Dear America, a poem

Below is a poem written by Khoreen Johnson, one of my sociological theory students this fall at Elon University. This powerful and heartfelt offering is part of a service project I asked my students to do. This poem is based on material covered in our theory course but more so on the content of Khoreen’s heart.

For context, I ask all of my students to do a ‘service assignment’ where they take something learned and share it with an audience outside of our class. These assignments have yielded some incredible work in the past, but this semester’s theory students embraced the challenge with intelligence, passion, and vision. And yes, I did the assignment myself, taking only as much time as was allowed in class for the first draft. I have added my attempt at the bottom of this post.

Look for more posts with student work touching on a wide array of issues we talked about during the semester.

---

Dear America,

When you hear the words “iron cage,”
do you think of what this system calls “justice,”
a cage built for those who need it least,
but let’s not get carried away.

In this iron cage, we make our way,
guided by choices from another time.
Decisions etched by hands long gone,
their shadows lingering,
casting rules we never chose nor questioned.

Eliot Schrefer’s words echo, heavy with truth:
“Tradition is peer pressure from the dead.”
Customs, codes, and laws from distant lives
define our present,
shaping the narrow paths we feel compelled to follow.

We inherit not just the world, but the patterns that bind it—
a lattice of habits and norms too ingrained to question.
We are tethered to these silent forces,
trapped within decisions we did not make,
yet bear as if they were born from our own intent.

The world we stumble through was made by ghosts,
their values threaded through every wall.
Invisible but unyielding, the cage of tradition
limits our steps, narrowing the roads the past insists we walk.

The cage is not just steel or bars;
it’s woven into systems, quiet yet relentless,
cutting sharp as they measure our worth,
as hunger and need are sorted into spreadsheets,
as survival is dictated in quotas, policies, lines.
It takes form in the subtle violence of scarcity,
a design that divides, isolates, and withholds.

For some, this cage becomes a monthly allotment,
food stamps rationed, dignity reduced
to numbers on a balance sheet.
For others, it’s debt piled high,
a weight they never chose, yet must carry.
The cost of existing measured in loans, interest,
the bare essentials withheld or hard-won.

Each day we weigh what to sacrifice—
to do what’s asked or what’s right,
to keep a job or keep our conscience.
The system demands our silence, and rewards our compliance,
our human decency strained by the need to survive.
We rationalize these choices, one by one,
adjusting, justifying, letting go
of small pieces of ourselves, numbing the guilt
that grows quieter with each compromise.

Yet within us, there’s a pulse that won’t quiet,
a voice that questions these silent commands.
To break beyond, to step outside, to challenge
the constructs we were handed like heirlooms.
Crying out to you, America, for change—
for a future where we choose not to follow, but to lead.

Some will push against this iron clasp, with dreams too fierce to be contained.
They speak for change, they rise, they rebel,
against the weight of history,
toward a future the past cannot dictate.

We live in iron cages, built strong and old, shaped by hands we cannot see.
But within these cages lies the choice—
to loosen, to reshape, to build something new.\
The past clings tight, pulls us back, yet always, somewhere, a path emerges—
if we dare to imagine, if we choose to see it through.

With courage and faith,

A Witness

---

 

“Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.”

-Denis Diderot

A letter to humanity

Dear fellow humans,

For me, the election of Donald Trump as the 47th President of the United States is the logical outcome of a failed global economic and justice system. His election is the product of deep racism and patriarchy and represents authoritarianism only one step away from fascism. Nearly all modern societies (since the rise of state societies after domestication of plants and animals) have defaulted to a form of leadership which has a single person at the apex called e.g., ‘King’, ‘Queen’, ‘Prime Minister’, ‘Supreme Leader’ or variations thereof. Due to social and cultural forces I have described elsewhere (see CTO, 2nd edition), there is an inexorable and increasing pooling of wealth and power in all nations and certainly internationally. Rule by oligarchy is essentially how we could accurately describe most world nation-state powers at this point.

It is said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, and that is what state societies have done regarding leadership: always gravitating toward a single (mostly male) powerful leader model. In a world dominated by neoliberalism, state leaders will only be from and hence serve the interests of the elite class. This must stop. In the words of lesbian warrior poet Audre Lorde, “…the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.”

I propose moving to a hybrid Quaker model of a leadership counsel always coming to consensus on major decisions based on agreed upon humanistic principles such as laid out (for example) in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. A counsel representing the diverse populations of the state would make binding policy decisions based on these principles. This body would be wholly separate from any sources of financial power and members would be prohibited from profiting from their positions.

Cursed by sobriety, I understand in principle the ‘cultural ratchet effect’ making it nearly impossible to undo millennia-long traditions, especially those having to do with power and privilege. That said, see my previous comment about insanity. If free will does indeed exist, we must exercise it now and attempt to save humanity from the insanity of leadership the likes of Donald Trump and Elon Musk.

With all the hope I can muster, I challenge humanity all to consider this style of leadership change.

Regards,

Tom Arcaro
End of career humanist and sociologist

 

Study tools for “Propaganda, false consciousness, and the normalization of marginalization”

 

Overview
Below are some tools that will help you explore the content in my essay “Propaganda, false consciousness, and the normalization of marginalization”. One of my more dense essays, in about 4500 words I deepen the use of Critical Hydra Theory and use the current situation in Israel/Palestine and a key example of how false consciousness is a key factor.

These tools were generated by NotebookLM from Google. I have edited for accuracy and usefulness.

---

Summary
The text explores the concept of “false consciousness” and how it perpetuates systems of oppression. It argues that powerful elites, often white males, use propaganda to manipulate the public’s perception of reality and justify their actions, such as colonialism and genocide. The author emphasizes the importance of recognizing and challenging these false narratives, highlighting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a contemporary example. The text draws on a diverse range of thinkers, including Nietzsche, Marx, Arendt, and Mills, to illustrate how propaganda works and how we can resist it. Ultimately, the author advocates for a critical approach to information, encouraging readers to question their own beliefs and work towards a more just world.

Suggested questions
1. What are the mechanisms by which the powerful have historically created and sustained false consciousness?
2. How does critical Hydra theory relate to the normalization of marginalization and toxic othering?
3. How can we understand the role of propaganda in perpetuating oppressive social structures?

---

Podcast based on this essay.

---

Table of Contents: Propaganda and the Normalization of Marginalization

I. Introduction
This section sets the stage by presenting four quotations about power, insanity, and ruling ideas from Nietzsche, Marx, Mills, and Arendt.  It introduces the concept of Critical Hydra Theory (CHT) and its focus on understanding how systems of oppression are created and sustained through the normalization of marginalization.

II. Confronting Toxic Othering by Understanding False Consciousness
This section defines “false consciousness” as the lack of awareness regarding structured social inequalities, using synonyms like delusion, fantasy, and misconception. It introduces “propaganda” as a tool used to perpetuate false consciousness, particularly in relation to classism, racism, and colonialism/paternalism – the “evil trifecta” of toxic othering. It poses questions about how false consciousness allows for the acceptance of inequality and how CHT addresses the mechanisms used by elites to perpetuate this state.

III. Unpacking Begins by Using a Current Example
This section uses the example of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to illustrate how a worldview justifying genocide and apartheid has been created and sustained by elites. It argues that normalizing the accumulation of wealth and power throughout history has led to the acceptance of inequality and the demonization of those who challenge it. It links this process to historical examples of apotheosis, where rulers are elevated to god-like status, and connects it to the modern-day influence of figures like Elon Musk.

IV. Insanity?
This section unpacks Nietzsche’s quote about insanity being the rule in groups by drawing upon Erich Fromm’s idea that “most people die before they are fully born,” suggesting a lack of full awareness in modern society. It connects this to the concept of “false consciousness” and the need for individuals to become “woke” or “decolonize their minds” to challenge prevailing narratives.

V. Ruling Ideas
This section builds upon Marx’s assertion that the ruling ideas of any epoch are those of the ruling class, who control the means of mental production. It argues that this control allows the powerful to normalize marginalization and create a false consciousness that justifies inequality. CHT posits that classism was the first privileging force, paving the way for other forms of marginalization, challenging the historical reality of egalitarian societies.

VI. Same Song, Different Verse
This section introduces C. Wright Mills’ concept of the “power elite,” consisting of individuals at the top of the military, business, and government pyramids in the United States. It highlights President Eisenhower’s warning about the “military-industrial complex” as evidence of this elite’s influence and their ability to shape domestic and foreign policy. It expands on Mills’ model to encompass a global elite that perpetuates a false illusion of democracy while controlling institutions like families, churches, and schools to maintain their power.

VII. Propaganda = Contempt for Facts
This section delves into Hannah Arendt’s analysis of propaganda in totalitarian regimes, arguing that it thrives on a “contempt for facts” and the fabrication of reality by those in power. It compares Arendt’s observation to Humpty Dumpty’s assertion of control over language in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass, highlighting how those in power manipulate narratives to define good and evil. It emphasizes how the power elite, by controlling media, education, and religion, shape public perception and normalize marginalizing structures.

VIII. What is Truth?
This section explores the concept of truth, identifying three versions: objective fact (Truth #1), personal truth (Truth #2), and propaganda/disinformation (Truth #3). It argues that false consciousness involves accepting Truth #3 (propaganda), denying Truth #1 (facts), and potentially distorting Truth #2 (personal beliefs). It quotes journalist Abby Martin, who states, “Truth is the ultimate resistance,” emphasizing the importance of critical analysis and seeking objective sources to counter propaganda.

IX. Palestine Never Existed?
This section applies the three versions of truth to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, outlining different narratives surrounding the creation of Israel, the displacement of Palestinians, and the ongoing conflict. (1-2 sentences)
It contrasts the historical reality of the “nakba” (Truth #1) with Zionist narratives that justify Israeli control and label all Palestinian resistance as terrorism (Truth #2). It highlights the propaganda (Truth #3) that portrays Israeli expansion as justified and necessary, regardless of the cost to Palestinian lives.

X. Anti-Zionism vs. Antisemitism
This section distinguishes between anti-Zionism (opposition to the political ideology) and antisemitism (prejudice against Jewish people). It acknowledges the rise of antisemitism but questions the extent to which the conflation of these terms contributes to this phenomenon. It highlights the voices of Jewish individuals, including Judith Butler, who criticize Zionism and Israeli government actions while emphasizing their own Jewish identities.
It points to historical documents like the 1948 letter to the New York Times signed by prominent Jewish intellectuals condemning Zionist actions as evidence of this distinction.

XI. Removing the Gauze
This section acknowledges the difficulty of challenging deeply ingrained false consciousness, comparing it to removing gauze from someone else’s eyes. It stresses the importance of amplifying Truth #1 and supporting those who have broken free from propaganda, using the example of the documentary Israelism. 

XII. Conclusion
This section summarizes how the ideas of various thinkers illuminate the role of propaganda and false consciousness in perpetuating oppression. It acknowledges the pervasiveness of propaganda but also emphasizes human resilience and the pursuit of a more just world based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
It ends with a quote from Antonio Gramsci: “The challenge of modernity is to live without illusions and without becoming disillusioned,” urging readers to remain critical and engaged in the pursuit of truth.

