Creating the other
Along with much of the rest of the world, my thoughts and emotions have been consumed with those in many parts of the world fleeing violence. Because I am a United States citizen I am particularly concerned with those attempting to enter this country, primarily those arriving at the border separating this country from that of Mexico. The refugees arriving there from various South American countries either find their way to the official entry gates or some other part of the border. If they find their way to the official entry gates their chances of being granted political asylum are very slim whether they are feeling “just” a violent home situation a violent country. In either case they have not found a safe way to remain in their country of birth and have now traveled up to thousands of miles for the slim chance of finding safe sanctuary, a job and a chance to raise their family. If fleeing “just” a violent home representatives of our government have determined that one is not eligible to be apply for asylum even if there was no protection for them in their home country.
All those not finding their way to “official gates” are now labeled as criminals and will be prosecuted under the policy of zero tolerance. Even most of those arriving at official gates will be labeled as illegals, undesirables, or those who are not be eligible for political asylum. In other words they all are labeled “the other”.
We humans have a long history of creating the others. From the time we are very young we are taught – directly and indirectly – labels for distinguishing ourselves from “the others” or for accepting the label as “the other”. Race, gender, age, sexual orientation, religion, culture, physical ability, illness, size and many other social constructs are used to create the others. There are also descriptive words such as evil, criminal, bad, ugly, unmotivated and a host of others to assign one to “the other”.
At one time, I had been accepted to study with the noted philosopher, teacher, refugee, and holocaust survivor Hannah Arendt at New School in New York City. Life circumstances resulted in not being able to do so.
Lyndsey Stonebridge , professor of modern literature and history at the University of East Anglia in Norfolk England has studied the works of Hannah Arendt and has written The Judicial Imagination: Writing after Nuremberg. A year ago the podcast On Being featured a conversation between the host Krista Tippett and Ms. Stonebridge. This podcast was repeated this week. The discussion is entitled “The Moral World in Dark Times: Hannah Arendt For Now. I encourage the reader of this blog to listen to or read the transcript of this conversation.
Ms. Tippett and Ms. Stonebridge talk about how we isolate ourselves from ourselves and from each other. That isolation is a significant factor in creating the conditions for organizing what the the psychoanalyst Melanie Klein called evil. She asked “Where does evil come from?” and Hannah Arendt asked, “How is evil organized?” (I am choosing to accept the word evil in this context although it is not a term I find helpful.)
The conversation then proceeds to the topic of isolation and then to Hannah Arendt’s discussion of what we normally call empathy. Ms. Arendt says that beyond pity and empathy is the willingness “to imagine ourselves in the place of another.” It is one thing for me to say that I can put myself in the position of the refugee who has traveled for thousands of miles and is now separated from one’s children and labeled a criminal. It is quite another to take a step to reach deep within myself to find that painful place which allows me to cast myself in the role of the refugee. Actors that I know who are very effective in communicating the essence of a particular character reach deep within themselves to what is often a painful place until they live the experience of the character they are portraying. Mrs. Stonebridge suggests that Hannah Arendt who was herself a refugee for 18 years – the other for 18 years – states that the one “who is doing the pitying or empathizing keeps the power.” (Ms. Arendt discusses this in her book On Revolution).
If I am unwilling to experience the discomfort of imaging myself in in the place of those I might label “the other” I will continue to play an active role in creating the other. In so doing I will isolate not only “the other” but myself as well. I then become “the other” to “the other”. As long as we have “the other” there is no possibility of preventing or stopping the creation of conditions for the Holocaust or other horrific acts of destruction which, in the long run, is self destruction. We cannot create “the other” without denying and destroying a part of ourselves.
Written June 22, 2018
Along with much of the rest of the world, my thoughts and emotions have been consumed with those in many parts of the world fleeing violence. Because I am a United States citizen I am particularly concerned with those attempting to enter this country, primarily those arriving at the border separating this country from that of Mexico. The refugees arriving there from various South American countries either find their way to the official entry gates or some other part of the border. If they find their way to the official entry gates their chances of being granted political asylum are very slim whether they are feeling “just” a violent home situation a violent country. In either case they have not found a safe way to remain in their country of birth and have now traveled up to thousands of miles for the slim chance of finding safe sanctuary, a job and a chance to raise their family. If fleeing “just” a violent home representatives of our government have determined that one is not eligible to be apply for asylum even if there was no protection for them in their home country.
All those not finding their way to “official gates” are now labeled as criminals and will be prosecuted under the policy of zero tolerance. Even most of those arriving at official gates will be labeled as illegals, undesirables, or those who are not be eligible for political asylum. In other words they all are labeled “the other”.
We humans have a long history of creating the others. From the time we are very young we are taught – directly and indirectly – labels for distinguishing ourselves from “the others” or for accepting the label as “the other”. Race, gender, age, sexual orientation, religion, culture, physical ability, illness, size and many other social constructs are used to create the others. There are also descriptive words such as evil, criminal, bad, ugly, unmotivated and a host of others to assign one to “the other”.
At one time, I had been accepted to study with the noted philosopher, teacher, refugee, and holocaust survivor Hannah Arendt at New School in New York City. Life circumstances resulted in not being able to do so.
Lyndsey Stonebridge , professor of modern literature and history at the University of East Anglia in Norfolk England has studied the works of Hannah Arendt and has written The Judicial Imagination: Writing after Nuremberg. A year ago the podcast On Being featured a conversation between the host Krista Tippett and Ms. Stonebridge. This podcast was repeated this week. The discussion is entitled “The Moral World in Dark Times: Hannah Arendt For Now. I encourage the reader of this blog to listen to or read the transcript of this conversation.
Ms. Tippett and Ms. Stonebridge talk about how we isolate ourselves from ourselves and from each other. That isolation is a significant factor in creating the conditions for organizing what the the psychoanalyst Melanie Klein called evil. She asked “Where does evil come from?” and Hannah Arendt asked, “How is evil organized?” (I am choosing to accept the word evil in this context although it is not a term I find helpful.)
The conversation then proceeds to the topic of isolation and then to Hannah Arendt’s discussion of what we normally call empathy. Ms. Arendt says that beyond pity and empathy is the willingness “to imagine ourselves in the place of another.” It is one thing for me to say that I can put myself in the position of the refugee who has traveled for thousands of miles and is now separated from one’s children and labeled a criminal. It is quite another to take a step to reach deep within myself to find that painful place which allows me to cast myself in the role of the refugee. Actors that I know who are very effective in communicating the essence of a particular character reach deep within themselves to what is often a painful place until they live the experience of the character they are portraying. Mrs. Stonebridge suggests that Hannah Arendt who was herself a refugee for 18 years – the other for 18 years – states that the one “who is doing the pitying or empathizing keeps the power.” (Ms. Arendt discusses this in her book On Revolution).
If I am unwilling to experience the discomfort of imaging myself in in the place of those I might label “the other” I will continue to play an active role in creating the other. In so doing I will isolate not only “the other” but myself as well. I then become “the other” to “the other”. As long as we have “the other” there is no possibility of preventing or stopping the creation of conditions for the Holocaust or other horrific acts of destruction which, in the long run, is self destruction. We cannot create “the other” without denying and destroying a part of ourselves.
Written June 22, 2018
RSS Feed