Trespasses - Quareness Series 206th "Lecture".
It seems obvious that consent is at the core of the difference between for example visiting and trespassing or commerce and theft or sex and rape. Indeed it seems that the notion of consent is self-evidently essential for civilised societal foundations. It's hardly surprising then that when large aspects of society and identity become coercive, many people start to become uneasy as attitudes and actions cross that red line from voluntary into non-consensual.
There's nothing inherently wrong with holding mirrors up to the world (whether to enlighten or enrage) although such practices can go too far. Art, for example, often involves "sidling up to the line" on issues of importance as we navigate the byways and bumps upon which societies travel. However, sometimes this "pushing it" becomes oppressive and prone to tipping over into authoritarian politics. As in the relatively recent past, radical and unusual identity may be fine and pushing boundaries may be fine but recognising the difference between such and deranged authoritarianism is everything.
The "new kid on the block" these days is the coercion...the lack of consent or agency. It ain't difficult today to turn that which could be great into something awful and autocratic by making it involuntary. Such distinctions matter...personal expression is not personal demand, "check me out" is not "obey and validate me"...the difference between conversation and ultimatum, between consent and coercion. How did identity move from being a source and expression of self to a grievance and a basis for demands? How has so much of our artistic vanguard morphed from being interesting and explorative into something demanding and oppressive? It can seem like we're no longer being invited on journeys but rather being frog-marched into less than inviting mores.
An earlier relatively wider degree of tolerance and acceptance now appears to being increasingly replaced with a somewhat all-encompassing culture war making painful the joy of difference and exploration...that's what authoritarian politics does. The tendency towards acceptance is being converted into resentment...that's what coercion does. The societal "we" is being shattered into multiple "us" and "them" factions competing for autocratic control...that's how totalitarian thinking always goes. Culture is becoming a matter of struggle and difference a source of strife instead of a source of perspective.
Identities are not the problem here. Those who are a different race or gender, etc. are not the problem. It's rather the people who presume to tell us who we must be and what we must bow to who are. Giving way to the ideologues, coercers and faux moralisers (those thieves of joy and perspective) can only lead to dissolution, resentment and domination by the seriously damaged. For sure this temptation/tendency towards politicalising everything and robbing it of joy and connection needs to be overcome, for in the final analysis reclaiming our culture of tolerance and difference is paramount...given that no laws or leaders can save a civilisation lacking basic ethics and civility.
Could it be that humans need a certain amount of struggle (possibly a necessary feature of evolution) and when they lack it, they may stir things up? Looking around it does appear that we tend to be drawn to some degree of struggle as our "easy lives" grow devoid of worthwhile challenge or accomplishment or meaning. Perhaps no longer having "to do stuff" gives rise to depression and "activism" (i.e. doing something) provides us with community and meaning...
thereby making us feel better (like a "cure"). As the saying goes..."the devil makes work for idle hands"...and maybe the antidote is having to deal with some real problems. In this regard we might consider children as having a developmental need to figure things out for themselves, to grow resilient and learn the skills to effectively interact with peers and indeed to be able to govern themselves in due course. Coddling kids tends to grow coddled minds and is hardly helpful for when they get out into the real world. Maybe our modern child rearing ideas are making their world too "clean"? Could "everyone gets a prize" and "no one should feel bad" be wrecking our children's chances for a happy fulfilling life?
Without experiencing any real problems and with parents cocooning them in structure and safety, youngsters may tear themselves apart in searching for something to struggle against. When their environment is devoid of useful battles, they may come to fight against the very system that cossets them...because it's all that presents itself. Could this be what lies at the core of the hygiene hypothesis of "the woke"? For the sake of all our futures, we may need to discard our over-protective parenting (whether by the family or the State). Ultimately it seems childhood needs to be hardy (is supposed to be a time of hard learning?) and being helplessly adrift in a peer group indoctrinated with poor responses to deprivation and frustration hardly bodes well either for individuals or societies.
Sean.
Dean of Quareness.
June, 2024.