---

Briefing Doc: Propaganda, False Consciousness, and the Normalization of Marginalization

Main Themes:

• False Consciousness: The chapter argues that a lack of awareness about systemic inequality (false consciousness) allows oppression to flourish. This is maintained through propaganda, likened to a “cult-like mentality” that benefits elites.
• The Power of Narrative: The excerpts emphasize how controlling “mental production” (education, religion, media) allows the ruling class to shape public perception and normalize their power. This aligns with Marx’s idea of “ruling ideas.”
• Propaganda as Tool of Control: Drawing heavily on Arendt, the chapter defines propaganda as a deliberate distortion of truth used to manipulate the masses. It instills a “contempt for facts” and replaces them with fabricated realities.
• The Israel-Palestine Conflict as a Case Study: The text uses the ongoing conflict as a prime example of how these themes play out in reality, highlighting the stark differences between historical facts, Zionist narratives, and pro-Israel propaganda.
• Unmasking Truth: The author stresses the importance of critical thinking, seeking objective sources, and amplifying the voices of the oppressed to challenge and dismantle false consciousness.
  Key Ideas & Facts:
• Nietzsche’s “Insanity”: The chapter opens by suggesting that groupthink and the acceptance of harmful ideologies are widespread, echoing Nietzsche’s view of societal “insanity.”
• The Power Elite: Building upon C. Wright Mills’ work, the text argues that a small, interconnected elite (military, business, government) holds disproportionate power and influences global affairs, contradicting democratic ideals.
• Complicity of Institutions: Families, churches, and schools, while seemingly separate, are argued to perpetuate the dominant narrative and serve the interests of the powerful, as per Mills.
• Conflating Anti-Zionism with Antisemitism: The author strongly criticizes the deliberate blurring of these terms, arguing that it silences legitimate critique of Israeli government actions and fosters a climate of fear.
• Truth as Resistance: The text emphasizes that objective truth, based on facts and historical accuracy, is crucial to combatting oppressive systems and propaganda.

Notable Quotes:

Nietzsche: “Insanity in individuals is something rare – but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
Marx: “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas.”
Mills: “Families and churches and schools adapt to modern life; governments and armies and corporations shape it; and, as they do so, they turn these lesser institutions into means for their ends.”
Arendt: “Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, for in their opinion, fact depends entirely on the power of man who can fabricate it.”
Abby Martin: “Truth is the ultimate resistance.”
Gramsci: “The challenge of modernity is to live without illusions and without becoming disillusioned.”
Further Analysis:

The document presents a compelling argument about the pervasive nature of propaganda and its role in normalizing inequality. The use of the Israel-Palestine conflict as an example provides a contemporary and highly relevant illustration. However, the chapter would benefit from:

Clearly Stating Its Objective: What is the author ultimately advocating for? What actions do they want readers to take after understanding these concepts?
Expanding on Critical Hydra Theory: The text mentions CHT but doesn’t fully explain its framework or how it applies beyond the examples given. [see previous chapters for full explanation and use of CHT]

Addressing Counterarguments: While critical of Zionist narratives, the chapter could benefit from acknowledging and addressing potential criticisms of its stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

---

Unmasking the Hydra: Propaganda, False Consciousness, and the Normalization of Marginalization
Study Guide

I. Key Concepts Review

This section aims to reinforce your understanding of the core ideas presented in the excerpt.

Toxic Othering: This concept refers to the process of designating certain groups as different and inferior, often leading to prejudice, discrimination, and violence. The excerpt focuses on how this process is often subtle and insidious, masked by propaganda and false consciousness.
False Consciousness: A state of unawareness or misconception about the social, political, and economic forces shaping one’s life. Individuals under the influence of false consciousness often unknowingly accept systems that are detrimental to their well-being.
Propaganda: The systematic dissemination of biased or misleading information, often by those in power, to influence public opinion and behavior. The excerpt highlights the role of propaganda in creating and maintaining false consciousness.
Normalization of Marginalization: The gradual process through which systemic inequalities and the oppression of certain groups become accepted as normal and inevitable. The excerpt explores how propaganda and false consciousness contribute to this normalization.
Critical Hydra Theory (CHT): The theoretical framework used in the excerpt to analyze and deconstruct systems of oppression. It emphasizes the interconnected nature of these systems (like the heads of a Hydra) and their reliance on false consciousness.

II. Short Answer Quiz

Instructions: Answer the following questions in 2-3 sentences based on the excerpt.

How does the excerpt define false consciousness, and what are some synonyms for this term?
According to the Thomas Theorem, how do definitions of situations influence reality?
How does the excerpt explain the historical persistence of extreme inequality?
According to the excerpt, what are the three main pyramids of power in the United States, and who constitutes the ‘power elite’?
How does the excerpt use the example of textbook content to illustrate the perpetuation of a specific worldview?
What is the relationship between propaganda and facts, according to Hannah Arendt?
How does the excerpt distinguish between the three versions of ‘truth’?
Briefly summarize the three ‘truth versions’ presented in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
What is the key difference between antisemitism and anti-Zionism, as explained in the excerpt?
What is the author’s concluding message about confronting toxic othering and the role of critical thinking?
III. Essay Questions

Instructions: Consider the following essay prompts. Formulate a well-structured response drawing upon the information and arguments presented in the excerpt.

Analyze the excerpt’s central argument regarding the relationship between propaganda, false consciousness, and the normalization of marginalization. Provide specific examples to support your analysis.
Discuss the excerpt’s critique of the “power elite” and their role in shaping social structures and narratives. How does this critique connect to the concepts of false consciousness and the normalization of marginalization?
Critically evaluate the excerpt’s use of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a case study for illustrating the concepts of propaganda and false consciousness. How effective is this example in supporting the author’s overall argument?
The excerpt emphasizes the importance of “removing the gauze” of false consciousness. Discuss the challenges and strategies involved in challenging established worldviews and promoting critical thinking.
Reflecting on the excerpt’s conclusion, discuss the significance of Gramsci’s quote, “The challenge of modernity is to live without illusions and without becoming disillusioned,” in the context of confronting oppression and striving for a more just world.

IV. Glossary of Key Terms

Apartheid: A system of institutionalized racial segregation and discrimination, historically practiced in South Africa.
Apotheosis: The elevation of a person to the status of a god.
Cabal: A secret group of people united in a plot or intrigue.
Classism: Prejudice or discrimination based on social class.
Colonialism: The policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically.
Decolonizing the Mind: A process of critically examining and challenging internalized colonial ideologies and thought patterns.
Empirical Fact: Information verifiable through observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
Egalitarian: Relating to or believing in the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.
Elite: A select group of people considered to be superior in terms of power, wealth, or status.
Existential: Relating to human existence and experience.
Genocide: The deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular ethnic group or nation, with the aim of destroying that group.
Hasbara: (Hebrew for “explanation”) Refers to pro-Israel advocacy or public diplomacy efforts.
Ideology: A system of ideas and ideals, especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy.
Imperialism: A policy of extending a country’s power and influence through diplomacy or military force.
Nakba: (Arabic for “catastrophe”) Refers to the mass displacement of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
Patriarchy/Paternalism: A system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it. / The policy or practice on the part of people in positions of authority of restricting the freedom and responsibilities of those subordinate to them in the subordinates’ supposed best interest.
Pogrom: An organized massacre of a particular ethnic group, in particular that of Jews in Russia or eastern Europe.
Political Zionism: A movement advocating for the establishment and support of a Jewish state in the historical land of Israel.
Privileging Force: Any social, economic, or political factor that grants advantages or benefits to a particular group over others.
Propaganda: The systematic dissemination of biased or misleading information, often by those in power, to influence public opinion and behavior.
Racism: Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group.
Settler Colonialism: A type of colonialism that functions through the replacement of indigenous populations with a settler society.
Social Status: A person’s standing or importance in relation to other people within a society.
Stratified Culture: A society characterized by different social levels or classes based on factors such as wealth, power, and prestige.
Systemic: Relating to a system as a whole, especially when indicating that a problem is ingrained in the entire system.
Totalitarianism: A system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.
Trope: A figurative or metaphorical use of a word or expression.
Weltanschauung: (German for “worldview”) A comprehensive conception or image of the universe and humanity’s relation to it.

Answer Key (Short Answer Quiz)

False consciousness is a lack of awareness regarding structured social inequalities impacting one’s life. Synonyms include delusion, fantasy, and misconception.
The Thomas Theorem states, “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences,” meaning that people’s subjective interpretations of situations shape their actions and the resulting reality.
The excerpt argues that the powerful in every epoch create a “cult-like mentality” among the masses, perpetuating the belief that extreme inequality is inevitable, natural, and justified.
The three pyramids of power in the US are the military, business/industry, and government. The “power elite,” largely composed of affluent white men, occupy the top positions in these realms and exert significant control over society.

The excerpt notes that control over public school curricula, including the sanitization of historical events like slavery, serves the powerful by promoting narratives that align with their interests.
Hannah Arendt argues that propaganda, often employed by totalitarian regimes, thrives on a “contempt for facts,” manipulating and fabricating information to suit their agenda.
The excerpt distinguishes between three “truth versions”: Truth #1 (empirically and historically accurate facts), Truth #2 (personal beliefs and opinions), and Truth #3 (propaganda and disinformation).
In the Israeli-Palestinian context, Truth #1 is the historical displacement of Palestinians due to the creation of Israel. Truth #2 is the Zionist narrative justifying Israeli control and portraying Palestinians as threats. Truth #3 promotes the view that Israeli expansion is justified at any cost.
Antisemitism is prejudice against individuals identifying as Jewish. Anti-Zionism criticizes the political ideology of Zionism, particularly its role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The excerpt stresses that these two are distinct and should not be conflated.

The author emphasizes the ongoing nature of confronting toxic othering and the need for continuous critical thinking. They advocate for amplifying the voices of those who have broken free from propaganda and are working towards justice.

---

FAQ: Propaganda and False Consciousness
1. What is false consciousness, and how does it relate to toxic othering?
False consciousness refers to a lack of awareness about the structured social inequalities that impact our lives. It’s a form of delusion, often perpetuated by propaganda, that prevents individuals from recognizing the systems of oppression they might benefit from or be subjected to. This unawareness allows toxic othering—the marginalization and oppression of certain groups—to flourish unchecked because its systemic nature remains hidden.

2. How does propaganda contribute to false consciousness?
Propaganda, as Hannah Arendt argues, thrives on a “contempt for facts.” It distorts reality by manipulating information, often replacing truth with carefully constructed narratives that serve the interests of the powerful. This creates a false consciousness by leading people to accept biased or inaccurate information as truth, blinding them to the real workings of power and injustice.

3. Who are “the ruling class” and how do they maintain power through ideas?
The “ruling class,” as described by Marx, refers to the elite group that controls the means of production and, consequently, the spread of ideas. This control allows them to shape the dominant narratives and beliefs within a society, often in ways that legitimize their power and normalize the marginalization of others. They achieve this through their influence over institutions like education, religion, and media.

4. How do C. Wright Mills’ ideas about the “power elite” help us understand the perpetuation of inequality?
Mills argued that a small, interconnected “power elite” at the top of the military, government, and corporations holds disproportionate influence over society. This elite operates in a self-serving manner, often blurring the lines between these sectors and prioritizing their interests over the needs of the general population. Their actions and policies often exacerbate social inequalities while maintaining their grip on power.

5. Can you explain the concept of “normalization of marginalization” with an example?
The “normalization of marginalization” refers to the insidious process by which the oppression and exclusion of certain groups become accepted as commonplace and inevitable. A historical example is the propaganda used to justify colonialism, where racist ideologies were spread to portray colonized populations as inferior, thereby normalizing their exploitation and subjugation.

