In mid August, shortly before my
computer collapsed for an unknown reason, I tried to begin a series
of articles about Twitter
and its outrage. It wasn't particularly well written,
because it lacked a clear thesis, but I intend to add a few final
thoughts in this Thursday's supplement, before the thought is retired
entirely.
Over seventy years ago, Gandhi used the
power of guilt in his quest to free India from the rule of the United
Kingdom. Over fifty years ago, Martin Luther King Jr's movement
achieved partial victories in the signing of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 and the Voting Rights Act. He succeeded because he was able to
shame people capable of making the changes he wanted.
Unfortunately today, hordes of citizens
shame others without a second thought, but they aren't Malcolm X
standing up to the police, even if they want to frame their story
that way. White
people harassing African Americans for engaging in everyday
activities is a serious issue, but shaming the harassers, through
videos or comment on Twitter, isn't like refusing to give up a seat
on the bus. There is no effort to effect societal change in these
scenarios, nor desire to alter the offending individual's behavior. For the individual being unjustly accosted, who chooses to record the altercation, there is obviously a need for self defense, for procuring evidence to defend oneself.
But for the individual sitting at their computer, there is nothing, except a righteous anger welling up inside the
breast of the woman or man who can type out a few words and then
search for another hit. Another click, another repartee, another burst of
angry satisfaction. On social media, everyone believes they are the combination of Dan Rather and Jon Stewart: fact and cleverness in
every soundbite. It's a search for likes, for popularity and
prestige. But more often then not, Twitter users are punishing those
who have only the most limited societal power themselves.
On the other end of the spectrum are
the celebrities and powerful people who made incredibly crude or
inflammatory statements online. Again, shaming these people doesn't
have the effect one would hope for. Those whose words sink most into
the sludge, are often the least capable of suffering guilt, and least
likely to seek amends.
Our nation can't seek to shame everyone
who commits an unworthy act, and the average citizen doesn't deserve
to have the cops called on them for no reason, but nor does the
caller deserve the notoriety of the internet and its eternal memory.
Shame must be used for a societal
purpose, and therefore the only just targets of guilt are those who
wield power. The politician who lies, sexually assaults women,
defrauds the public, aids corporations at the cost of the citizens,
withdraws food from the mouths of children and the poor, foments
hate, murders innocents, jails reporters, and aids the malicious.
These are the targets, and it doesn't have to be limited to only the
highest office in the land, but any public servant.
Recent:
Relevant:
Comments
Post a Comment