A few days ago one of our favourite Zen masters, Brad Warner, wrote a blog post under the title What You Don’t Speak Out Against You Co-sign? He was responding to a comment that “what you don’t speak out against you co-sign” and taking him to task for not openly campaigning against Donald Trump and all that he stands for. Needless to say Brad disagreed, as I do too.
Let’s start off being clear. “What you don’t speak out against you co-sign” means “If you don’t speak out against something then you are supporting, aiding, facilitating, even encouraging it”.
As Brad says, this is a very common way of thinking. It goes along with the “if good men do nothing …” trope. But it isn’t true and it is (designed to be) divisive and create factions. It is nothing short of moral blackmail.
Many people see their target as some variant of evil. So if you don’t campaign, demonstrate or protest against Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Brexit, pervasive CCTV, fossil fuels, or whatever, then you condone them and you are the work of the Devil. Not so.
In Brad’s words:
If someone characterizes you as evil, do you want to be friends with them? Do you want to support the things they support? Do you want to listen to their reasons for calling you evil? Or are you more likely to say, “Well screw you!” and deliberately support whatever it is they’re against?
… …
The stance that [such people] are taking will only drive more people to support the [cause] they hate.
So their efforts become a self-denying ordinance.
Also implicit in this is (a) that there is one right and one wrong answer, and (b) that there is only one way to protest. Some must choose to refrain from joining in with the noise everyone else is making. Protesting noisily is seldom effective. In general, protests and petitions work only to reinforce the determination to do whatever is being protested against. They may convince those who are already of like mind to join your bandwagon, but to many, like me, they are annoying and pointless – even if I agree with the sentiments.
Don’t get me wrong. I object just as strongly to the same things (see list above) as anyone else. But I choose not be be mouthy about it or jump on bandwagons. Like Brad I am not skilled in political rhetoric, and whatever I might wish to say has already been said a thousand times over by those more skilled (and likely more knowledgeable) than me. So I would largely be wasting my breath.
Everything goes through cycles and fashions; always has, always will. Ultimately “we are where we are” and “what will happen will happen” – although by “right action” we can indeed hope to affect the outcomes. But what is “right action” for you may not be so for me.
Essentially it doesn’t matter what I say. Brexit will happen or it won’t happen. North Korea will blow us all sky high, or it won’t. Rinse and repeat, with your cause du jour.
That’s not to say that we shouldn’t speak out about things we fundamentally disagree with, but there won’t be thousands not speaking out because I keep quiet: there is already plenty of discussion and debate. Your mileage may vary.
Like Brad, I believe there is a better way, at least for me. First of all staying silent (or maybe just quieter) helps protect my sanity – something which is precarious enough for most of us at the best of times. The Dalai Lama always talks about compassion, and self-care is only having compassion for oneself. Without self-compassion and self-care you are not able, and not there, to show compassion for others.
Keeping silent has other benefits too. It provides quiet space where other topics, perhaps of more immediate personal importance or urgency, can be discussed. And, when appropriate, it also allows controversialists and facilitators (as I like to think I am) help others see the wood for the trees and take an appropriately thoughtful and nuanced approach, rather than jumping on some blinkered, raucous bandwagon.
There’s more than one way to stop the crocodile running off with the sausages.
For another perspective on this see Silent Protests Are Still Protests.