6. What is the danger of conflating anti-Zionism with antisemitism?
Conflating anti-Zionism, which critiques the political ideology of Zionism, with antisemitism, which is prejudice against Jewish people, dangerously shuts down legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies and actions. This conflation is often used as a tactic to silence dissent and stifle debate about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

7. How can individuals challenge their own false consciousness?
Challenging false consciousness is a continual process that involves questioning accepted truths, seeking diverse perspectives, and critically evaluating information, especially from sources in power. It requires actively seeking out and amplifying the voices of marginalized groups and engaging in honest self-reflection to identify and unlearn internalized biases.

8. What role does critical thinking play in combating propaganda and oppression?
Critical thinking is crucial in dismantling propaganda and the systems of oppression it upholds. It empowers individuals to question dominant narratives, identify biases, and develop informed opinions based on evidence and ethical considerations. By fostering critical thinking skills, we can create a more just and equitable society that recognizes and dismantles harmful ideologies.

Confronting Toxic Othering begins with therapy

 

In Russell Means’s autobiography Where White Men Fear to Tread, he offers profound insights on the process of decolonization and healing. On page 531, he reflects:

“I had often wondered how best to decolonize my people. Treatment made me realize that there is no need for all of them to get into the whys and wherefores of colonization that have led them down the path of self-destruction. It must be done one human being at a time. Without that kind of help, Western society does not allow people to come to terms with their feelings. With honesty and with therapy, my people can be made whole again.”

This perspective is remarkably insightful, particularly when applied to various global injustices and issues within the United States. It leads me to consider the potential positive impact of mandatory or strongly encouraged therapy, both individual and group sessions, with a focus on emotional healing. What we need, in essence, is a collective effort to reconnect with our feelings—a group therapy session on a national or even global scale.

Earlier in the chapter, Means observes:

“At Cottonwood, I came to understand that life is not about race or culture or pigmentation or bone structure. It’s about feelings. That’s what makes us human beings. We all feel joy and happiness and laughter. We all feel sadness and ugliness and shame and hurt. Life is not an ‘ouch’ contest. Nobody cares who has the best reason to suffer. If you’re rich and hurting, you feel no different than someone who is poor and hurting. Then I realized that if the human family has all the same feelings, all any of us should worry about is how to deal with them. Forget about saving the environment, never mind race relations. Don’t worry about justice. Deal with feelings and relationships. The cultures of every indigenous society in the world are based upon improving relationships—the individual’s connection with a dolphin, a wolf, an eagle, a tree, a rock, a spider, a snake, or a lizard, with other human beings, with the clouds, and with the wind.”

Means argues that true healing and decolonization require a shift from focusing on external issues—race, culture, justice—to internal ones: our feelings and relationships. He suggests that improving our connections with ourselves, others, and the world around us is key to overcoming the legacy of colonization and the resulting self-destruction.

As I reflect on Means’s words, I find myself in full agreement. Part of confronting toxic othering is looking inward—examining our relationships with ourselves and others, understanding the feelings that shape those relationships, and striving to cultivate positive, respectful connections. This inside-out therapy based approach to addressing toxic othering is both revolutionary and, perhaps, daunting to imagine both for oneself and en masse for marginalized populations.

Means’s advocacy for an American Indian embracing of therapy and emotional awareness is powerful. Looked at more broadly, it’s a call for a profound shift in how we relate to ourselves and the world. Once we have a deeper understanding of our feelings and relationships, we can develop the respect and empathy needed to overcome toxic othering. Toxic othering is driven by fear, mistrust, and even anger, all negative emotions.The core of this toxicity is the tendency to see someone different—whether by race, class, gender, or sexuality—as threatening. Normal othering is motivated by inclusion, acceptance, and love. A healthy ands and self-aware person with gravitated toward normal, not toxic othering: this is Means’ point.  respond with negative feelings, often leading to harmful actions.

To sum up, confronting toxic othering requires a deep, introspective journey. It demands that we take responsibility for knowing ourselves, getting in touch with our feelings, and understanding that being whole means being aware of our emotions and nurturing healthy relationships—with ourselves, others, and the world around us.

Propaganda, false consciousness, and the normalization of marginalization

[See this page for a detailed study guide for this essay.]

[updated 28 September 2024 and again on 9 November 2024]

“Insanity in individuals is something rare – but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”

-F. Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil

“The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas.”

K. Marx, The German Ideology

“Families and churches and schools adapt to modern life; governments and armies and corporations shape it; and, as they do so, they turn these lesser institutions into means for their ends.”

–C.Wright Mills, The Power Elite 

“Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, for in their opinion fact depends entirely on the power of man who can fabricate it.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism

Prelude
Starting any chapter with four daunting quotations is always a risk, but I am inviting you, kind reader, to join me in understanding perhaps the most important topic related to Critical Hydra Theory (CHT), namely, how systems of oppression are created and sustained. Restated, what insights can we gain from interrogating the slow motion process of the normalization of marginalization(s)? The four thinkers referenced above are diverse in their approaches and ideologies, but I feel their perspectives intersect powerfully as we attempt to more clearly understand how we know and experience our chronically and deeply unjust social worlds. So, let’s begin.

Confronting toxic othering by understanding false consciousness
When acts of toxic othering are obvious and open, confronting this behavior can be straightforward, though difficult. But such is rarely the case. Both individual and organizational acts of toxic othering are more often disguised, candy-coated, and remain unseen or unpercieved even by those who are trained social observers. To make full use of CHT we must understand the nature of false consciousness. Briefly defined, false consciousness is a lack of awareness regarding one or more structured social inequalities impacting one’s life. Synonyms include delusion, fantasy, and misconception. Propaganda is an important word to keep in mind on this journey of deeper understanding. Propaganda is a frequently employed tool of those who benefit from perpetuating false consciousness. The concept of false consciousness was originally used to describe the impacts of classism, and indeed classism is part of what I have described as the ‘evil trifecta’ of toxic othering, namely classism, racism, and colonialism/paternalism.

How do so many people down through the ages -and especially now- blindly and/or passively and unknowingly accept the impact of the many privileging forces that shape their lives? How is it the false consciousness making this acceptance possible is so pervasive and hard to recognize? In sociology we refer to the Thomas Theorem which states, “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.” The question at hand is how do people come to define situations the way they do, where do these definitions come from and how are they perpetuated and then internalized, and whose interests are served by these definitions? Restated, how can we better understand the normalization of marginalization and how this contributes to toxic othering?

The Critical Hydra Theorist addresses this question head on, presenting the radical idea that in all epochs the rich and powerful have created a cult-like mentality among the masses such that they believe extreme inequality is inevitable, that it is necessary and natural for there to be rich and poor, and that the rich absolutely deserve their positions of power. The central questions addressed below include, (1) how is false consciousness created and sustained, (2) how can we understand the mechanisms by which those in elite positions of power have perpetuated and benefitted from false consciousness, and (3) are there steps which can be taken to effectively reverse false consciousness, to confront toxic othering and the social structures upon which the many privileging forces depend. Ultimately, critical Hydra theory is about understanding oppression and, whenever possible, listening to the voices of the oppressed to more deeply understand this phenomena and how it can and should be addressed.

Unpacking begins by using a current example
Below I unpack and interweave insights taken from the four quotations above, making the argument that what is happening at this moment in Gaza and the West Bank, to use a current example, can best be explained by interrogating how a weltanschauung [world view] justifying genocide and apartheid has been created and sustained by a relatively small number of elites residing in the US, Great Britain, Israel, and elsewhere in the so-called ‘Global North’.

Restated, I will examine how the classic sins of gluttony, greed, and the obscene pooling of wealth and power have been normalized and even glorified down through modern history to the point where calling out this behavior is viewed as deviant, wrong, and even ‘unpatriotic’. This process of normalization can be likened to ‘death by a thousand cuts’, though more effective because the individual cuts have been so subtle as to be virtually unnoticed or, ironically, even welcomed. To wit, historically and even now defining what is ‘good’ and ‘normal’ has been the purview of the powerful. Metaphorically, layers of gauze have been put over the eyes of the many, distorting their realities. It is more than an analogy to liken this situation to the rise of a cult, or, more accurately, an interconnected cabal of cult leaders stretching back to the origins of state societies thousands of years ago.¹

Though it was not until Marx and Engles coined the term ‘false consciousness’ in the mid-1800’s, all modern epochs before and since have been marked by this mass ‘insanity’, i.e., an inability to see clearly the forces of power and privilege maintaining a status quo benefitting (mostly) the cult leaders and their toadies, the ruling classes. An extremely, though not unusual, outcome of this false consciousness is the apotheosis -elevation to the status of a god- of many leaders at the apex of past and present civilizations. We know now that the pharaohs for whom tens of thousands of slaves worked and died to create massive pyramidal monuments were not gods but mortal humans. The same can be said for the rulers who commissioned the terracotta warriors in Xian, China; history provides us with many examples of apotheosis. A contemporary example might be Elon Musk who owns hundreds of communications satellites that can be controlled to impact the lives of millions (billions?) of people across the globe, god-like power to be sure.

How is it that people have so many truths (e.g., our rulers are gods) that “…just ain’t so“? A first answer might be these (false) truths benefit them in some way. Let’s revisit this insight at the end of this [chapter] after addressing the quotations above and the questions they raise.

Insanity?
Aphorism 156 in Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil states, “Insanity in individuals is something rare – but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.” Frustratingly, Nietzsche offers no elaboration on this statement, and we can only take educated guesses at what he meant.²  Using another quotation, this time from Frankfurt School scholar Erich Fromm, perhaps we can unpack Nietzsche’s thought about insanity. Fromm wrote, “Most people die before they are fully born.” Not inconsequentially, the title of the book from which this quotation comes is The Sane Society. Published in 1955, this book proposes that in modern society most of us are insane, or at least emotionally and existentially unwell, and certainly affected by delusions. Not being ‘fully born’ here equates to languishing in false consciousness, gauze over one’s eyes. Twentieth century American social critic Neil Postman would say we are “amusing ourselves to death”, an idea he outlines in his book by that title. Though a misused and overused trope at this point, the word ‘woke’ comes to mind as we think about what is means to be fully born. More recent rhetoric would use the phrase ‘decolonizing the mind’ as a process of addressing one’s false consciousneses.

Ruling ideas
Though Nietzsche does not elaborate on his ‘insanity’ comment in Beyond Good and Evil, he does deepen this idea in his next book On the Genealogy of Morals, pointing out almost exactly what Marx posited in The German Ideology, namely,

“The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas.”  He goes on, “The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it.”

Those in power have always used their positions to control ‘mental production’ and to foster a worldview among those over whom they have power that normalizes their marginalization; the rich are ‘good’ and the poor are ‘bad’ or ‘evil’. But more insidiously -and to the point- they perpetuate a false consciousness which leads the poor to accept or simply not recognize as such the existence and scope of inequality, exploitation, and oppression.

Critical Hydra theory (CHT) posits that all privileging forces are interconnected and the privileging force of classism paved the way for all other social forces which marginalize various aggregates of people sharing similar social statuses (e.g., females or the poor). For most of human history -hundreds of thousands of years- our species lived an egalitarian lifestyle, not perfectly so, but a generally accepted assumption among archeologists and anthropologists is that significant structured social inequality did not exist during those times. Only relatively recently (perhaps the last 10,000 years) have multiply stratified cultures been the rule, and it is the narratives pushed by the powerful “in every epoch” that defined the worldview of the masses, creating ‘mass insanity.’

