that you’re going to have an instinctive reaction to that violence.
If you’ve been inspired by a given public figure’s charisma, and if that person’s beliefs and ideals were more closely-aligned with yours, then if political violence is directed at that person it’s likely that you’re also going to have an instinctive reaction to that violence.
Instinct, by definition, is reflexive. It operates on a deeper level, a level which is triggered and activated by any number of stimuli, memories, lived experiences, and underlying beliefs about the world and the way it works. Instinct can be taught, it can be absorbed through contact with others, and it can be innate and a natural part of each of us.
Those two instinctive reactions are likely to be in opposition to one another. Some opponents of any given public person might end up expressing positive feelings about violence that’s occurred, and some of that same person’s friends and supporters might have expressed negative feelings (though neither group is reacting in identical ways, even within otherwise-similar groups).
There are also an almost-infinite number of categories of people who are likely to have additional layers of feelings and reactions and responses to any particular act of violence. Victims of gun violence might be deeply re-traumatized if video clips of a violent act end up widely circulating online, regardless of their feelings about the victim in that situation. Some marginalized communities might have immediately begun to plan for their own safety, fearing that already-simmering tensions might more-easily boil over as a result of such an act. And while some of the public figure’s supporters might have reacted with horror and sadness, others have reacted with anger. Some conservatives have been put into a state of anxiety and fear about the prospect of others (or themselves) being harmed, and some liberals have been put into the same anxiety and fear for the same reasons.
Some of those on the right have felt a sense of righteous anger about the events of the past week and have begun to lash out at people who do not feel the same as they do. And some of those on the left have felt a sense of righteous anger about those same events and have begun to celebrate what they perceive as a blow against the ideals that political figure espoused.
I’m not celebrating any violence, of any kind, done against anyone. Put most plainly, I am a pacifist Quaker social worker, and all three of those identities have existed for me in my life on their own as independent aspects of who I am, at least one of them for as long as I can remember. I am not happy whenever anyone dies, and I’m not happy when violence is committed in the name of anyone’s ideals, no matter what those ideals may be. I don’t think that anybody should be shot, ever. I cannot be more specific than this: every single murder is a horrific act. Such an act ends up causing a huge amount of trauma in people around the world. I hate the fact that events like this ever happen. In my mind, nothing good comes as a result of violence, not for anyone.
This is not a piece dedicated to both-sidesism. My intent is not to say “the left is wrong and the right is wrong, so stop being upset”. It is not my place to tell people on the left that they need to stop experiencing their reflexive feelings, nor my place to tell those on the right that they need to stop experiencing theirs.
Another thing about me, for as long as I can remember, is that I have a tendency to slip into black and white thinking, especially about moral or ethical issues that seem obvious to me. When it comes to one of these issues, I can pretty easily find myself thinking “Everyone must agree with me, or else.” My many years as a mental health professional have led me to a great deal of self-reflection, and that self-reflection has made me consciously push back on this instinct within myself. When I notice myself falling back behind my walls and gates and readying my defenses, I have to force myself into a more-neutral position, or at least a position with more nuance that allows for disagreements without those disagreements being cause for a huge conflict. That’s something I do, sometimes really often.
This is not to say that I don’t find myself in those old black and white, good vs evil, up vs down positions. But I do think I’m far more prone to pulling back than I used to be, or than most people do. Not everyone can (or will) do that. I’m trying to make it as reflexive as my old instinct to put up those walls.
So, let’s review. Something awful happened last week, and the 340 million people in this country have ended up with at least several million variations of complex feelings about those events. And since the world is what it is, many of us openly express our feelings in a wide variety of online spaces. That’s not saying that we’re all performative, it’s not saying that “social media is evil and people need to just log off”, and it’s not saying that we’re all ruled by the algorithm, though the algorithm certainly doesn’t help. For many people, those online interactions are the only contact they have with other folks, especially for people with a disability or other barriers. In my opinion, not posting our feelings is not the answer, and neither is not having those feelings in the first place. And just as I don’t know the exact right words to say in this newsletter, I don’t know the exact right way to fix this problem we’re experiencing at this particular point in time. But I still want to talk about it, since I can’t help but feel like talking about it offers others some value.
Something that is deeply, deeply concerning to me are the massive ongoing efforts to destroy those who disagree on this issue. I do not see people on the center or people on the left trying to concretely harm others who disagree with them about last week’s violence, or about the deeper symbolism of what that public figure means to them. On the other hand, I could show you hundreds of examples of people on the right who are trying to hurt those who disagree with them about these events. And I can’t see a single good thing about that response, which is why I would love to have this conversation (even if it’s dangerous to say, perhaps).
Don’t misunderstand me here. I do grasp where the desire to take action on the part of the right and the friends and supporters of the victim of any political violence might come from, and it’s not generally coming from a bad place. It’s about fear, and anger, and a desire to make a lasting impact on the world. It’s about trying to fix something that they feel is broken. There are people on that side who are trying to make money (like the scam artists trying to launch a new memecoin). There are those on that side who enjoy hurting people. But those are few and far in-between, I think. They’re not bad people.
I also grasp where the celebration and jokes from some on the left is coming from (though, again, I’m not saying any death is a funny thing or should be celebrated). They also feel the world is broken, and they also feel that this event might be a good thing (or at least not a terribly negative one). But those on this side of things span a massive spectrum as well—a very, very few are advocating for violence, many more are expressing celebration or humorous thoughts, and far more are expressing feelings of “meh” or a lack of compassion or care about the death. They’re not one heterogenous group, and they’re not bad people either.
