This essay, and the podcast, recall a recent experience I had in my journey of inclusion. In the spring of 2020, weeks after the murder of George Floyd, I was doing a certification program in Equity and Inclusion from a major "Ivy League" caliber US university. Being in the early days of the Covid restrictions the cohort was very international. I was one of 6 white Americans out of 32 students, and over half of the students were outside the US. One of the assigned books was "White Fragility", which was de rigueur in all my professional circles at the time. When we gathered for our class discussion (a shifting Zoom meeting to accommodate international time zones) I was stunned to hear the three black women and two black men in the cohort, who were all born and raised on the African continent (Western and South central Africa countries), demand to know why we were reading a colonialist apologetic. They spent 45 minutes critiquing the book as an extension of reductivist views of African culture and history rooted in white supremacy. Many of us sat in stunned silence. It was a book that was, at the moment, beyond questioning. (I do think it brings some uniquely American perspectives and critiques, but my subsequent work on international coaching teams has reinforced the views expressed by my fellow student cohorts). Humans are complex. Our histories are complex (much of modern Western math has roots in what are now African and middle Eastern countries, so a "mathematical view" is not inherently European, contrary to many white, progressive conversations around race). Reducing us to soundbites and snippets is a tactic of power that we have inherited from empire. It is endemic, and it does not comport with a progressive and open worldview. We are still struggling to shed the history of power, reductivism, and bias, even in our attempts at equity and inclusion.
That's so interesting, Mark! A great illustration of why it's a good idea to hold many of our positions lightly, knowing that we almost never have a complete view of the situation. Thanks for sharing this. I hope you're well!
It's such a relief to read this. I experienced DiAngelo's earlier book, "What Does It Mean To Be White?", which was required reading on a Work That Reconnects facilitators' course, as deeply divisive in its real-life effects, and only compounding the problems it purports to address. I would so like the reaction of the Africans in your online meeting to be heard by the WTR course organisers: their reaction to me was basically "poor woman, she doesn't see her white privilege and fragility". It's a Kafka trap.
Good, good, all good. I've just finished listening to 4 episodes of the podcast and found it surprisingly broad-ranging, often about changing social dynamics in the age of the internet as it is about JK Rowling.
Few interim thoughts (and clearly I feel safer musing here than on social media! Wonder why?). 1. the podcast balances the fundamentalists' condemnation of the novels but the trans-rights activists are enraged by JKR's own statements, so the real world v fantasy is a little unequal to me. 2. Doing some other reading, I found JKR's tweets more snarky and aggressive than her longer posts on her website, and the interviews on the podcast are even more reflective and mild. Gloves off on Twitter didn't seem to help her case. 3. JKR's focus is protecting women and girls predators especially in light of the proposed British gender ID law, something I hadn't known about. 4. On the podcast she sounds deeply sympathetic to trans-people, but is firmly unwilling to categorize trans-women as women, a sticking point with her opponents. 5. This just makes me wonder about humans' need to categorize and label. When does it help us understand and relate to the world and when does it detonate a minefield of problems?
Love these reflections, Craig. How far along are you in listening? I thought the most recent episode (#5 I think? I'm losing count) started to address your point #2, which I totally agree with. Twitter (and uh, Facebook, as we've seen) is not conducive to nuanced conversations. And when people start to feel attacked and defensive, they can easily slip into being more cutting and aggressive than they would otherwise be. That episode traced how we all lost our minds a bit during the pandemic and were spending SO much time online, without access to community and connection, and online discourse started to become even more toxic and distorted. That's when all of this started to go really off the rails. I think your point /question #5 is a great one. I'm thinking a lot about that too.
I've listened to episode 5 as well--and appreciated the analysis of the pandemic. It was weird to be walking in the neighborhood listening to "And then George Floyd was murdered by police" and being just a couple blocks from ground zero.
Just had to pop over and say “hi” after seeing your comment on The Free Press. I am a proud Minneapolitan, and I’ve been shocked and dismayed by the rising authoritarianism in my once very-liberal cohort. I say “once” because even though my friends and family still would call themselves liberals, they’ve adopted a very illiberal mode of discourse.
I got into huge trouble on FB and Twitter for saying a lab leak was a possible source of the SARS-COV2 virus. I didn’t say it was certain, or even likely; just said it was a possibility. There have been dozens of documented cases in the past of pathogens leaking from research facilities; a kind of thing which has actually happened is, by definition, possible. Again, not saying it was definite or even probable. Just possible.
The pile-on I got from my friends and family was insane.
I eventually gave up on Facebook and nuked my old Twitter account.
I’m as leftist as it gets, so seeing the Left embrace corporatism and reject civil liberties over the past 4 years has been disheartening for me. I haven’t left the Left, but the Left is leaving me.