Same song, different verse
When talking about those in power (“the ruling class”) it is easy to oversimplify, but the reality, though not complicated, is quite nuanced. In his 1956 book The Power Elite American sociologist C.Wright Mills posits that there are three main pyramids of power in the United States, namely the military, business and industry, and the government. The tops of these three realms are the ‘power elite’, mostly rich white men essentially pulling all of the levers of control over both domestic and foreign policy and financial matters. In his 1959 farewell speech President Eisenhower explicitly agrees with Mills’ model, warning of a ‘military-industrial complex’. He spoke this warning,

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”   

Mills describes a circulation of these elites at the tops of the three pyramids, with generals and admirals becoming politicians (a former Army general, President Eisenhower is a perfect example) and then sitting on the Boards of major corporations. Not incidentally, with rare exception these elites are white males, typically from affluent families. Above I use the word cabal to describe these elites, a description I see no need from which to back away. This relatively small group of individuals in the US interact with their counterparts in other nations, many having the same elite, white, male composition; they are like minds.

Both Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making (2009) by David Rothkopf and Giants: The Global Power Elite Paperback (2018) by Peter Phillips stand on the shoulders of Mills,  extending his model to include a global elite numbering in the low thousands. That this power structure exists flies directly in the face of the illusion that we are a planet dominated by democracies which listen to the voices of their citizens. This illusion is part of our global false consciousness.

Mills offers us a way to understand how this is done, pointing out that, “Families and churches and schools adapt to modern life; governments and armies and corporations shape it; and, as they do so, they turn these lesser institutions into means for their ends.”  Complicity and illusion (read: false consciousness and propaganda) are perpetuated in our homes, schools, and places of worship. Control over what is taught in our public schools serves the powerful in sustaining narratives favorable to their ends. Indeed, for example text book references to slavery and/or how the US government handled the “Indian wars” are carefully curated by politically conservative school boards all across the United States; “they [those in power] turn these lesser institutions into means for their ends.” ³

Propaganda = contempt for facts
Hannah Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951) makes powerful use of the term propaganda as she details the rise of Nazism and other totalitarian political movements. She writes,“Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, for in their opinion fact depends entirely on the power of man who can fabricate it.” This statement affirms ‘ruling ideas’ theme presented by Marx and makes powerful use of the Thomas Therom mentioned above, arguing that those in power fabricate fact, i.e., produce propaganda which create mass delusion. Arendt, for example, posits that racism (including antisemitism) and colonialist imperialism were perpetuated by the propaganda spread by elites toward the end of gaining popular support for pogroms and colonial/capitalistic expansion by totalitarian leaders wielding god-like power.

Arendt’s observation evokes this passage from Lewis Carroll’s 1871 Through the Looking Glass.

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less. ‘

‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things. ‘

‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

Arendt argues that totalitarian rulers act as ‘masters’, creating propaganda which normalizes and justifies various unjust ideas and actions, i.e., fosters false consciousness and makes oppression possible. The elite maintain control over the definition of good and evil.

In sum, by controlling the media, education, and using religion (and hence, the family) as propaganda tools, the power elite control the mental space of the masses and normalize marginalizing social structures, laws, and policies.

What is truth?
What is ‘true’ is an epistemological question, and in any population there can exist several kinds of ‘truth.’ Truth version #1 is, well, fact: empirically and historically accurate. Truth version #2 is ‘my truth’ as in ‘strawberry ice cream is the best flavor’ or ‘my god is the only true god.’ Truth version #3 is propaganda or political disinformation. ‘Gauze over the eyes’ is perpetuated by those in power using propaganda to deny objective facts and sway personal truths to be in line with their lies.

False consciousness is believing Truth version #3 and obeying the demand to ignore or deny Truth version #1 and, in many cases, having a compromised version Truth version #2 which supports Truth version #3.

Arendt illustrates this process perfectly in her book: “…what is taken as fact” is, in fact, propaganda, the fuel that perpetuates false consciousness.

What is truth? One answer comes from American journalist and activist Abby Martin. She writes, “Truth is the ultimate resistance.” Here she is referring to Truth #1 arrived at through critically analyzing all information, alway seeking objective sources grounded in empirical fact and historical accuracy. This kind of truth is arms us to defend against falsehoods and skewed narratives pushed by those who seek to disguise injustice.

Palestine never existed?
Though a more thorough discussion will come in the next chapter, we can use the current situation in the Middle East as an example of the above. Here are the three ‘truth versions’ in the context of understanding the Israeli- Palestine war.

Truth version #1 is that the political Zionist movement, with support from the United Nations, enabled the creation of a Jewish state in 1948 leading to the forced displacement of over 700,000 Palestinians, an event know as the ‘nakba.’ This displacement continues through the 20th and now deep into the 21st century, the Israeli controlled land ever expanding through continuous and, according to international law, illegal settler colonialism. Palestinian resistance to this expansion has been seen in decades both before and since 1948. Through actions by the Israeli government the political Zionist movement systemically marginalizes Palestinians and most recently has led to the charge of genocide against Palestinians by Israel.

Truth version #2, taught in Hebrew schools all over the world, but most significantly so in the United States and Israel, is that Zionist ownership of what was Palestine, now Israel, is normal, just, and how things must be to insure the safety of the Jewish people. All Palestinians are ‘terrorists’ and only want death to all Jews; as an existential threat to Jews they must be controlled and/or defeated. Of key relevance, in the United States Christian Zionism is very strong, many believing that having Jews in Israel is the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy showing we are getting closer to the return of Jesus Christ.

Truth version #3 is that a colonialist, Zionist expansion in Israel is right, natural, and worth any cost in Palestinian lives. This truth is spread in many forms, especially in Israel, the United States, and much of the Western World. The current war in Gaza is just and must end in an absolute Israeli victory allowing for further expansion free from any threat from Palestinians.

As stated above, false consciousness is believing Truth version #3 and obeying the demand to ignore or deny Truth version #1 and, in many cases, having a comprised version Truth version #2 which supports Truth version #3. A key element of this false consciousness is the conflation of anti-Zionism and anti-Israeli government actions with antisemitism.

One can self-identify as Jewish either by religion, by ethnicity, or both. Antisemitism is a bias against those who identify as Jewish. Antisemitism is wrong and should not be tolerated in any context.

Zionism is a political ideology and being Jewish refers to religion/ethnicity. The Israeli government is a political entity, not a religion/ethnicity. I do not doubt that antisemitism has risen across the US, even on college campuses, but a reasonable question to ask is to what extent is this at least in part due to the intentional conflation of anti-Zionism and anti-Israeli government action with antisemitism?  Here’s a second question, is the epithet ‘antisemitic’ being used too broadly in some cases?

One irony I am sensing is that some of the most powerful, passionate, and articulate voices pointing out that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism are Jewish men and women around the world, including in the US and Israel, many of them arguing that Zionism itself is antisemitic. Many Jewish spokespersons, including perhaps the most prominent person in my discipline of sociology, Judith Butler, assert that Zionism is not Judaism and what the IDF is doing in Gaza is an out-and-out war crime, and is based on an inherently racist colonial-settler ideology. Here is a concise article by a Jewish author Peter Beinart, editor-at-large of Jewish Currents, which further clarifies the distinction between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. As additional background, this letter to the New York Times published in December, 1948 was signed by Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt, Sidney Hook, and many other Jewish intellectuals and activists. It explicitly calls out as ‘terrorism’ the actions being taken at the time by the leaders of the new Israeli state driven by an overtly political Zionist ideology. Israel’s actions and ideology, on the whole, remain unchanged since then and have lead to the current conflict.

Propaganda supporting political Zionism and conflating anti-Zionism and antisemitism has been systematically and successfully perpetuated by proponents of Zionism, both Jewish and non-Jewish and on both sides of the Atlantic. The “Hasbara Handbook” is systemically employed to deflect, redirect, and create an illusion of rational discussion. We are now circling back to the line from Mark Twain, mainly, what you ‘know for sure what just ain’t so.’

To be crystal clear, through the lens of critical Hydra theory, I support the Jewish religion, those ethnically Jewish, and those who otherwise self-identify as Jewish. I do not support a political ideology or a government  which systemically marginalizes any humans, in this case Palestinians. I agree with the November 10, 1975 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379 which states clearly that, “…Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.”

Here is what a wise philosopher colleague of mine offered as a framing of the question and response,

Is it important to distinguish between: (1) being anti-Zionist in 1879, (2) being anti-Zionist in 1947, (3) being anti-Zionist in 2024?

Several points—first, it is far easier to insist that anti-Zionism in 1879 and in 1947 is distinct from anti-semitism.  But, given the political reality of the state of Israel (UN recognized, etc), one can legitimately worry about the implications of being anti-zionist once the political reality of the state of Israel is established.  Jews could legitimately ask what the practical implications are and what grounds the motivation to be anti-zionist in contemporary times.  Back when the PLO was explicitly and overtly calling for the eradication of the state of Israel, their anti-zionism looked indistinguishable from anti-semitism.   

As I understand it, contemporary anti-Zionism is a call for fairness and justice for the Palestinian people, (both in terms of historic reparations and in terms of full and fair political and human rights  today) and is NOT a direct call for the elimination of the state of Israel.  But–again—that is a highly nuanced and sophisticated point of view.  It is reasonable for Jews and Israelites to worry that ordinary folks might struggle to keep these nuanced claims distinct from unacceptable antisemitic beliefs and claims.

Second, I completely agree that the Zionist notion of there being a “Jewish state”, inherently invites a 2nd class status for all non-Jews.  That is an a-priori premise that is built into the foundations of Zionism.  And is the basis for the sound claim that Zionism = racism.  Because when played out, Zionism entails that non-Jews necessarily are 2nd class. 

Rational, measured and productive discussions on this topic demand an agreement on how words are being used, to be sure. That said, effective propaganda uses the opposite, namely conflating definitions and weaponizing oversimplification.

A case in point
The events that took place after the UEFA Europa League match between Amsterdam Ajax and Maccabi Tel Aviv in Amsterdam on November 7, 2024 have been reported by various news media almost exclusively as ‘anti-semitic’ and even as a pogrom. As I write this news is still coming out and, in some cases, being repressed. So, what is the ‘truth’? And through what lens does one access that truth? A close look at social media reporting leads to an alternate description of the events as being much more nuanced and put emphasis on actions by Maccabi Tel Aviv fans well before, during, and after their 0-5 loss to Ajax. What to call these events is in question, and we must always question those that pedal ‘truth’ that only conforms to the narrative they have crafted previously. The term ‘gaslighting’ has been used to describe this behavior.

Removing the gauze
One truism is that you can’t take the gauze off of someone’s else’s eyes.⁴ False consciousnesses are woven into one’s self concept, and any challenge to one’s worldview is often perceived as an existential threat. In our efforts to confront toxic othering generated by false consciousness, the best we can do is repeat, clarify and make access to Truth #1 as easy as possible. By doing this, we promote the preconditions that make it possible for some to peel off, layer by layer, the gauze over their eyes. The voices of those who were blinded by propaganda but have now woken to Truth #1 -The political Zionist movement is inherently racist against Palestinians- must be heard and amplified by those seeking justice. Hearing and amplifying (in multiple forums) these voices will serve to encourage more people which minds able to learn to have a like transition, ideally.

