Why Don’t They Understand?
Photo by Anne Nygård on Unsplash
I watch the video of the death of George Flynn, and I am sick.
The president of the United States orders a park to be forcibly cleared of peaceful protesters exercising unambiguous Constitutional rights, all for a photo opportunity in front of a church, and I am outraged.
I see images of police officers, all in black and wearing riot gear, throwing flash-bombs and spraying tear gas at crowds, arresting and beating journalists, and I mourn.
I read the personal stories of African-Americans profiled, detained, and beaten by those sworn to protect and serve, all on the basis of the color of their skin, and I am disgusted.
Yet, I know that others just don’t see it that way.
Some religious leaders applaud the president for his appearance before St. John’s Church. Fox News headlines focus on looting and chaos, with demands to bring order, while providing little coverage of the underlying causes of the protests. And one person I know who was in business for many years wonders if perhaps there are some effective tax incentives that could help the situation.
How can people look at the same events, yet see them so very differently?
To a hammer, every problem is a nail. If you have a deeply personal frame of reference, all you see is seen through, and distorted by, that frame.
Some religious leaders who decry homosexuality and abortion and want their values incorporated into public law are pleased by the appearance of a president holding a Bible in front of a church, asserting his intention to bring order and stop protests. They see him as strong, as capable of imposing the changes they wish to see on society. Whether or not he opens that Bible, worships in a church, or lives a life based on religious principles, is beside the point.
It goes without saying that these leaders would see things differently if the president was Muslim, and called for the incorporation of Islamic principles into American law.
To some of those largely unaffected by discrimination, protests and acts of violence are seen as threats to the civil order that protects their lives and property. Anything that jeopardizes that order is frightening, and must be subordinated. Particularly if one is white, it is easy to dismiss the complaints of people of color.
Yet a month ago, some of the same people were supporting protests against state public health orders by mostly white crowds, including individuals carrying semi-automatic weapons and wearing plate carriers, as patriotic exercises of First Amendment rights. The difference? The shelter-at-home orders affected them; racial discrimination does not.
To those who support a generally Republican economic agenda, the demonstrations threaten to change the public narrative, damaging prospects for further tax cuts and deregulation, and risking the imposition of new laws. For them, the quelling of the protests becomes paramount, to protect what is thought to be a greater, and largely economic, good. If policy change is considered, it returns mainly to thoughts of trickle-down economics and faith that a rising tide lifts all boats.
The belief in the power of free enterprise to solve all problems is a privilege that can be held only by those who do not face the institutional, structural, and systemic impediments to progress that confront many minority and underinvested communities. It simply ignores the reality of life as a member of those groups.
The tendency to see all issues through one’s favored lens is powerful. But it distorts reality, focusing attention on one’s own concerns, while obscuring the perspectives of others. And let there be no doubt: our nation has been constructed largely from the shared frames of reference of a privileged portion of its population. This perspective has come by many to be thought of as an objective truth, undistorted, when such is not in fact the case. Recognizing that this frame may be distorted does not imply subjectivity, or the absence of an objective truth. Truth does exist, but it is the height of arrogance to assume that it can be found solely though the perspective of one group. Throughout American history, the frames of reference of those who are without power, marginal, or different have been substantially ignored. Our laws, our institutions, and our economy reflect the flaws that have arisen from accepting only one perspective.
It is comfortable to ignore the distortion inherent in our own frame of reference. It is easy to build an understanding of the world that reflects only our frame, that dismisses anything that fails to fit within the constructs we create.
But it is nonetheless a distortion. One we ignore at our own peril. After the rioting is quelled and the protesters go home, the underlying causes will remain. It will only be a matter of time before another spark is struck. In the meantime, the institutions of America – the wall between government and religion, the principles of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the right to assemble, limitations on the role of the military in society – will have been irrevocably damaged.
Is every problem a nail to you? If so, perhaps trying to see through another’s eyes, to understand (and not just dismiss) their frame, would be a good place to start.