The two cartoons you posted really sum it up. I posted that we shouldn’t assume that people who disagree with us are crazy, stupid, or evil, that we should strive to understand opposing viewpoints even if we disagree with them, that we can’t learn anything new if we think we’re right all the time, and that we shouldn’t assume “our side” is immune to propaganda. The responses were basically the same thinking as illustrated in those cartoons.
I’m worried that we’re heading toward literal thought police, or something like the Cultural Revolution.
Hello and welcome, Xtal! Great to hear from a fellow Minneapolitan. The past few years have indeed been mighty tough for those who don't automatically sign on to the prevailing "expert" opinion on every issue and instead insist on weighing different arguments and perspectives for themselves. The good news is I think there are many more of us than social media would suggest because, as you note, many have learned to simply stop engaging there due to the extreme hostility and illiberalism taking over those spaces. Glad we're able to find each other here!
Hi Mo. stumbled on your site from the free press. After 30 years of living in south Mpls and raising my (now grown) kids there, I threw in the towel and moved to a farm.
(Added then deleted approximately 15 more paragraphs 🤪)
Hello and I look forward to reading more of your missives.
Once again, Mo, you serve a feast of wonderful insights and questions raised and pondered in your writing. I appreciate and applaud your efforts! Genuine dialogue feels lost to me in midst of the five minute news cycle, twitter sized point of view positions all in service to a zero sum game mind set. Have we stopped (or did we ever) truly listen to one another or are we stuck setting up a scoring repartee? Have we lost the wisdom of trying to imagine the journey in another’s moccasins? I’m 75 this year and my plan is to claim my place at the fire to listen, converse, and learn, too. Off now to check out the podcast.
Great article and thoughts, Mo - thank you! And you have come up against the same forces that triggered the exodus of many from the online community you and I met on, which is to me still utterly bizarre, given what that community was meant to be about.
I will try to have a listen to the podcasts, though as a Brit I have already followed JK Rowling's journey on this topic on and off. I have a lot of empathy for her, and though her tweets have indeed been biting, she has been standing up for herself and pushing back with her gift of words and I can't really fault her.
Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts, Helen. It's great to hear from you! Hope you're well and spring is bringing some sweetness and light your way.
This essay, and the podcast, recall a recent experience I had in my journey of inclusion. In the spring of 2020, weeks after the murder of George Floyd, I was doing a certification program in Equity and Inclusion from a major "Ivy League" caliber US university. Being in the early days of the Covid restrictions the cohort was very international. I was one of 6 white Americans out of 32 students, and over half of the students were outside the US. One of the assigned books was "White Fragility", which was de rigueur in all my professional circles at the time. When we gathered for our class discussion (a shifting Zoom meeting to accommodate international time zones) I was stunned to hear the three black women and two black men in the cohort, who were all born and raised on the African continent (Western and South central Africa countries), demand to know why we were reading a colonialist apologetic. They spent 45 minutes critiquing the book as an extension of reductivist views of African culture and history rooted in white supremacy. Many of us sat in stunned silence. It was a book that was, at the moment, beyond questioning. (I do think it brings some uniquely American perspectives and critiques, but my subsequent work on international coaching teams has reinforced the views expressed by my fellow student cohorts). Humans are complex. Our histories are complex (much of modern Western math has roots in what are now African and middle Eastern countries, so a "mathematical view" is not inherently European, contrary to many white, progressive conversations around race). Reducing us to soundbites and snippets is a tactic of power that we have inherited from empire. It is endemic, and it does not comport with a progressive and open worldview. We are still struggling to shed the history of power, reductivism, and bias, even in our attempts at equity and inclusion.
That's so interesting, Mark! A great illustration of why it's a good idea to hold many of our positions lightly, knowing that we almost never have a complete view of the situation. Thanks for sharing this. I hope you're well!
It's such a relief to read this. I experienced DiAngelo's earlier book, "What Does It Mean To Be White?", which was required reading on a Work That Reconnects facilitators' course, as deeply divisive in its real-life effects, and only compounding the problems it purports to address. I would so like the reaction of the Africans in your online meeting to be heard by the WTR course organisers: their reaction to me was basically "poor woman, she doesn't see her white privilege and fragility". It's a Kafka trap.
Good, good, all good. I've just finished listening to 4 episodes of the podcast and found it surprisingly broad-ranging, often about changing social dynamics in the age of the internet as it is about JK Rowling.
Thank you, Craig! I'm glad to hear that -- I agree, I think the podcast is about so much more than just JKR. I'm glad you're finding it interesting.
Few interim thoughts (and clearly I feel safer musing here than on social media! Wonder why?). 1. the podcast balances the fundamentalists' condemnation of the novels but the trans-rights activists are enraged by JKR's own statements, so the real world v fantasy is a little unequal to me. 2. Doing some other reading, I found JKR's tweets more snarky and aggressive than her longer posts on her website, and the interviews on the podcast are even more reflective and mild. Gloves off on Twitter didn't seem to help her case. 3. JKR's focus is protecting women and girls predators especially in light of the proposed British gender ID law, something I hadn't known about. 4. On the podcast she sounds deeply sympathetic to trans-people, but is firmly unwilling to categorize trans-women as women, a sticking point with her opponents. 5. This just makes me wonder about humans' need to categorize and label. When does it help us understand and relate to the world and when does it detonate a minefield of problems?