Conclusion
Using the words and ideas of various thinkers we have explored how propaganda and false consciousness are employed by those in power in the perpetuation of oppression. The contemporary example of Palestine is only one of countless stories with exactly the same theme, the oppressor controlling the mental space of the oppressed. But humans are smart and resilient, and those who suffer marginalization eventually see the eternal truth that all humans deserve access to lives of dignity. There is some irony to the fact that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was passed in the United Nations in 1948, the same year as the Nakba. The first lines are critical,

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world…”

Systems of oppression which deny human rights will be recognized and challenged by both the oppressed and all those who truly believe in these rights. Employing critical Hydra theory to confront toxic othering begins by understanding the layers of gauze over one’s own eyes and then partnering with others who are undergoing the same liberating process.

As final note, we must be ever aware of the fact that each of us is prone to internalizing untruths, half-truths, and outright propaganda regarding any of the heads of the Hydra. The process of pulling off layers of gauze is a constant effort, likely never completely accomplished. We must remain humble in our quest to understand and confront oppression, always open to new information and alternate perspectives based in empirical fact.

Just like any social scientist striving for objectivity and for the truth, I must ask myself, ‘what do I know for sure that just ain’t true?’ This all at the same time realizing the fight for a more just world for all is ongoing and full of push back from those who are entrenched in propaganda and false consciousness themselves.

I began this chapter with a series of quotations, so I’ll end with one. Antonio Gramsci, in his Prison Notebooks warned us, “The challenge of modernity is to live without illusions and without becoming disillusioned.”⁵  

---

¹This thesis has been explored and affirmed in recent books. See Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making (2008) by David Rothkopf and Giants: The Global Power Elite Paperback  
by (2018) Peter Phillips. Both cite and stand on the shoulders of C. Wright Mills.

²Indeed, many Nietzsche scholars believe he used this technique of purposeful ‘cryptic’ writing, demanding that the reader think about and wrestle with the ideas he presented.

³For good treatment of this phenomena take a look at ‘Lies my teacher told me’, And How American History Can Be Used As A Weapon (2018) by James Loewen.

⁴ Here is a good example of someone who took the gauze off of their own eyes. The Jewish made 2023 documentary Israelism tells several similar stories of young Jewish people who shed their Zionism and now support a free Palestine.

⁵A thank you to my colleague Kerem Morgul for reminding me of this Gramsci quotation. Antonio Gramsci, an Italian sociologist, was one of the core thinkers that made up the Frankfurt School, the birthplace of modern critical theory and the direct inspiration for critical Hydra theory.

Using Critical Hydra Theory to understand the Palestine-Israel confrontation

[Updated 14 February 2024

“Silence is consent.”

-Plato

 

Overview
As I write this we are in day 100 of the Israeli bombing and invasion of Gaza that was prompted by an attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7, 2023. To date there have been approximately 1200 Israeli and over 23,000 Palestinian deaths, among them thousands of children. Given the lack of food, water, medicine or other critical humanitarian aid, the number of deaths from disease, exposure, and hunger are dramatically on the rise.

On 29 December 2023 the Republic of South Africa submitted to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) an application initiating proceedings on the charge of genocide against the state of Israel. The application included “…provisional measures to protect the rights invoked herein from imminent and irreparable loss” and requested an immediate response from the ICJ. This comprehensive 84 page document lays out relevant details supporting the genocide charge. The ICJ is expected to act on South Africa’s application by mid-January. As of this writing, 800+ organizations and dozens of  governments worldwide have signed on in support of South Africa’s action.

For additional information on the overall situation, take a look at this ‘Thoughts on Gaza‘ GoogleDoc, updated daily.

The ‘evil trifecta’
Critical Hydra theory begins with the assumption that oppression of one group of humans by another group through the use of toxic othering is wrong. Oppression exists in many forms, and is thoroughly woven into our histories, laws, policies, and current social structures. This oppression is perpetuated by one or more of the eight privileging forces represented by the heads of the Hydra.

Colonialism is the outward expression of entitlement. Literally so, as we examine how British royalty with the titles of ‘Lords’, ‘Dukes’, ‘Princes’ and ‘Kings’ (and their wannabe next tier ‘new money’ capitalist elites) justified the rise of the ‘British Empire’ through rapacious and exploitative colonial expansionism. Entitlement is when someone feels that their ascribed status gives them the right to oppress others. Expressed by individuals, acts of entitlement are boorish and sad. Expressed in the name of nations, these acts are horrendous and have led to many genocides across the globe both down through history and just now, today in Gaza.

Perhaps the most immediately relevant heads of the Hydra include the evil trifecta of classism, colonialism, and racism. These three privileging forces are at the root of most global social problems, and especially so regarding the genocides in Gaza, Myanmar, Syria, Bosnia, the Sudan, Congo, and elsewhere.

Facilitating this evil trifecta is a devotion to unchecked neoliberalism with its flawed assumption that a market free from laws and government oversight or intervention will somehow find ways of commodifying and profiting from entrepreneurial solutions to all human needs and problems. To find the root causes of most global social ills all it takes is to ‘follow the money’ and watch the economic actions (both official and covert) of people in political, military, and corporate power, the ‘entitled.’  It was sociologist C. Wright Mills who in 1956 published The Power Elite detailing this theory, but perhaps more importantly in 1959 it was former Army General and Republican leader Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned of a ‘military industrial complex’ in his farewell speech as the outgoing President of the United States. Now, nearly 70 years later, their words seem ever more relevant.

Though some may frame it so, the situation in Gaza is not primarily about religion or ethnicity. It is about power, hegemony, and greed. And it is no surprise that the British and US elite – historically full of classist, colonialist, and racist hubris- are at the center of the history of this tragedy.

It is no surprise that the Irish have long been pro-Palestinian; they share similar histories and fates with those in Palestine; both are victims of British colonialism. The ‘troubles’ the Irish talk about are eerily parallel to the experiences of the Palestinians. Though many Irish did not support all of the terroristic acts of the IRA just like many (most?) Palestinians do not support the terroristic acts of Hamas, they understand the terrorist’s motivations and need to resist oppression. When decades of boycotts and other acts of nonviolent resistance yield little or no results, it should be no surprise more extreme measures are put on the table. Hamas and the Irish Republican Army were forged by the same forces.

A George Floyd moment?
Is this a George Floyd moment for the world regarding the lasting impacts of colonialism? Metaphorically, does Israel have its knee on the neck of Palestine with the whole world watching via social media? Here’s why I think it is. I believe that the Israeli government’s response to October 7 -the bombing and invasion of Gaza and

crackdowns in the West Bank- is increasingly  being questioned by many people in Israel, the United States and throughout the Global North. Though we all acknowledge that the situation in Gaza is ‘complex’, the basic reality is that the Palestinian people have been systematically and increasingly marginalized for several generations.

Many social progressives are following the advice of Representative John Lewis and are causing ‘good trouble’ by speaking out, organizing, and protesting. They are arguing that, yes, Israel has a right to exist but so do Palestinians, and that full citizenship rights must be established and stolen land returned.

In the United States the 2020 George Floyd incident tipped the perceptions of many white Americans. Though there were countless racially motivated murders preceding Floyd’s -Emmett Till, Rodney King, Trevon Martin, to name a few- his death was so graphic and obscene that it finally moved many white people to learn more about baked in racism and to join BLM protests. In my students here at Elon I see a real difference in perception among the white students. There is a before George Floyd and an after George Floyd appreciation for racial complexities and realities in the US. I think that this same change is happening now in the Jewish diaspora, especially in the US. Just like racism in the US has not ‘been solved’ now post George Floyd, Zionist colonialism and hyper-nationalism will not go away after this moment in time. But change is coming, and it will be led by mostly younger people who are more self aware of misinfortmation they’ve been told.

Critical Hydra Theory and the conflict
One core premise of all critical theories, including Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Critical Hydra Theory (CHT), is that no human is more human than any other human. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) argues every human has a right to freedom and dignity.

As such, apartheid is an egregious wrong, one state systemically denying rights to one group of inhabitants while granting full rights to others. Genocide -the intentional killing of one group by a state- undeniably the most heinous and extreme violation of human rights possible- is the most profound violation of the basic principles detailed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Both apartheid and genocide are wrong, and both demand response by those using any version of critical theory.

Critical Hydra Theory (CHT) encourages an interrogation of the many privileging social forces which make possible these violations of human rights, but more than that, CHT demands a response. As the founder of critical theory, Karl Marx, said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it (“Theses on Feuerbach” (1845), Thesis 11.)” Those using CHT must first seek to understand the sources and manifestations of power and privilege and to follow the lead of those who are the victims of oppression in engaging in the struggle for justice.

Key to avoid, however, is an ad hominem approach which turns the oppressed into the oppressor, as in the case of Israel, historically the victim and now the perpetrator of oppression. The struggle is against toxic othering itself, against the processes of oppression, not against any specific population. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn told us long ago,

“(T)he line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either — but right through every human heart — and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years…. If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.”

To underline: it is the processes of oppression which are the focus for the critical Hydra theorist. We must understand and then help to dismantle the long ossified social and political structures which justify and hence make possible various forms of oppression. This is no easy task, nor is this a short term fight for justice. Confronting toxic othering means questioning the very core of our modern global culture and being willing to deconstruct and decolonize not only our cultural institutions but our own minds as well.

The coming days and months
Tragically, the crisis in Israel and Palestine seems destined to be with us for a good deal longer. Using Critical

Hydra Theory to understand the Palestine-Israel confrontation means to be at odds with some of the people with which we interact. The US government is still sending military aid to Israel. Given that Israel has engaged in both apartheid and genocide -based on long established international law definitions- the critical Hydra theorist must condemn these actions and hence is open to having the epithet ‘antisemite’ weaponized against them.

Being anti-apartheid and anti-genocide is not ‘antisemitic,’ it is being pro-justice for all humans.  To wit, in a letter to the editor published in The New York Times on December 4, 1948 over two dozen Jewish intellectuals, among them Albert Einstein¹ and Hannah Arendt, called the leaders of the newly formed state of Israel ‘fascists’, and argue that terrorist tactics were being used against the Palestinians. They cite specifically the case of the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin, but that was only one of countless other villages which were then -and still today- overtaken by ‘terrorist’ forces. Tools fascists use include both apartheid and genocide. The ideology and tactics evident in 1948 can be seen today in Israel/Palestine.

Since this crisis is indeed ‘complicated’ by decades (centuries?) of

propaganda surrounding and justifying colonialism and acts of brazen racism and classism, we must recognize that there are many people at various stages of awareness [including me!] about the essential nature of the crisis, and hence there will be heartfelt and emotional differences of opinion as people struggle with past and present facts regarding the war (and other) international crimes being committed in the West Bank and Gaza.

That both antisemitism and Islamophobia are on the rise is an indication that too many people ignorantly gravitate toward ethnocentrism and racism: demonizing the other. Both are wrong minded and support oppression, and both are contrary to humanistic efforts to recognize human rights for all.

In the coming days and months there is a danger that versions of racism -dehumanizing the ‘other’- will become virulent, but it is the responsibility of the critical Hydra theorist to call out any and all ad hominem attacks. Just as we must call out Israeli officials dehumanization of Palestinians, we must as vigorously reject all dehumanization of Israeli citizens and Jewish people. The critical Hydra theorist is aggressively anti-antisemitic. Toxic othering against any legitimately recognized religious, ethnic, or cultural group is antithetical to the principles of CHT.