I started compiling screenshots of a few examples of what I’m talking about here, and quickly became overwhelmed at the sheer number and tone of those posts. So let’s start with people I know and care about in my small community. I know multiple people who have gotten mass death threats related to their online reactions. I know folks who have faced attempts at getting them fired, who have had to purchase cameras for their homes and who have had to file police reports. The chair of the Republican Party in my county posted a long statement which repeatedly stated that Democrats and those who have liberal perspectives are “a cancer” on our country and our society. He stated in a wide variety of ways his belief that political violence is a one-way street, and that those who disagree with him on that must be punished. These responses are extreme and harmful and only make the situation much, much worse. The people he’s talking about are his neighbors, his co-workers, and maybe even his family members. That’s not okay.
Looking beyond the people I actually know, I have seen the following over the past few days:
A person who is claiming to have a database of 50,000+ people who are “celebrating” over the recent political violence who will be “exposed” and fired.
A person who has stated they have personally gotten more than 700 people terminated by their employer this week.
A person who is ecstatic because they supposedly got someone fired who is now also being evicted from her home (and is begging for money via GoFundMe so she can afford to survive).
A person who has begun a spreadsheet of all publicly available data related to those who are commercial airline pilots, so they and their “team of volunteers” can “personally vet their social media accounts” and force their firing if “concerning” material can be located.
A person who claims that more than a hundred teachers have lost their teaching licenses in their state and can never teach again, as a result of their posts online.
A person stating that every mental health professional who has expressed opinions they disagree with about this death should be forever barred from holding professional licensure and treating clients.
A person advocating for newspapers and TV networks to be shut down over individual peoples’ opinions expressed via those mediums.
A person suggesting that liberals should be executed by firing squad.
A person saying that anyone they get fired will be added to a calendar in the future for more calls to make sure they can never have long-term employment again.
A person advocating for imprisonment of all registered Democrats.
A person suggesting that liberal-leaning nonprofits need to be designated terrorist organizations.
And none of these examples are even from elected or appointed political officials who have the power to exert even more real-life pressures on those they disagree with.
I’m not mentioning actual initiatives being supposedly pursued by the Trump Administration here, either. It’s hard to know how many of those are talk and how many are actual causes for concern, but we know they’re going to start deporting folks here on a visa who are “celebrating” the events of last week, which is equally damaging to the country as a whole (and is just one example).
I don’t think it’s useful for us to say “let’s all be friends”, because that’s probably not realistic. I also don’t think it’s realistic for us to say that this is all a huge series of First Amendment violations (since it’s not, generally-speaking). We know that the amendment doesn’t protect us from the consequences of our speech, that’s a given. But these consequences aren’t justified. They are punishments for not adequately mourning, and they’re causing huge and lasting effects for the people involved. And the rules have now changed, or it feels like they have. More conservative-leaning people have had the opportunity to express how they feel about a whole host of issues as well, as far back in our history as public discourse has existed. I know that some conservatives have felt silenced for their views in specific contexts (and I would call some of those concerns valid and others less-valid).
The difference, now, is that people can no longer feel safe expressing different views without being told that they want others to die and deserve to not work, or have a home, or care for their kids, or stay in this country. That’s beyond toxic, and it’s incredibly dangerous. I cannot see any adequate justification for wanting to destroy someone who disagrees with me.
And how does it help anyone to make the teacher shortage (or nursing shortage, or pilot shortage) even worse? It probably makes that person who calls or emails an employer feel good to get someone punished for that speech, in the moment. It probably feels like you made a difference and seized some control in a situation that feels totally uncontrollable. But it hurts all of us.
I’m also increasingly concerned by the meme I’ve seen shared approximately a thousand times over the past week (about how some people spend so much time being Republicans or Democrats that they forget how to be a human being). I understand the motivation of wanting to declare affirmatively that we are all just people, at our core. I also understand wanting to insulate yourself from the partisan camps out there, largely out of a desire to stay safe in an unsafe environment by not being seen as an enemy. I’ve seen a whole range of other “I hate politics” posts, too, which are in the same vein. For instance, the person who said they “fell out of love with politics as quickly as they fell in love with them" and that they’ll never go back to that world.
Let me suggest to you that while I don’t see the absolute need to take sides or identify with a specific party as being an absolute requirement, I do feel that every single one of us has a responsibility TO care about politics, TO be involved in political campaigns related to causes you’re passionate about, TO vote, TO learn about candidates and support them in the way that you have the energy to do. Politics is about human beings, and if you care about people, you need to care about politics. I’m sorry to have to tell you this, but I sincerely believe it to be true.
What does it do when we distance ourselves from politics? It means that the people who ARE involved have proportionally more power and influence and say about the laws and candidates and initiatives that affect all of us. It also means that you and your comfort are leaving marginalized communities to fend for themselves. If your very identity is considered “political” (such as is the case right now with the transgender/nonbinary community), then “not caring about politics” also equals not caring about them. And that hurts all of us.
I’m not arguing that you have a responsibility to harm yourself on behalf of other people, as we all have to make our own decisions based on our own level of risk tolerance. I am, however, begging you to not opt out of this conversation. When fewer and fewer of us are willing to talk about politics, the conversations just end up skewing more and more into polar opposites, and that means there aren’t any centrist voices or nuanced voices being heard. I badly want to have conversations with people who disagree with me, on this or any other issue. That means we need those voices.
I’m writing this week’s newsletter on this topic not because I know the right words to use but because I don’t. I don’t know how to articulate how I’m feeling, besides doing the best I can to share where I’m at. My request of you is that you take some time over the next few days to consider, really consider, how to keep talking. Even when we don’t have the words.
So many of us are afraid and angry and anxious and alone this week, and I wish you a few moments of peace and love. Just those few moments can make a difference.
See you next week! If you think these (halting, inadequate) words might resonate with someone else, please share it with them. And I’ll keep writing, even when I don’t know what to say. Because what’s the responsibility we each bear?
What must we do?
What we can.