Let’s talk about confrontations
Our society is filled with prejudice and stereotypes that affect many of its members daily. It is a fact and it doesn’t take long for anyone to see those prejudice and stereotypes. These hurtful things have most of the time roots deep in the system or in history, which oftentimes make them seem normal or usual. The matter of fact is that they are not, and individuals have the responsibility to get rid of them to have a safe and inclusive society for everyone. Of course, the level of responsibility differs depending on whether individuals have privileges or more capital than others. In the following article, I will try to argue the reasons I think everyone should speak up and confront these injustices, each reason will be specific to a category of individual. The categories will be based on the level of knowledge about the issue of the individual. In the end, I will weigh that approach and suggest further alternatives.
Before starting, it is important to notice that even among affected groups, there are different levels of sensitivity toward prejudices and stereotypes. While some members may see them as degrading things, others may value them as something bringing attention to their way of life, and others may even ignore them, and pretend not to be affected by them daily. With all that nuance, it becomes absurd to blame individuals who accommodate themselves with those prejudices because of the valid reasons that may have led them to that stance. Nonetheless, it is still valuable to point out those prejudices, while acknowledging our positionality that may have influenced our perspectives and while expecting people to open their eyes and maybe work towards some change.
While the following arguments are mostly based on my experience with people who face the same oppression as me, they can also be applied to any human because in the end that is what we all share, humanity. So, I will separate individuals from a group/society where there are injustices in different categories based on their level of knowledge and action towards the injustice.
The first category is that of the brainwashed people. These are the individuals who have fooled themselves in not seeing the injustice they are in, they have developed their interaction, and life around the injustices. In some cases, they even praise their oppressor because of the seemingly positive benefits of the injustices. The main issue with this group is that the individuals don’t realize that they are being burnt little by little and that they even add wood to the fire. Who can blame them? They may have valid reasons, but we need to acknowledge that some are in that position without their will, just because they are not exposed to the appropriate resources (and consciousness). Of course, it may be also a decision some have taken for their survival. Precisely, most people will tell you that it is all about surviving, which is a fact and I would be dumb not to acknowledge the effort these individuals make to just survive even if the system is oppressive and trying to keep them at the bottom.
However, I hold against this group the fact that in their blindness, they may inhibit any social changes, because they have been too “comfortable” in the injustice that anything susceptible to disrupt that “comfort” is fought against. In this case, speaking up to these individuals may be very emotionally draining and sometimes pointless, but its results are significant. Indeed, if the brainwashed people are educated and woken up they can constitute a solid mass of people against the oppressor. This phenomenon has been seen throughout history when oppressed people have decided to rise, how frightening they were towards the oppressors to the extent that this latter had to give up.
The second category comprises those individuals who see the problem and some of its negative consequences on the lives of people, but they consciously turn a blind eye. This is the most difficult group to confront. Indeed, they are often educated people, people with some educational level, or just individuals who have been questioning the inequalities or injustices they experience. Something I may reproach them of is to have decided to follow the system or to trick it in a way that it meets solely their profit. Yes, the individualism these people have is the problem, because they may do good to themselves while knowing they will be harming other members of their society. As these people are attached to their own sake or that of people very close to them, it is difficult to make them change their path because they may see it as a threat to their success/comfort.
Just like the other group, these people will inhibit any social change that may be against the system they profiting from. Even worse, they may try to discourage people who also question injustices by invalidating their questions as just phases, things that they have also passed through. By doing so, they give the postulate that eventually trying to change things is pointless and the only solution is to follow the stream and perpetrate the oppression. Of course, they can have hope and dreams that only when they reach a certain stage they will try to change things, but they fail to realize how the system may be addictive, and even if they later decide to change they will be so detached from the mass of people’s reality that even the so-called “change” they will do will simply be to make them feel good about themselves.
These are the reasons why I said that it is the most difficult group to confront. Sadly most of the people who escaped from being brainwashed fall into this group. If you use a more analytical perspective, we can even argue that there are a lot of historical elements that may have led people to reproduce the injustices they face to that extent. The sell-outs, corrupted politicians, or the so-called “elites” in many places are a parfait example of this. On the other side, if this category of people comes to reason and decides to give up on their ego and comfort, they can be very efficient in the fight against oppression because they have already been serving the system, so they will have a very interesting perspective to give.
The third group is a decisive one because it consists of the individuals who see the injustices and have decided to fight against the system. Of course, they do so in many ways, just like the problem is complex. Their boldness and courage are very impressive and they don’t hesitate when needed to confront the oppressor. While they may seem the ultimate stage oppressed people can reach before being truly free, they do carry some flaws. Indeed, it can be difficult to reason or correct them because they may become defensive, failing to see the person confronting them as having the same goal as them. Similarly, giving or presenting different approaches or perspectives to them may be difficult because they are so attached to their convictions that they don’t realize the power of intersectionality in analyzing social issues.