Identifying and then researching and interrogating all the privileging forces represented on the heads of the Hydra is a necessary step in addressing social issues. Ones advocacy and activism must be intersectional and include a steadfast interrogation of all privileging forces. A critical Hydra theorist is against all forms of toxic othering and thus supports the struggles of those who are victims of these oppression. Just as the critical Hydra theorist is aggressively anti-antisemitic, they are also anti-sexism, anti-racism, anti-heteronormativity/anti- queer discrimination, anti-colonialism/paternalism, anti-classism, anti-ableism, anti-ageism, and anti-anthropocentrism. Key to remaining true to the overall goal of CHT -i.e., fighting the process of oppression- is to be vigilant in listening to the voices of the oppressed and having the courage to call out any action or rhetoric that dehumanizes their oppressor.

Progress toward a more just world for all must be motivated by a love of humans and humanity. To move toward justice we need to tap into the positive emotions of love and compassion, not the negative emotions of hate and fear. Moving forward toward the goal of a more just world will take resolve, courage, compassion, and a keen awareness of all of the privileging forces represented by the heads of the Hydra.

---

¹In April of 1948 Albert Einstein was asked by Shepard Rifkin, Executive Director of the American Friends of the Fighters for the Freedom of Israel, to help raise funds for Lohamei Herut Yisrael (also know as LEHI or the Stern Gang after its founder Avraham Stern. In his terse response Einstein capitalizes the word “Terrorist” and refers to those in this organization as “…mislead and criminal.”

Here is the text of the letter:

Mr. Shepard Rifkin
Exec.Director
American Friends of the Fighters
for the Freedom of Israel
149 Second Ave.
New York 3,N.Y.

Dear Sir:

When a real and final catastrophe should befall us in Palestine the first responsible for it would be the British and the second responsible for it the Terrorist organizations build up from our own ranks.

I am not willing to see anybody associated with those misled and criminal people.

Sincerely yours,

(Signed, ‘A. Einstein’)

Albert Einstein

 

---

Buy the Book
The above essay is the first in what will become a series of new chapters for the planned Third Edition of Confronting Toxic Othering: Understanding and Taming the Hydra. You can purchase the Second Edition here. All royalties go to support education initiatives for refugees in Bangladesh and beyond.

Second Edition of Confronting Toxic Othering available now!

The journey continues
My journey understanding and taming the Hydra has been ongoing since I published the first edition in 2021. This new edition contains many chapters I have written over the last two years based on classroom experiences both at Elon University, in Bangladesh, and online with refugees from Myanmar, Somalia, and Syria. Several useful classroom exercises have been added and the final section of the book now deepens explanation of the basic tenets of Critical Hydra Theory. I will be using the book in all my classes for the remainder of the school year, making these classes fulfill all the requirements for Elon University’s Advancing Equity Requirement (AER).

Overview of the Second Edition
Confronting Toxic Othering embarks on an ambitious quest to interrogate the root causes of all global social and environmental problems. Drawing upon the myth of the Hydra, the essays illustrate how each of the creature’s heads symbolizes eight fundamental and pervasive privileging forces, each fueled by the tendency to ‘other’ individuals based on differences such as race, class, or colonial history. Informed by the author’s teaching experiences with students in both the United States and Bangladesh, readers are encouraged to learn from the evolution of thoughts that culminate in the formulation of ‘Critical Hydra Theory’. Fully detailed in the concluding chapters, this theory highlights the intersectionality inherent in all eight forces of privilege.

The book serves as an invaluable tool for classroom or workplace dialogues on Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice, offering numerous provocative exercises designed to deepen the reader’s understanding of their own privileges. In our troubled world, addressing social justice issues can be a daunting task.

Confronting Toxic Othering offers a unique and robust tool to assist readers in becoming even more effective agents of progressive social change toward a more just world for all humans.

Proceeds go to  education initiatives
All author proceeds from the sale of Confronting Toxic Othering will be used to support education initiatives in UNHCR organized and run refugee camps both in Bangladesh and around the world.

Order now!
You can order now from Innovative Ink Publishing. Both physical ($30.00) and digital ($20.00) copies are available.

Barnes & Nobles has physical copies ($30.00) only.

To date, Amazon only has copies of the first edition.

Thank you!
Thanks go to all of my students -both in Bangladesh and here at Elon- since the fall of 2019 when I first began presenting the Hydra model. Countless class discussions have led to many improvements on ideas and exercises contained in this edition. Special thanks go out to Linda Martindale for editing assistance over the entire history of this project and to my Bangladeshi colleague Azizul Hoque for his support and input over the last several years. My deepest thanks go to my friend and colleague Dr. Ahmed Fadaam who created the many versions of the Hydra illustration. Finally, thank you to the Innovative Ink Publishing team for making this second edition become a reality.

 

 

 

 

 

CHT: A theoretical perspective for the 21st Century

A new theory for a new century
Being a 21st-century social scientist is a perhaps Sisyphean task; so much happens in such an unclear way, and trying to stay current with local, national, and international social and political news is akin to drinking from a firehose. Modern social scientists cannot ignore the fact that we live in a globalized, intricately, and infinitely interconnected social world made ever more seamless by increasingly ‘smart’ technologies that make national boundaries irrelevant. The increasing presence of artificial intelligence (AI) makes the future of humanity ever more complex and unpredictable.

At their core, all critical theories begin with the assumption that power and privilege asymmetries are at the root of most global social problems. Critical Hydra Theory (CHT) offers an explicitly pan-disciplinary and globally applicable approach capable of addressing 21st-century questions about the myriad social and, importantly, environmental problems facing humanity. CHT is a critical theory in the classic sense of this term and begins with the assumption that social injustices exist and must be systematically interrogated as part of our efforts to move humanity in a positive direction where dignity is afforded to all, including future generations.

Like other critical theories, CHT is also a radical theory in that it advocates for a change in the fundamental structure of our global social world, a reexamination of many deeply embedded assumptions about how human cultures can and should function, especially in relation to power and privilege. CHT is a tool that can be used to loosen the bolts of past social structures and serve to make positive and lasting social changes.

What constitutes a theory in the social sciences?
In the social sciences, a theory is a systematic framework or set of ideas that aims to explain and understand social phenomena, patterns, behaviors, or relationships. The primary purpose of  social science theories is to provide a structured and coherent way of thinking about and interpreting the social world. Important to remember is that theoretical perspectives in the social sciences are not mutually exclusive tools, but rather each perspective can be employed by the thinker as appropriate. Specifically, though critical theory focuses on examining socially constructed inequalities and serving as a tool for progressive change, it makes broad use of other perspectives to understand how narratives about these inequalities are constructed and maintained and also about the interconnectedness of all social institutions such as religion, politics, the economy, education, and so on.

CHT has key elements that constitute a theory in the social sciences and offers some useful methodological tools which enhance our ability to understand and explain our complex social worlds. As discussed elsewhere in this book, CHT builds on critical theory (and more specifically the so-called Frankfurt School) and more recently on Critical Race Theory. Below I explore what CHT offers a 21st century thinker.

Methodological tools
First, the most obvious tool is the image of the Hydra itself, visually reinforcing the premise that all privileging forces share the same body, and the root of all these forces is the tendency to engender toxic othering. This representation makes explicit the inherent intersectionality of the approach, and stresses that all privileging forces share a common origin. Simply presenting the Hydra image to those unfamiliar with CHT often has the effect of generating immediate appreciation for how all the implied ‘isms’ are related to each other.

Next, the central methodological tool used by CHT is learning from social critics with specific foci like racism or homophobia, for example, and immediately raising the question of how the insights from those who focus on one head can be used by those attempting to more deeply understand other heads.

This methodological tool is most effective when the questions and methodologies are probed and then creatively employed to deepen an overall understanding of privileging forces. To be clear, CHT has been inspired greatly by and employs the insights and methodologies of Critical Theory and Critical Race Theory. Here are several examples, many of which come directly from feminist thought.

• Judith Butler, a queer feminist sociologist, is known for their argument that gender is performative. With that premise, a CHT thinker will be immediately prompted to ask to what extent is, say, class or race/ethnicity performative? How are other social statuses, both the privileged and the marginalized, also performative?
• There is a growing awareness of and studies exploring the topic of internalized misogyny, the phenomena of females demonstrating contempt for other females or otherwise showing gender bias for men. Using that logic, the CHT thinker must consider internalized racism where BIPOC exhibit bias toward whiteness and/or contempt for BIPOC. Certainly, the idea of internalized classism now comes into focus as does internalized paternalism, where the colonized adopts the biases of the colonizer, and so on. The umbrella concept of internalized oppression is now being addressed by many scholars, and finds ample support from CHT.
• Most females have been victims of and are hence painfully familiar with the phenomena euphemistically labeled ‘mansplaining.’ Can we also begin to explore ‘richsplaining’ or ‘Global northsplaining’ or ablespaining’, and so on? Indeed, this is where CHT would have us go.
• Putting ‘white privilege’ into Google search just now yielded 331,000,000 hits including countless articles, books, web page resources, and, of course, a Wikipedia page. Using CHT, this term immediately generates questioning about male privilege, Global North (colonizer) privilege, hetero/cis privilege, and so on.
• Similarly, when hearing about the ‘white savior industrial complex’, a term coined by Nigerian-American writer Teju Cole, using CHT we now need to ask about the ‘male savior complex’, ‘able savior complex’, and so on.
• A very engaging exercise can be made out of finding examples of the terms ‘microaggression’ and ‘micro affirmation’ relative to all the heads of the Hydra. Typical students, especially BIPOC, will be able to identify micro-aggressions related to race or ethnicity, and using CHT this can lead directly into seeing how these actions can be found in reference to all the other privileging forces represented by other heads of the Hydra.

In sum, the CHT user seeks out methodologies of interrogation used by progressive activists in all areas of social justice work and retrofits them, as appropriate, for analysis of all other heads of the Hydra.

Global perspective
Conceived in preparation for a 2019 international conference of humanitarian workers in Berlin, Germany, Critical Hydra theory from its beginning has embodied a global perspective.

A first glance to some, the image of the Hydra seems off to some in that all of the heads are of equal size, inferring equivalent importance. Viewed from a Critical Race Theory perspective and particularly in the context of US culture, this critique may seem valid; racism appears to be a much bigger problem than, say paternalism/colonialism. Switch continents and countries, however, and the reality can be quite different, with the salience of these two heads reversed as in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the lasting impacts of colonialism and post-colonial imperialism.

The heads of the Hydra are of variable salience depending upon the geographic, historical, social, and cultural context. The intent of the model is (1) to emphasize that work needs to be done in understanding the context-dependent salience of each head, and (2) that the full utility of the model encourages taking a broad look both chronologically and geographically.

That all heads share the same body and driving mechanism -toxic othering- demands that the critical Hydra theorist explore the complex intersectionality of the various privileging forces and ask questions like, ‘how can we understand the historic interconnection between racism, classism, and colonialism in the formation of policies, laws, and social norms which serve to systemically marginalize the population of (for example) the Democratic Republic of the Congo’?

As a side note, via online and in-person classes I have introduced and used the Hydra model now with learners in the US, Bangladesh (both with Bangladeshis and Rohingya), Kenya, and Jordan. Though there are always many questions, most learners grasp the model quickly and tend to immediately modify it to fit their own unique circumstances. How the ascribed status of refugee fits into the Hydra model is always addressed.

