Edit: Despite the work I put into wording this just so, it seems I didn't illustrate my purpose well enough, and I managed to offend someone very dear to me. Quite simply, this blog post aims to do the following:
- Assist fellow activists/conversation starters.
- Assist non-activist individuals trapped in the dramatic whirlwind of these conversations.
- Encourage all parties to recognize that their perspective, while important, may not embody the full "story." It's important to consider the other party's perspective, as well.
- Inform readers that very rarely does a personal anecdote amount to an effective argument. That does not make the anecdote unimportant. Anecdotes are necessary to share a perspective, and we should feel privileged to be given a glimpse into the other party's life. Generally speaking, however, anecdotes do not negate the argument of the other party (there are always exceptions, of course.)
I hope this clears up a few things. On to the post.
When voicing my opinion or sharing information regarding the state of the economy, medicine, industry, education, civil rights, workers' rights, or other present situation worthy of attention, I am met with many different reactions: some are very positive, some are inquisitive, some are disinterested and neutral, and some are flat out spiteful. Throughout this range (and inclusive of other reactions not listed because there are honestly too many to pinpoint each), there are two kinds of arguments I come upon more frequently than others, and they both involve an individual using their own experiences as proof that nothing is actually wrong. It should be said that these are broad generalizations based on my own experience, along with what I have read/heard/witnessed for many others. These two arguments can be very similar, and it may not be obvious why I have separated them in the first place. There tends to be a difference in the two viewpoints, however:
- The I've spent my entire life struggling and you don't hear me complaining argument, and
- The I've worked hard and made ends meet, so people need to take responsibility argument.
Person #1 is often quite angry. He/she has indeed worked incredibly hard under inhumane conditions. Perhaps they served in the military and experienced life-altering situations, or worked two or three jobs while fitting as many college classes in as possible. Perhaps they have children, as well. Perhaps their families were a great drain on them emotionally, financially, and opportunistically. Or, perhaps all of these apply to this person. Person #1 is upset that they had to deal with so much in order to maintain some livable situation, and other people aren't as willing to do so.
Person #1 fails to realize that people fighting for fair wages, fair hours, fair and cheaper school opportunities, and all the rest, do not think for a moment that Person #1 does not deserve everything they have. Quite the opposite, in fact. Person #1 deserves a great deal more. In our modern society, with money and food and resources aplenty, no one should have to deal with all of those things just to survive. If you have, I have a great respect for you and am so sorry that life has been so difficult. Your government should provide far more opportunities for you. I fight the idea that I should have to juggle a debt-bloated college education, varying part time jobs with no benefits and minimum wage income, and a system consistently standing up for the demands of Big Business while stepping all over the workers who allow business to function at all. Yes, people do it. That doesn't make it okay. That's the whole point, really. Do we really want our children and grandchildren to have to use these personal anecdotes as the measurement of their worth and success? Aren't we supposed to want better for future generations? Isn't that the point--to be constantly bettering ourselves and our society?
Person #2 is more apt to assume that the people who can't "make it work" simply aren't doing it right, and/or they're trying to milk the system while avoiding responsibility/hard work. (Person 1 and 2 may overlap on this subject, but I have separated them for this writing.) These individuals also use their personal anecdotes to show how success (however you define it) is possible.
Person #2 also deserves everything he/she has drawn together for him/herself. This is where the anecdotes serve another purpose, however: just because you did it, doesn't mean everyone else can, too. My fiance recently worded it pretty nicely when she said, "For every one person who makes the system work for themselves, there's a dozen people who abuse rather than trying, and hundreds more who simply cannot, for one reason or another." This isn't about the people who did it vs. the people who can't. It's about the system which makes it so difficult for so many who simply are in wholly different situations and therefore do not have the same opportunities.
Many of these individuals want nothing more than to grab that full time job and start putting away to Social Security. They want to take out a loan for a new car and build credit. They want to go to school and better themselves and their employability. But for whatever reason, they are unable to get that full time job, or they can't afford payments on a new car, or their credit won't allow for the purchase to be realistic for them in the first place, or their schedule and dismal future don't place a college education within their reach. Maybe they made a few mistakes. Still, they deserve the chance to make a decent living and get a decent education. After all, a mistake from which we've learned shouldn't wreck the rest of our lives; and the more educated we all are, the better society would be. Or maybe they've spent their entire lives in a poor situation with very poor opportunities. It's easy to forget that every little detail about our childhood leads up to the place we are in today, and not only do many people grow up in low-wage households, but many children grow up in abusive, oppressive households. These individuals are not doomed to fail, but are far more likely to.
If you find yourself in an argument regarding these issues, regardless of the side you're on, please stop and consider these things. Nothing is ever as simple as it seems, and it is very easy to condemn a person while knowing nothing about them or what brought them to the current stage of their life. Just because Person #1 has had to fight so hard, doesn't mean he/she should have been forced to. Just because Person #2 was able to make it work, doesn't mean it's a possibility for everyone else. Just because Person #1 or #2 is arguing that you're not working hard enough, that doesn't mean he/she deserves to be disrespected. Just because you can't make it work, doesn't mean it's unworkable. We live our lives and so are limited to our immediate perspectives, but there's always more.
Personally, I have to make sure I choose my wording a little more carefully to avoid excluding or stepping on some folks/groups. For example, I should point out that anecdotes are not useless. However, an individual's personal anecdote often does not form a complete argument. It may have a good point, but that doesn't make it a complete argument. A single anecdote is only useful to that single set of circumstances--its logic often cannot be applied to other situations. (This is not all-inclusive, of course. There are always exceptions to everything.) Huge groups of anecdotes start to form a visible trend, and statistics can be very useful.
What I encourage people to avoid is, "Here is the problem, and here is what I did for that problem. Therefore my solution also works for you, and if it doesn't work, you're doing it wrong/you don't want it enough/you don't deserve it."
Edit: Which also means to avoid, "It's impossible to make anything work, why even try?"
Both of those are incorrect assumptions. They exclude both people and opportunities, and they limit the individual.
No comments:
Post a Comment