To Be Real, part 1
I teach a community college course called “Women Respond to Violence” in which we examine varieties of violence and the multiplicity of ways that women (and their male allies) have struggled to understand and intervene in its causes and consequences. (Here’s the syllabus for the upcoming semester.)
Most of the students are survivors of some form of violence, such as sexual assault, domestic battery or war. Most are women; many are refugees. Most are poor or working class; some are or have been homeless. Many live in violent neighborhoods; all, along with you and me, live in a dangerously deranged biosphere in which babies are born with (literally) hundreds of industrial chemicals (many of them neurotoxins) already floating in their blood.
In other words, most students come into the class with substantial real-world experience of violence. And yet, about halfway through each semester, the class collectively pronounces itself stunned (and overwhelmed) by the extent and variety of abuses human beings have and continue to inflict on each other (this is before we get to violence against animals and ecosystems, which tends to prompt another round of horrified surprise).
No, I don’t leave them in that lurch. The point of the course is empowerment, not demoralization. But true empowerment can only come within a real assessment of the situation. Otherwise, it’s all pep talks and smiley faces—superficial succor instead of substantial skill-building. So we face the facts squarely, knowing that doing so is a requirement for figuring out what we can do that might actually have a chance of making a difference (rather than just making us feel better).
As a new year begins, I find myself wanting to make a similar but broader assessment of inconvenient facts. I want to pile them all up together and then see where the chinks in the wall might be. This might be what Joanna Macy recommended as a spark to anti-nuke activism: Directly confronting, rather than shiftily avoiding, the sources of despair.
I think that I’ll start by recapping some of the distressing facts that I and my students wrestle with every semester. (I’m about to launch into a new 15-week cycle of that class, so various topics will be especially fresh in my mind as the exercise unfolds.) Then, I’ll tally up other troubling realities that I often wonder whether social change activists in various movements are adequately accounting for. Probably, I’ll need to go offline and non-linear at some point, but I can scan and post any scribbles or sketches.
The hope is that looking at the aggregation of inconvenient facts—and looking especially at the connections among them, at the ecology of violence—might help in crafting more realistic social change strategies. Whether consciously or not, all social change strategies are rooted in assumptions about what people are like and how the world works. If these unspoken assumptions are inaccurate, the strategies may be inherently unlikely to achieve their aims. Real-world change can only come through an accurate assessment of the facts on the ground.
I invite you along with me on this exercise. What facts, when they come to mind, tend to punch your morale in the stomach? What thoughts lead you into the temptation to throw up your hands and quit trying? Share them with me in the comments, and I’ll be sure to include them in the process.
(This is the first of what will be I-dont-know-how-many parts in the “To Be Real” series. I’ve created a new category—Facing Facts—for the series, and I’ll go back and add relevant past posts to that category for our mutual reference.)
Possibly related posts:
January 10th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Hi, pattrice,
Some thoughts. What keeps me pessimistic rather than the opposite is the realization that there are many, many humans who are not educated by or otherwise subject to facts. They have worldviews, and these cannot be swayed by facts. Such folks may be religious, or humanist (which I often claim is a religion because it makes a god of humans) or whatever makes them into creationists, climate change deniers, anti-woman/glbt, meat eaters, etc. I was first aware of these kinds of folks as an active force (as opposed to individuals) which isn’t subject to persuasion by factual reality during the Dover creationism trial (Dover parents sued school board over requirement to teach intelligent design). So, the question is, how many of them are there? Is it possible that there aren’t as many as the media would have us think, because the media loves getting off on conflict and the tea-partiers and their ilk make good selling copy? I just don’t know. What do others think or know? And however many of them there are, does anything make them change? If so, what?
So, a second consideration. What leads to a minimal optimism: In spite of the worldviewers, who don’t change, there have been substantial changes in the things we care about – rights of the Earth in Bolivia, as well as no circuses; end to primate testing in Spain and approaching same here (though I expect the research industry to fight tooth and nail against it); gay marriage in numerous states; increased MSM coverage of veganism (though mostly related to human health rather than an overall philosophy affecting sentient life on the planet). And these “victories” came about only because people kept at it, didn’t give up, focused on the facts, worked in spite of those who don’t change, who don’t listen to facts.
Finally, I include racism (U.S. form – including slavery, Jim Crow, lynching, etc.) as one of the worldviews. Yet, in the 40 plus years since the mid-60s, something has changed in the south. White prosecuters have brought some of the worst racist killers of both famous and no-so-famous black Americans to justice. How did these white people get to that point in a couple of generations, growing up in the south of the 60s and 70s? I don’t know how and I haven’t read anything to explain it. Yet it happened.
So even though it’s clear that we must keep working, it’s also important to me to know, as you suggest, how to deal with the fact of those who don’t want to listen to facts, as well as the facts we keep in front of us all all time – that the earth is being destroyed by our species, that our species is unbelievably violent toward its own members, that our species is deeply flawed. I really want to hear from others how they continue to get up in the morning with what we’re facing. And I’d love to be there to take your course. Thank you. Cathie
January 30th, 2012 at 3:34 pm
I got real nervous many years ago when Richard Nixon was elected to a 2nd term on the strength of his “secret” Vietnam peace strategy. I became even more staggered when the puppet who replaced him almost won the subsequent presidential election. I became permanently traumatized when Reagan was elected. As far as I can see, it has been downhill since then.
I use those elections as proxies for the clarity and precision and factuality of the thinking of the American electorate. Needless to say, all 3 of those elements seem to be in short supply.
January 30th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Oops, I forgot to say I’m really looking forward to follow the progress of this postings quest.
March 11th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
[...] count this as part 2 in the “to be real” [...]