The ‘Anthropocentrism’ head of the Hydra
The 21st century holds many challenges, the most existentially threatening of which is the current climate crisis. Indeed, that we may be approaching multiple environmental ‘tipping points’ seems not in question. Having an ‘anthropocentrism’ head on the Hydra model makes the critical Hydra theorist truly a 21st-century thinker, the visual alone forcing the issue of the intersectionality between the human-to-human othering and human othering of the non-human world. Previous critical theories have ignored or have not found a place for anthropocentrism in analyses. CHT addresses this significant gap.

The toxic othering of the non-human world has been woven into the basic cultural assumptions of all modern cultures. These assumptions can be described collectively as a ‘mentality of exploitation’, putting human needs above those of other species. The normalization of this marginalization has been a key feature of the ‘success’ of capitalism, wherein industries blissfully ignore all externality costs of their consumption and pollution. First used in the late 1960s and now used in many social and environmental science discussions, the concept of the ‘tragedy of the commons’ is a key concept helping to explain how ignoring externality costs is a common feature of modern day industries. The internal logic of capitalism is such that as a new manufacturing facility is planned, for example, both the short- and long-term impact on air and water are rarely considered.When interrogating the anthropocentrism head, CRT leads us quickly into the related topics such as environmental racism and colonialism and the classist NIMBY (not in my back yard) pattern of placing toxic waste and disposal facilities into poor neighborhoods.Questioning human nature: a viable species?

Questioning human nature: a viable species?
All social theories are ultimately based on assumptions about human nature and wrestle with the question ‘what does being human mean?’ Critical Hydra Theory (CHT) encourages us to scrutinize both the essence of human nature and the convergence of the self and society. It offers a distinct perspective, allowing us to perceive the entirety of humanity as one single entity, especially in our interconnected 21st-century existence. As a critical and radical theory advocating for a deep reassessment of both individual cultures and our global culture, CHT immediately runs into questions about basic human needs (instincts?), motivations, capacities, tendencies, and limitations.

One key tool of CHT is contrasting the social lives of humans that lived in pre-modern times (i.e., before the rise of state societies) and those in modern cultures. By studying the lives of pre-modern humans, for example, we find that the assumption that humans are greedy to be false; an egalitarian ethos appears to be the dominant mindset and communal sharing was the order of the day. The essential wisdom being considered by CHT is that human nature is more so ‘culture nature’ and that human nature may be more a factor of cultural influences than we might have previously assumed. The assumption that at least in part human nature may be malleable offers a glimmer of hope for social change advocates.

What we know from history, and more specifically from archeology and anthropology, is that complex state societies emerged independently on every continent, albeit at different times. We know also that a shared characteristic of all ‘modern’ cultures is the fact of structured social inequality and the cultural justification of same. In order words, toxic othering is a universal fact of all modern humanity. But it is a fact of human nature? Through individual and group action, can ‘the moral arc of the universe’ be bent toward justice, toward a world where toxic othering everywhere re-manifests itself into benign normal othering. Can those who use tools like critical Hydra theory expose and then provide viable alternatives to deeply embedded marginalizing structures?

The world is dominated by the privileging forces represented by the Hydra and these forces are causing untold human misery. Can we do better? Making the world more just for all, both now and into the future, is the ultimate test of our humanity and the imagination and power of the human spirit. To the extent that human agency exists, are we able to use our power to take control of human history and

• turn back a climate change-induced hellscape which looms in our near future?
• stop committing genocides such as those in the Congo, Myanmar, Gaza, and Europe?
• learn to accept all expressions of sexuality and gender identity?
• reject the normalization and glorification of gluttony and greed creating billionaires with god-like power and an obscene pooling of wealth across the globe?

In the end we must ask: are humans a failed species, so frail and weak as to not be able to rise up against the privileging forces? All the heads of the Hydra are important. But the evil trifecta of classism, colonialism, and racism combined with the slow-moving cancer of anthropomorphism must be recognized and confronted most aggressively if we are to prove ourselves as a permanently viable species and not just a character ‘That struts and frets his hour upon the stage / And then is heard no more.’  

Progressive and positive social change necessitates both individual and collective action.

The challenges facing humanity are massive and demand unprecedented levels of effort to face them effectively. All the above questions are critical and demand being addressed using every analytical device at our disposal. Critical Hydra theory is a tool, but it must be wielded by those with courage in their hearts and who possess a deep faith in the positivity of the human spirit.

As we imagine and then enact this new chapter of humanity, we need to remember one of the most important tenets of critical Hydra theory, namely that we need to listen to the voices of those who have been historically marginalized, especially those who have been multiply marginalized. Women’s voices. Refugee voices. Queer voices. Poor voices. Global South voices. Elderly voices. BIPOC voices. Differently abled voices. By listening to these voices and learning about how to endure and then confront oppression(s) we can move forward as one toward a more just world for all.

Wherever the research takes CHT with respect to human nature, we mustn’t limit our imagination of what our social world can look like based on incorrect assumptions.

A future made possible by confronting toxic othering
Critical Hydra theory is a theoretical perspective for the 21st century based on the promise that humanity must make it to the 22nd century and beyond. Though most readers will not live to see this next century, we have a sacred responsibility to do everything in our power to ensure our children and grandchildren will, and that this rebuilt world will be marked by a respect for human diversity and be structured so that all humans everywhere will be able to reach their full potentials.

---

 

“It would be advisable to think of progress in the crudest, most basic terms: that no one should go hungry anymore, that there should be no more torture, no more Auschwitz [or Gaza or Cox’s Bazar]. Only then will the idea of progress be free from lies.”

-Theodor Adorno

 

Critical theory, Critical Race Theory, and Critical Hydra Theory
Though I could not have described it as such, I began my journey confronting toxic othering many decades ago⁰. It was the mid 1970’s in a graduate level sociological theory course when I was first exposed to critical theory. Our professor was passionate about sociologists Theodore Adorno and Antonio Gramsci, both associated with the Institute for Social Research at the Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany, founded in the early 1920’s. I too was attracted to these sociologists and the Frankfort School because I found reinforcement for my urge to understand and address social justice issues. Critical theory goes beyond ‘objective’ scholarship and aims to critique and change society, rather than merely understand or explain it. Grounded in Marxism, the Frankfort School took seriously Marx’s statement, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.”

The theoretical grounding of critical Hydra theory can be linked back to the Frankfurt school, rooted in a study of

Marx and informed by many Enlightenment thinkers who stressed equality among humans. Although critical theory can be critiqued as being Western-centric, the ideas of Gramsci, particularly his use of the idea the ‘subaltern‘ (roughly a synonym for the marginalized ‘other’) indicates that the Frankfurt school thinkers understood how to extend classic Marxism¹ by systematically exploring the universality of the powerful using their influence to legitimize cultural hegemony. Though the individual thinkers using critical theory or critical Hydra theory may at times be guilty of being Western-centric, the basic tenets underlying each theory are not culture-bound.

A key fact is state societies (‘civilizations’), no matter where in the world they developed, had fundamentally the same issues with toxic othering. Once past a temporary egalitarian phase, it is universal that all ‘modern’ societies are marked by classism and soon after other ‘isms’ represented by heads of the Hydra.²

Most anthropologists now agree that socially structured inequality fueling cultural hegemony is a cultural universal among state societies. One of the main tenets of Gramsci’s use of the term subaltern is that we must listen to the voices of those who have been severely marginalized^3, and these voices exist all over the world. This is a key message of those more recent proponents of critical race theory.

Critical Hydra theory addresses marginalization of the othered and employs the concept of the subaltern and the methodology of listening to the voices of the marginalized into the analysis of toxic othering as a framework of analysis addressing social injustice as it exists around the world in all modern societies. In my development of the critical Hydra theory model, I have definitely been influenced by modern critical race theorists, but the origins of my critical analysis go back to my earliest days as a thinker.

Critical theory embraces and models an intellectually omnivorous approach, listening to myriad voices within the academy -philosophers and those from all social sciences- as well non-academic voices, particularly the words of those directly impacted by socially structured inequalities and injustices. Critical theorists see the necessity to interrogate and critique the very fabric of society. My study of critical theory back in graduate school prepared me to listen to thinkers like Brazilian Paulo Freire (author of Pedagogy of the Oppressed) and American legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw later in my career.

The works of more modern thinkers like Audré Lorde have inspired me a great deal and serve to affirm the basic tenets proposed by Gramsci. What Lorde suggests, which is absent in both critical theory and critical race theory, is a hint at the anthropocentrism head of the Hydra, which I think is absolutely critical and is perhaps our biggest existential threat as a species now.

Seeking what they sought
I explain elsewhere in this blog [book] how the idea of the Hydra emerged in my thinking and how, over many semesters talking about and teaching ‘critical hydra theory’ (CHT), the ideas have matured and deepened. When I transitioned from talking about Hydra theory to using the phrase ‘critical Hydra theory’ I was aware that I was clearly using and extending the cache that ‘critical race theory’ (CRT) had established. I knew the name Kimberlè Crenshaw, having covered her in my sociology classes for years when discussing race and gender, and when introducing and explaining the concept of intersectionality. I knew that Professor Crenshaw had co-founded the African American Policy Forum (AAPF) and that their work clearly overlapped with what I was trying to accomplish with CHT.

Indeed, here in part is AAPF’s mission statement:

“We promote frameworks and strategies that address a vision of racial justice that embraces the intersections of race, gender, class, and the array of barriers that disempower those who are marginalized in society. AAPF is dedicated to advancing and expanding racial justice, gender equality, and the indivisibility of all human rights, both in the U.S. and internationally.”

As soon as I published Confronting Toxic Othering in late 2021, I reached out to AAPF and requested the opportunity to talk with anyone within the organization concerning our common goals and to get a reaction to my use of the phrase ‘critical Hydra theory’. I was put into contact with their CRT expert (at the time completing her dissertation examining CRT) and sent her a copy of the book. Our conversations and correspondence in the following months left me feeling supported in my work, and we agreed that we were both seeking the same thing: a world where the forces of marginalization were thoroughly interrogated and, ultimately, eradicated to the point where humans everywhere are afforded basic dignities. Now as I work on the revised edition of Confronting Toxic Othering I am finding more and more that my ideas, especially the basic tenets of CHT, are simply a restatement of what others -mostly BIPOC and those from the Global South (aka the colonized world)- have been saying for decades. Below I explore the words of one of these powerful writers, Audrè Lorde, and describe how she is part of the canon of CHT.

Why CHT at all?
In early August of 2023 I was privileged to lead a three day workshop for humanitarian workers in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. The theme for the workshop was “Social Justice in Action: Unmasking Power Dynamics in Humanitarian Response” and we used the Hydra model and CHT to talk about power dynamics affecting the 1,000,000+ Rohingya refugees residing in the world’s largest refugee camp just south of Cox’s. The participants in this workshop immediately grasped the logic behind the Hydra model, embraced the challenges of CHT, and employed this new conceptual tool with creativity and passion.

In the US context, the increasingly inclusive approach of organizations like the AAPF emphasizing the “indivisibility of all human rights” appear to hint that CHT is redundant. In non-US contexts like Bangladesh, the concept of race takes on very different nuances and talking about critical race theory infers a Western/US perspective and puts explicit emphasis on an inherently problematic race concept, i.e., on what is ultimately an artifact of Western colonialism. [See here and here for more on this idea.] In short, the value added of critical Hydra theory (CHT) is being a more internationally understood way of talking about how power and privilege have been embedded into all cultures.

