All ideas and divisions seem to stem from an “Us vs. Them” Conflict, so that’s what I’d like to talk about in my post.
I believe that Action Logic is a good way to begin to address a separation between two groups. I believe that speaking and arguing verbally can sometimes be easily convoluted, drowned out, or simply ignored, but actions are hard to ignore. But when one group makes a clear action towards another, it is unavoidable. As the saying goes, “Actions speak louder than words.”
I also strongly believe that Pedagogy of the Oppressed can be one of the most, if not the most effective way of bridging gaps between groups. If we can change the structure of learning, to a structure of Problem-Posing education, where both sides can become able to dialogue with one another as a way to solve problems, and look at all sides of an issue as part of an unavoidable interrelation. At this current moment in time, all of the world’s problems seem to be so divided into Us vs. Them situations, that no one is able to listen to the other. I often times find myself so deeply rooted on one side of an issue, that it is difficult for me to see the other side. But how are we supposed to ever accomplish anything if we are constantly thinking “Us vs. Them?” In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, this distinction has the possibility to disappear. Instead of attempting to force all sides to conform to one specific idea, forcing those who are marginalized to conform to an oppressive structure, the floor can be opened to include all opinions, seeking to transform society as a whole. If this type of teaching could be introduced in schools, starting at a young age, I believe that when those children grew up, they would be more willing to work together to solve world problems, rather than fighting.
If one side is incapable or entirely unwilling to listen to another, believe in Strategic non-violence and Trekking both as very effective ways to affect change, especially when combined. If you look at history, the movements which were really able to persevere were those ones of endurance, ones which the protesters stood together unmoving in solidarity. Short protests are effective in expressing a sentiment, but it is the long ones where the people come together, expressing a shared dedication to a cause and knowledge of the possible losses, but are still willing to give up whatever it takes to accomplish that goal. Non-violence also works better, because it gives more time for the issue to be heard. If violence immediately occurs, then it is easy for institutions to instantly shut down any resistance with greater violence. But if there is no violence, there is no way that a government can immediately react in a violent way. They have to wait, and assess the situation, and in this way, change can be spread.
I believe that all the points I mentioned in this post can actually tie together, and work off of one another. There is never only one answer to a problem, and not every problem can be attacked from one angle, so we must have open minds when searching for solutions, but I do believe that all of these tactics can be used in some way or another, to tackle any problem.
Comments
Post a Comment