From a personal opinion, I think individuals usually reach this stage when they start thinking beyond their system, when they start thinking beyond the propaganda and start promoting different perspectives as valid. That is why this is still a very powerful group and if they are open-minded enough confronting them may turn into an empowering experience for them and others, because their desire to change will bring them to give very nuanced points, and the confrontation may also show them that they are not alone.
Sadly one of the tricks the oppressors and the second category of people may use as argument is to make the person who decides to go against them is that this person is alone. This feeling of loneliness which springs from some individualistic ideologies can be discouraging and destructive because it gives the ultimate solution to join the majority (i.e. oppressors and sell-outs). So if the individuals from this third group have succeeded in liberating themselves from the individualistic way of thinking and associate themselves with the mass of people, talking with them or confronting them may be very productive. They also have a very difficult task to avoid falling into the trap of the second group if they get discouraged or distance themselves from the mass of people they identify with, especially if they get charmed by the luxury of the oppressors.
The last group is that of the oppressors. These are the people who primarily benefit from the injustices or the oppression, they are oftentimes at the origin of those injustices. They use many tools such as religious ideologies, fallacies, trickery, science, or even the so-called “common sense” to perpetrate their oppressive position. I have to acknowledge, just like for the other group, that it is not a homogeneous mass, there is diversity in it and in the way people either benefit from the system or support it. In this group, the most dangerous parties are those who deny their position and privileges, those who disregard their impact, and those who are openly oppressive. Indeed individuals denying or failing to recognize that they hold a privileged position and that they are oppressing others will always be very defensive and feel personally attacked when confronted. They are also the first people to blame the oppressed and pretend not to have any responsibilities. Confronting these people can go in many ways and be very draining for the person who is confronting them.
Those who are openly oppressive are dangerous because they are conscious and clearly know the consequences of their acts, but still do them. Trying to reason with these people can be very pointless and a total waste of time, what is efficient is to challenge them and to tell them the truth right in the face. Sadly, these are the people with whom we have to make compromises.
The other challenge of confronting people from the oppressors or privileged groups is to do with being afraid to hurt or disappoint the “good and honest” oppressors or those who are “helping” us. This can lead people from the third group to deem their words, to accommodate the truth to the oppressor, and to try to not be too subversive. This is a trick, truth is only truth when it is given as it is and should be. I mean, from a personal opinion again, if the oppressors feel attacked, they have to question their positionality, and oppressed people should never feel uncomfortable saying why they are uncomfortable. I am even tempted to say that it is for the good of the whole society to make uncomfortable these same individuals who profit from others, on the one hand, and pretend to be saviors or “good and honest” oppressors on the other.
Now that I have given these different categories to confront and their particularities, one question remains. Who is the one confronting?
I think every member of the society who truly has the good of the society at heart and is humane/human enough can do that. It would be dangerous to talk about responsibility, because in the first place, everyone has the responsibility to educate themselves, and no one should feel obliged to educate others. Theoretically, yeah, and in practice it is up to everyone to confront others. This group of confronters have also some flaws and needs to be careful of some dangers. There is no competition of who is the most confronting and when the person who confronts comes to lose sight of the good of all the community/society, they have a problem. They may feel like gatekeepers, but that is why I am insisting on not leaving all the responsibility of educating others to the confronters. They are in the end members of society too, they may be part of any of the mentioned groups, but they have their own biases and perspectives. Of course, the pressure will always be there, fuelled by different sides, but just like for the third category people, going beyond the individualistic way of think can be empowering and more impactful.
Of course, in reality, things are more complex and some individuals may have the characteristics of more than one group. This is connected to the fact that any individual has a complex and fluid identity, I would even say identities. Using an intersectional approach consists also of recognizing that one may be privileged in one area and not in the other, sometimes it can be a conjugated oppression, and so on. With all of that, the more we educate ourselves and understand our true selves and the system, we will get a broader perspective of our actions and role in society. That comes with acknowledging our biases and preconceived ideas, as well as things that may have shaped the way we think, act, and are. Then we will be more open-minded to grasp different parts of the truth and have a more nuanced perception of the world.
I will conclude by saying something a great friend of mine has told me: we are all agents in our lives. While we acknowledge how much our society shapes the way we behave and interact, we have to acknowledge the power we hold in our lives. That agency can of course be shrunk or reduced depending on our surroundings, but it will always be there. We have to empower each other and value each other’s power, not to blame or invalidate each other, but to grow empathy and humanness in us and everyone around us. Only then, we will live in harmony and peace with everyone.
