Now I suspect some of what I have written so far has already riled up sections of today’s society, who will have taken (or more accurately, imagined) offence in my words, which deserves a short sidebar on its own.
One of the aspects of modern society (and I’m looking particularly at the last twenty years) which disappoints and frustrates me the most is the mixture of self-entitlement, lack of personal responsibility, and lack of facility to debate. One of the worst places for this is, of course, social media, and especially Twitter (Rebranded X no doubt as everyone using it is always cross), and there is a disturbing trend that when a user sees something they don’t like, rather than refute, they make (frequently vicious) personal attacks on someone holding a differing opinion. There is a whole new vocabulary to learn here, of ‘gammons’, ‘terfs’, karens’, ‘snowflakes’, and a barrage of other labels which seem to have been invented purely with the intention of insulting someone. I follow various conversations of relatively innocuous subjects (TV shows, football, music, authors) and increasingly, those barrelling into threads of conversation don’t even try to engage over the subject being raised. One (true recent example) began ‘I can’t wait until the gammons see this and…’, revelling in someone else being upset, insulting them, clearly recognising there is a point of dissention or discussion (or else why mention it) but not caring about that; only about how it might upset people. How is this productive or positive in any way?
My own perspective on life is that you can’t challenge arguments, or sway opinions, or educate, unless you take the effort to first understand what is being said, and why. It is the reason I’m very uneasy about the ‘no platforming’ movement. It just encourages an echo chamber mentality, with no real thought or questioning or other’s views or opinions, and instead encourages a herd-mentality ‘group think’, that whatever is said by someone you respect must be accepted blindly. But this just promotes ignorance. How do you counter an argument if you simply dismiss its premise or pretend it doesn’t exist? The only way to challenge an opinion or viewpoint is to understand what might drive it, and look for the counter viewpoint, the facts which disprove it, or at least make its premise insecure. I’m not saying this will always succeed, but the only way to effect genuine change is to engage. Simple denial of their existence is pointless. A blind following of a movement without questioning it also raises the real possibility that your own standpoint may be based on fallacies as well as truths, unless you think for yourself. If you disagree with anything I write, that’s fine by me, and I’m always willing to learn and be proved wrong, but the dismissal of whole sections of society (‘snowflakes’, ‘Karens’ etc) with insults and aggression isn’t going to change those people, it is only going to strengthen their resolve, and form a harder, more defensive viewpoint. It makes groups even more toxic. On both sides. Often to the extent that the real issues and concerns become secondary to the conflict, making it self-perpetuating. Which makes me sad.
Stay safe
Kit x