There’s a big difference between
(a) analyzing and identifying and understanding the existing divisions and groupings of people,
(b) causing division between people.

I propose that failing to accurately understand existing groups and their uniqueness and specific concerns is actually more divisive, because it inevitably leads to animosity when they are singled out either for special or poor treatment.

The language in politics today is decrying those who cause division – but making it worse by trying to force everyone into a single box.

I’d rather understand and then glory in our uniqueness and differences.

If you liked this article, then please follow us on Twitter logo and or join our email notification list.

2 thoughts on “Divided”

  1. Ann M Reagan

    To me, the most divisive thing is the language of “othering”. Watch any hot-button issue, especially if it is cloaked in fear, and look for how often “they” are brought up. “They” seek to destroy our way of life. “They” are against our freedoms. “They” will ruin our country. And the end to all reasonable discussion, room for growth, or opportunity for cooperation for the common good, “They” are evil.

    Putting people in a box is easy. It requires no critical thinking. It doesn’t even require that I listen to that “othered” person – “OH, you believe A, and B? Then you clearly also believe G through Z!” Once I’ve put you in that box, I can put the lid on, and not have to consider anything you say (because I already ‘know’ what you think, and your “evil” motives for thinking it).

    1. Yes. You’ve identified my other current hot-button topic. How ironic, isn’t it, that the very cry of “they’re trying to divide us” is actually used to divide us.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top