Our Constitution and Bill of Rights guarantee our freedom of expression, recognizing that words, and the opportunity for conversation, dialogue and debate, are among our most important civil functions.
May we all reconsider how we use our right of expression, that the power of the tongue might be used constructively and in respect of the worth and humanity of every individual that we encounter.
Eleanor Roosevelt holds the International Declaration of Human Rights
Political discourse has become problematic in today's conversation due to the divergence of political persuasions into warring camps, each with their representatives, their media outlets, and seemingly their own language, talking points, and buzz words, offered in support of the favored ideological principles.
Therefore, we may pay less attention to what is being said than we do to who is saying it and whose side they are on. Having figured out whose "side" the speaker is on, the actual words may pass right by unheard, and any critical thinking, rational dialogue, or even constructive civil discourse is lost in the fog of taking sides. We defend anything that is said by "our side," and anything from the other guys is taken as just a "political attack" or "fake news." After all, if our side gives up an inch of our turf, the whole country could collapse right before our eyes, so it would seem.
But in the midst of this supercharged and conflict laden political context, we need to remember that words matter. Our language matters. The way we speak to others and speak about others matters. It is not only freedom of speech that we value, but we affirm the worth of the individual, we value equality, and we value opportunity for all in pursuit of goodness, health and happiness for themselves and their families.
As such, we must take seriously when words are spoken that demean, belittle, or attack others. From a perspective of faith, there is an added element of compassion and good will that should infuse our conversation toward and about our fellow humans. The presence of malice in our conversation should be a sign that something is not right.
Words that target an individual, community, ethnic group or country hold special significance. In good faith dialogue, we can either accept or abdicate the special responsibility that goes with this type of language. Leaders bear a special responsibility to demonstrate discourse that is constructive and free of racial overtones of malice.
Some language is overtly racist. There are words, phrases and symbols from our racist past that should not be used. "Go back to where you came from" is an example of an overtly racist phrase. It is reserved for individuals of another color, ethnicity, or country. An awareness of our history of racism make this evident to the responsible speaker. A white person cannot direct the phrase toward a brown person without sending a clear racist message. It does not help to explain "why" a person tells another to go back. There is no subtlety here, it is recognizably racist. If you have constructive point to make, engage the argument; don't attack the person.
In our political discourse, particularly since the sixties, words and expressions have emerged for the purpose of conveying a racist message in a covert manner. These are referred to as "dog whistles." (Note 1) In any use of dog whistle rhetoric, there is a plain meaning of the word or phrase which is uncontroversial, but in the partisan political context, subtle messages are sent. A flag, displayed in certain contexts, can be a dog whistle. References to the good old days or an idyllic past era fail to take into account that the past for many was a time of oppression, violence, and suffering. (Note 2) These expressions send one message to those who enjoyed their favored status in the good old days and a different message to those who suffered, thus, in many contexts these references function as dog whistles. Repeated reference to the criminal element of immigrants, aliens, or the inner cities can be a dog whistle. Referring to immigration as infiltration, excessive reference to law and order, reference to hidden conspiracies in the financial sector to control the economy, claims to ignorance about the known characteristics of racist groups or individuals, reluctance to condemn overtly racist behaviors - all of these uses of language can be subtle rhetorical tools to send an ethnically targeted message.
Other commentators have more capably and thoroughly described overt as well as hidden racism. But here I wish to call attention to an alarming phenomenon, gaining momentum at this time, which is the outcome of the combination of racist rhetoric from leaders and a racially flavored populism. This damaging phenomenon is gaining strength in the form of a positive feedback loop in which the populace is energized and emboldened to engage in formerly disapproved racist language and behavior, while some in power take the populist surge as support and justification for their own racist rhetoric.
A positive feedback loop is a cycle that feeds off of itself, a circular relationship in which two or more parts gain strength by taking as a source the energy of the counterpart, making both stronger. In this case, racist rhetoric spoken by leaders strengthens racist behavior in the populace, which in turn motivates and justifies more racist language from leaders.
A key component in this feedback loop is President Trump's tendency to find absolute justification in his racist rhetoric in the fact that many people agree with him. Trump, it appears, may be less guided in this practice by internal values, and more by his love of approval, the applause of the crowd. When criticized for his racist comments, his defense is, "I'm not a racist because a lot of people agree with me." He expresses personal attacks on individuals, groups, cities and countries, and the crowd roars and chants. Rather than retraction or correction, he continues with newly developed personal attacks in the next rally or the next round of tweets. Meanwhile, individual citizens are emboldened to shout at others in the grocery store or the restaurant, "Why don't you go back to where you came from?"
May we all reconsider how we use our right of expression, that the power of the tongue might be used constructively and in respect of the worth and humanity of every individual that we encounter.