Love these reflections, Craig. How far along are you in listening? I thought the most recent episode (#5 I think? I'm losing count) started to address your point #2, which I totally agree with. Twitter (and uh, Facebook, as we've seen) is not conducive to nuanced conversations. And when people start to feel attacked and defensive, they can easily slip into being more cutting and aggressive than they would otherwise be. That episode traced how we all lost our minds a bit during the pandemic and were spending SO much time online, without access to community and connection, and online discourse started to become even more toxic and distorted. That's when all of this started to go really off the rails. I think your point /question #5 is a great one. I'm thinking a lot about that too.
I've listened to episode 5 as well--and appreciated the analysis of the pandemic. It was weird to be walking in the neighborhood listening to "And then George Floyd was murdered by police" and being just a couple blocks from ground zero.
Just had to pop over and say “hi” after seeing your comment on The Free Press. I am a proud Minneapolitan, and I’ve been shocked and dismayed by the rising authoritarianism in my once very-liberal cohort. I say “once” because even though my friends and family still would call themselves liberals, they’ve adopted a very illiberal mode of discourse.
I got into huge trouble on FB and Twitter for saying a lab leak was a possible source of the SARS-COV2 virus. I didn’t say it was certain, or even likely; just said it was a possibility. There have been dozens of documented cases in the past of pathogens leaking from research facilities; a kind of thing which has actually happened is, by definition, possible. Again, not saying it was definite or even probable. Just possible.
The pile-on I got from my friends and family was insane.
I eventually gave up on Facebook and nuked my old Twitter account.
I’m as leftist as it gets, so seeing the Left embrace corporatism and reject civil liberties over the past 4 years has been disheartening for me. I haven’t left the Left, but the Left is leaving me.
The two cartoons you posted really sum it up. I posted that we shouldn’t assume that people who disagree with us are crazy, stupid, or evil, that we should strive to understand opposing viewpoints even if we disagree with them, that we can’t learn anything new if we think we’re right all the time, and that we shouldn’t assume “our side” is immune to propaganda. The responses were basically the same thinking as illustrated in those cartoons.
I’m worried that we’re heading toward literal thought police, or something like the Cultural Revolution.
Thanks for your excellent post.
Hello and welcome, Xtal! Great to hear from a fellow Minneapolitan. The past few years have indeed been mighty tough for those who don't automatically sign on to the prevailing "expert" opinion on every issue and instead insist on weighing different arguments and perspectives for themselves. The good news is I think there are many more of us than social media would suggest because, as you note, many have learned to simply stop engaging there due to the extreme hostility and illiberalism taking over those spaces. Glad we're able to find each other here!
There are so many of us! I keep finding people speaking up. Courage-- with a healthy sprinkling of prudence--is the answer.
Hear hear!
This is excellent. From one Minnesotan to another: thank you.
Hi Mo. stumbled on your site from the free press. After 30 years of living in south Mpls and raising my (now grown) kids there, I threw in the towel and moved to a farm.
(Added then deleted approximately 15 more paragraphs 🤪)
Hello and I look forward to reading more of your missives.
Hello and welcome, Esther!
Hi Mo Perry.
FYI good interview with Vincent Lloyd on his classroom experience. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2EA3LoUbv4
That was good, thank you!
Once again, Mo, you serve a feast of wonderful insights and questions raised and pondered in your writing. I appreciate and applaud your efforts! Genuine dialogue feels lost to me in midst of the five minute news cycle, twitter sized point of view positions all in service to a zero sum game mind set. Have we stopped (or did we ever) truly listen to one another or are we stuck setting up a scoring repartee? Have we lost the wisdom of trying to imagine the journey in another’s moccasins? I’m 75 this year and my plan is to claim my place at the fire to listen, converse, and learn, too. Off now to check out the podcast.
And how ironic that it was all in response to a podcast entitled "Witch trials of..."
It has become a cult. Do not question the orthodoxy or face banishment.
Great article and thoughts, Mo - thank you! And you have come up against the same forces that triggered the exodus of many from the online community you and I met on, which is to me still utterly bizarre, given what that community was meant to be about.
I will try to have a listen to the podcasts, though as a Brit I have already followed JK Rowling's journey on this topic on and off. I have a lot of empathy for her, and though her tweets have indeed been biting, she has been standing up for herself and pushing back with her gift of words and I can't really fault her.
Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts, Helen. It's great to hear from you! Hope you're well and spring is bringing some sweetness and light your way.