- This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Why does the author argue that making eye contact and small talk is more than being polite? The author writes, “Having old friends in politics is a last resort. And making new ones is the first step towards change.” (page 82) What are small ways that each of us can reach out to others, especially to those we don’t know or may have previously feared?
-
I think that Snyder is indicating that making acquaintances and friendships in your community can be a lifeline in more ways than one in troubled times. In a small way, engaging with those around you helps you be less fearful of strangers and feel less alone. In a big way, you may be able to lean on them and they on you if the time calls for it. I think making small talk is a way to connect to your neighbours and those outside of your immediate circle. I think Snyder has other reasons for suggesting it. I had to look up what Snyder meant by a “culture of denunciation” in the opening of this chapter so I could be clear as to why he was arguing for making connections. I hadn’t realized that the term has been used to describe what the German Democratic Republic (aka the Stasi) did in East Germany when they were in power under communist rule.
The Stasi got large portions of the populace to act as agents of the state—people spied for them. “The Stasi became known as one of the most efficient and brutal intelligence-gathering agencies that has ever existed. Its power lay in surveillance. The Stasi had eyes and ears everywhere, so that people did not speak in the streets; they whispered in their own homes and were wary of speaking freely to family or friends. To contradict the state was treason, for which a person could be imprisoned and tortured in order to produce more names. Sometimes people were executed.” (Source: https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/creating-a-culture-of-denunciation/).
So I think he’s saying that making new friends is a healthy barrier against such regime tactics. You may be less likely to turn on someone you know if you’ve made eye contact with them. And they may be less likely to turn on you if you are no longer a stranger.
Obviously the tactic of “culture of denunciation” has been used by other tyrannical regimes, but I am increasingly nervous for my US neighbours given the profound and extensive surveillance tools available to the government. Also, Trump and others in his circle are starting to signal an increased intolerance for dissent.
Saying that destroying Tesla property is “treason” is worrying. I don’t condone the destruction of property, but saying it’s “treason” indicates you will be punished not for property damage but for a crime against the state. Turning away a French scientist and seizing his computer at the border because he’s written negative things about Trump is also worrying, as it is silencing criticism. I’m curious if anyone here has other examples that point to a rising culture of denunciation in Washington?
As for small ways we can reach out to others, I think volunteering might be a great way to reach out to people you don’t know or possibly fear. There are usually programs helping the homeless, at-risk youth, and new immigrants. I know in my community there are volunteers needed at centres for new immigrant families, reading programs for lower-income kids, dog walking for seniors with pets, fundraising for women impacted by domestic violence, food banks, etc. So many ways to engage with people in our community. Sometimes, it can be as simple as talking to someone sitting next to you on the bus or who you walk by on the street. I’m curious to hear what others suggest.
-
Thanks for that extra information about the Stasi, Tara. I was familiar with the concept, but didn’t realize that that was what it was called.
I do believe that eye contact and actual communication with a person is essential to truly “seeing” another human being. There are all sorts of things to be gleaned from observation of body language that just can’t be duplicated through written words. When I have driven down my neighborhood streets during election times (and sometimes, sadly, long afterward) and have seen derisive political signs, or just ones that tout candidates that I oppose, I get a gut reaction of repulsion; yet if I actually know some of these people, and have had actual conversations with them, I have formed opinions of them as people, not just as “Thems.” I know that some of these people are good, and reasonable, and may not follow all the ideologies that those signs represent. Maybe they haven’t done all their homework, and don’t realize that the ONE issue that makes them want to cast that vote overlooks the many OTHER issues that will be affected if that person comes to power. Some people have voted simply to lower their own personal taxes, or because they have a religious belief against certain issues, and see the only way to get what they want is by voting for certain people, whether they like them or not, whether they agree or even know about the rest of their agendas. When I understand that about these people, it gives me hope that they can be reasoned with on certain subjects, and that is where a real conversation may bear fruit. And maybe they’ll recognize something in me as well, and not just see me as a faceless enemy. Once we all turn on one another as “Us” versus “Them,” that personal connection isn’t there, and herd mentality often turns into mob mentality. The more people we make personal connections with, the more chance we have to avoid this. If we, as human beings, as people who love our country and our world, can still find more things in common than differences, then we may still have hope.
I also agree, Tara, that branding the destruction of Tesla property as treason, is extremely upsetting and wrong. People are bandying about words and concepts without considering their true meaning. I don’t condone burning those cars, but I do take exception to calling it treason! The definition of treason, according to https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason is “the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family.” Vandalizing those cars is treason, yet vandalizing the Capitol and rioting there was not?? Oy.
-
-
Snyder advocates eye contact and small talk to enable one to gage the friendliness or seriousness of any given situation.
In addition, he makes an important point about how to find the path forward towards positive change. By making eye contact and small talk, there is a potential to have more than just a polite exchange – there is potential to actually connect and show a stranger that you are human.
Snyder is hoping that genuine connections can form between people who have voted for different parties, which will enable people to break through the dehumanizing “us vs them” mentality. Only after one sees another as human will one be willing to listen to the other. Listening, connecting and finding common ground is the path forward for the majority of the population who value their freedoms and rights and will need to work together to fight against tyranny.
It’s interesting that that path forward as Snyder advocates in this chapter involves a face-to-face experience. That aligns with what I’ve read thus far on combatting disinformation, which is that online exchanges are unlikely to lead to opportunities to humanize people from the “them” group.
-
I think Snyder is channelling Maya Angelou,
“I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.”
The effect of eye contact or small talk is to affirm the other person, to acknowledge they exist. It is a place to start and a reasonable place to end as well.
Making small talk is not my forte. But I can see it as a path to connecting with others and building trust. Turst is the critical factor in survival. It seems a whole lot more doable than the idea of engaging on charged and divisive issues, and maybe ultimately more persuasive.
This is Snyder’s shortest chapter so far, an illustration of how straightforward this message is.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.