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." Edmund Burke
Notes:
(1) The book Dog Whistle Politics, by Ian Haney López describes present day use of dog whistle rhetoric in support of a particular political strategy. Quoting from the book jacket ... "(Haney) offers a sweeping account of how politicians and plutocrats deploy veiled racial appeals to persuade white voters to support policies that favor the extremely rich yet threaten their own interests. Dog whistle appeals generate middle-class enthusiasm for political candidates who promise to crack down on crime, curb undocumented immigration, and protect the heartland against Islamic infiltration, but ultimately vote to slash taxes for the rich, give corporations regulatory control over industry and financial markets, and aggressively curtail social services. White voters, convinced by powerful interests that minorities are their true enemies, fail to see the connection between the political agendas they support and the surging wealth inequality that takes an increasing toll on their lives. The tactic continues at full force, with the Republican Party using racial provocations to drum up enthusiasm for weakening unions and public pensions, de-funding public schools, and opposing health care reform."
(2) Not to suggest that race based oppression, violence and suffering are a thing of the past.
#######################
I offer an article below from the Washington National Cathedral because of its relevance to this topic above.
NOTE: What follows is a verbatim reproduction of an article published at the website below by the Washington National Cathedral. The author of this blog TommyYork.blogspot.com has no authorial or editorial relationship to the content.
https://cathedral.org/have-we-no-decency-a-response-to-president-trump.html?fbclid=IwAR1CFPxbPdqVyC121_0LQWBY2JMBrxlO17CzwNgjIpRDYogXelwfje0Zgps
HAVE WE NO DECENCY? A RESPONSE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP
July 30, 2019
The escalation of racialized rhetoric from the President of the United States has evoked responses from all sides of the political spectrum. On one side, African American leaders have led the way in rightfully expressing outrage. On the other, those aligned with the President seek to downplay the racial overtones of his attacks, or remain silent.
As faith leaders who serve at Washington National Cathedral ¬– the sacred space where America gathers at moments of national significance – we feel compelled to ask: After two years of President Trump’s words and actions, when will Americans have enough?
As Americans, we have had such moments before, and as a people we have acted. Events of the last week call to mind a similarly dark period in our history:
“Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. … You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?”
That was U.S. Army attorney Joseph Welch on June 9, 1954, when he confronted Senator Joseph McCarthy before a live television audience, effectively ending McCarthy’s notorious hold on the nation. Until then, under the guise of ridding the country of Communist infiltration, McCarthy had free rein to say and do whatever he wished. With unbridled speech, he stoked the fears of an anxious nation with lies; destroyed the careers of countless Americans; and bullied into submissive silence anyone who dared criticize him.
In retrospect, it’s clear that Welch’s question was directed less toward McCarthy and more to the nation as a whole. Had Americans had enough? Where was our sense of decency?
We have come to accept a level of insult and abuse in political discourse that violates each person’s sacred identity as a child of God. We have come to accept as normal a steady stream of language and accusations coming from the highest office in the land that plays to racist elements in society.
This week, President Trump crossed another threshold. Not only did he insult a leader in the fight for racial justice and equality for all persons; not only did he savage the nations from which immigrants to this country have come; but now he has condemned the residents of an entire American city. Where will he go from here?
Make no mistake about it, words matter. And, Mr. Trump’s words are dangerous.
These words are more than a “dog-whistle.” When such violent dehumanizing words come from the President of the United States, they are a clarion call, and give cover, to white supremacists who consider people of color a sub-human “infestation” in America. They serve as a call to action from those people to keep America great by ridding it of such infestation. Violent words lead to violent actions.
When does silence become complicity? What will it take for us all to say, with one voice, that we have had enough? The question is less about the president’s sense of decency, but of ours.
As leaders of faith who believe in the sacredness of every single human being, the time for silence is over. We must boldly stand witness against the bigotry, hatred, intolerance, and xenophobia that is hurled at us, especially when it comes from the highest offices of this nation. We must say that this will not be tolerated. To stay silent in the face of such rhetoric is for us to tacitly condone the violence of these words. We are compelled to take every opportunity to oppose the indecency and dehumanization that is racism, whether it comes to us through words or actions.
There is another moment in our history worth recalling. On January 21, 2017, Washington National Cathedral hosted an interfaith national prayer service, a sacred tradition to honor the peaceful transfer of political power. We prayed for the President and his young Administration to have “wisdom and grace in the exercise of their duties that they may serve all people of this nation, and promote the dignity and freedom of every person.”
That remains our prayer today for us all.
The Right Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington
The Very Rev. Randolph Marshall Hollerith, Dean of Washington National Cathedral
The Rev. Canon Kelly Brown Douglas, Canon Theologian of Washington National Cathedral
About Washington National Cathedral
Grounded in the reconciling love of Jesus Christ, Washington National Cathedral is a house of prayer for all people, conceived by our founders to serve as a great church for national purposes. Learn more at www.cathedral.org
The above is a verbatim reproduction of an article published at the website below by the Washington National Cathedral. The author of this blog TommyYork.blogspot.com has no authorial or editorial relationship to the content.