Additionally, in the Western context and especially in the US, talking about Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and/or Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice (DEIJ) issues using the rhetoric and framework of Critical Race Theory introduces a layer of political controversy that may (at least in the short run) present challenges. Critical Hydra theory provides a framework that can offer a fresh lens for those attempting to grasp the issues underlying the myriad needs for DEI/DEIJ initiatives.

Critical Hydra theory builds on, extends, and deepens both critical theory and critical race theory, with the addition of the anthropocentrism head being the most demonstrative new dimension.

The canon inspiring Critical Hydra Theory: Karl Marx, Audrè Lorde, Paulo Friere, and others
Reflecting on the words of philosopher Basho “Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise; seek what they sought”, we need to ask: what were people like Marx, the founders and followers of the Frankfurt school, and more recently activists like Paulo Freire and Audre Lorde seeking?

That the word ‘dignity’ is used in the very first sentence of the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is significant and lies at the heart of the work of the multinational committee who authored this document. They were seeking to articulate a set of assumptions and assertions which could act as a policy roadmap for all global cultures in the aftermath of the grotesque acts of genocide and racism which had played out in Nazi Germany.

Though he devoted scant writing as to how we would get there, Marx was seeking a post-capitalist world where all humans could be free from alienation and live in a social world that encouraged and facilitated the maximization of the physical, intellectual, artistic, and spiritual potential of all humans. Founders of what is classically referred to as ‘critical theory’, the Frankfurt school cadre of thinkers including Adorno, Gramsci, Habermas, Marcuse and others sought to encourage and model the critiquing of societal structures, ideologies, and power dynamics at the root of much human misery. They were motivated by the hope that through the use of critical theory the pursuit of social justice and human liberation could be broadly embraced and lead to an inclusive, humane world for all humans.

Though not formally part of the Frankfurt school, thinkers like Edward Said (Orientalism) and Frantz Fanon (“Black Skin, White Masks” and “The Wretched of the Earth”) have significantly influenced Critical Hydra Theory within the broader Critical Theory tradition, addressing issues of othering, colonialism, racism, and decolonization. Said and Fanon were seeking a world where the interrogation of colonialism bore the positive fruit of understanding and then dismantling the lasting impacts of oppressive colonial structures.

Both Freire and Lorde make the same two points. First, echoing Fanon’s observation about the colonized adopting the perspectives and actions of the colonizers, they point out that virtually everyone is simultaneously both the oppressed and the oppressor. Here is how Lorde puts it in her seminal essay “Age, Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Difference”

“But our future survival is predicated upon our ability to relate within equality. As women, we must root out internalized patterns of oppression within ourselves if we are to move beyond the most superficial aspects of social change. … For we have, built into all of us, old blueprints of expectation and response, old structures of oppression, and these must be altered at the same time as we alter the living conditions which are a result of those structures.”

She then goes on to invoke Freire,

“As Paulo Freire shows so well in The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, the true focus of revolutionary change is never merely the oppressive situations which we seek to escape, but that piece of the oppressor which is planted deep within each of us…”

Lorde also says clearly that all forms of oppression share a common twisted logic, that:

“Racism, the belief in the inherent superiority of one race over all others and thereby the right to dominance. Sexism, the belief in the inherent superiority of one sex over the other and thereby the right to dominance. Ageism. Heterosexism. Elitism. Classism.”

A second point made by both thinkers is captured by the title of one of Lorde’s most dramatic pieces of work, namely  “There Is No Hierarchy Of Oppressions“. She says,

“Within the lesbian community I am Black, and within the Black community I am a lesbian. Any attack against Black people is a lesbian and gay issue, because I and thousands of other Black women are part of the lesbian community. Any attack against lesbians and gays is a Black issue, because thousands of lesbians and gay men are Black.”

This indeed is a main tenet and goal of critical Hydra theory, that all the heads of the Hydra must be recognized as different avatars of toxic othering sharing the same body, their origin and impacts interrogated, and their heads transformed from devouring monsters to benign faces representing human diversity.

Lorde hints at one of the main differences between classical critical theory, CRT and CHT; she anticipates the anthropocentrism head of the Hydra. She warns in the poem that appears at the end of “Age, Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Difference” that unless we enact radical cultural change “someday women’s blood will congeal/upon a dead planet”.

Her reference to a ‘dead planet’ can be taken to mean she saw our human tendency to oppress included our oppression of other life forms on the planet, an idea that was increasingly current in her time and is certainly well understood by many today.

She ends the poem with an optimistic vision, offering that if we win,

“there is no telling

we seek beyond history

for a new and more possible meeting.”

Indeed, in that poem she summarizes the hopes of critical theory, critical race theory, and critical Hydra theory, namely that through our agency both individually and collectively we can create a more just world for all. As Theodor Adorno puts it, “Only then will the idea of progress be free from lies.”

Final thoughts
Confronting the endemic toxic othering at the root of all social problems is a quest common to all who seek a more just world, and the Hydra model is a powerful tool able to be employed in this perhaps Sisyphean task. Critical Hydra theory is an offering to those who see themselves as agents of social change, a new twist on an old set of ideas and motivations. For as long as there have been humans there have been those who recognized injustice and toxic othering, one group feeling and acting ‘superior’ to another. I believe that just like intelligence or height which exist on a bell curve in human populations, empathy is a trait that also is much more pronounced in some more than others. Eradicating injustices is a goal that has motivated many empathy enhanced⁴ social philosophers, poets, and activists across the globe throughout our troubled history as a species. The rich tapestry of their many voices comes from all periods of human history and from all corners of our world. The tool of critical Hydra theory is just one more arrow in the quiver of the most recent generation of social justice warriors who seek a world ‘beyond history.’⁵

 

---

Notes

⁰Here is what I wrote in 1980 anticipating my career as a humanist and social justice seeker.

¹In his 1846 work The German Ideology Marx says, “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas; i.e., the class which is the ruling material force in society is at the same time the ruling intellectual force” and lays the groundwork for the somewhat more inclusive concept of cultural hegemony.

²See Peter Tuchin’s Ultrasociety (2016) for a detailed argument that although stratified state societies are an inevitability humanity is moving toward a world with less structural inequality.

³In her book Can the Subaltern Speak? Indian feminist Gayatri Spivak posits that subaltern voices are muted, diverse, and expressed in a manner hard to process by many who seek to listen, mostly critical academics. Beginning in the 1980’s those such as Spivak working in Subaltern Studies have addressed the methodological and ethical issues of mitigating the inherent bias of the colonial/Western perspective as subaltern voices are heard.

⁴In my theory class I talk about how Marx imagined a post-capitalism world where humans would live ‘from each according to their ability, to each according to their need’, and where all human potential would be realized and dignity would be afforded to all. I think Lorde shared this vision.

⁵These individuals are typically at odds with those individuals who are ‘authoritarian enhanced’. Perhaps this is one way of talking about the classic battle between good and evil in all human populations: the empaths versus the authoritarians.

Open letter to Women’s Peace Cafe attendees, Dhaka, Bangladesh 8 August 2023

Esteemed students, staff, faculty, and friends,

I have very pleasant and vivid memories of our short time together at the Women’s Peace Café last week. I found your attentiveness extraordinary, your questions on point and challenging, and your hospitality warming. Here is the article in The Business Standard reviewing our event.

During our conversation I believe several points I made resonated with many of you and also I gave you a couple assignments or challenges. Below I review and extend some of my main points. Additionally, you are welcome to read this which I wrote when I was in Cox’s Bazar at a three day workshop focusing on power, justice, and how to use the Hydra model to better understand global issues.

Listen to those who are marginalized
One of the first challenges I gave you was creating a list of marginalized people who have been inspirational to you. These names should include females, of course, but think also of other marginalized statuses.The premise that we must learn to hear the voices of those who are marginalized is one that is accepted and encouraged by leaders in the Critical Race Theory (CRT) movement in the United States. Those who want to be allies to the marginalized must listen to them and follow their lead. Here is a clarifying quotation from Paulo Friere, author of Pedagogy of the Oppressed: 

“Although the situation of oppression is a dehumanized and dehumanizing totality affecting both the oppressor and those whom they oppress, it it the latter who must, from their stifled humanity, wage for both the struggle for a fuller humanity; the oppressor, who is himself dehumanized because he dehumanizes others, is unable to lead this struggle.” (Pedagogy of the Oppressed, page 47)

My list is exclusively women of color^!, except in the case of American sociologist and activist Judith Butler, a ‘they’. These names represent only a short, suggestive list in terms of my personal development; my more complete list goes much longer. I would hope that you would take this challenge to construct your own list, keeping in mind that the best voices to listen to are those which have been marginalized. Who are the voices present in Bangladeshi culture speaking about their oppression? How can you learn from them?

We are one Humanity
A second main point I made was that we must move forward together based on the assumption no human is more human than any other human. I gave you my long, winded definition of humanism², and I hope to challenge you to come up with your own definition that expresses how you feel about humanity and justice.

My ‘humanism’ definition is a work in progress which I have modified several times during my career. The world is changing rapidly, and the definition of what it takes to be a humanistic person who prioritizes humanity over nationality is always changing. Be prepared in the future to learn and revise your own definition.

On a related note, we also talked about how toxic othering is at the base of all the various ‘isms’ like racism, sexism, classism, colonialism, etc. We must always keep in mind that a humanitarian actor should never fight just one evil like sexism, for example, and not be prepared to be an ally to those who are fighting all the other isms.

The Hydra model is only one tool to use as you become a champion of humanity and embrace the challenge of understanding and responding to issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). As a model, however, I think the
Hydra image is robust because it demands the integrating and understanding of all the dangers to humanity represented the the various heads and understanding the concept of intersectionality presented to us by Audre Lorde and Kimberlé Crenshaw.

I hope that you will use the model of the Hydra in the future as you attempt to understand more deeply your own life and the lives of people around you. Critical Race Theory and Critical Hydra Theory both use the word interrogate to describe their methodology in exploring the past, and understanding how racism -and the other isms- have been woven into institutions, laws, policies, and norms in our cultures.

I would like you to keep the word ‘interrogate’ in mind as you examine your own culture and your own life as you own your role as an advocate for humanity. Seek always to question basic assumptions and have the courage to speak truth to power.

Global south = colonized world
One small point I made had to do with the commonly used phrase the ‘Global south’. One way that marginalization becomes normalized is by using words to sanitize the past. Such is the case with the use of the phrases ‘Global north’ and “Global south.’ The use of these terms asks use to forget history and to acknowledge that the present world is very much a product of our colonial past. In no uncertain terms, Global north = colonizers and Global south = colonized. As I mentioned above, using Critical Hydra Theory demands we interrogate the past and understand how those in power have normalized marginalization. The colonialism/paternalism head of the Hydra is at the root of most global social problems. You are invited to read this and this where I explore this topic in some detail.

Mother Earth and the the fight against anthropocentrism
We all have a tendency to put out the fire closest to us, or the one that is most immediately personal to us. Women fight sexism in their own lives, and in their culture, because that is an immediate and personal concern. But as I pointed out in my presentation of critical concern is the climate crisis. Right now Bangladesh is very much at risk due to the extreme climate episodes that we will see happen more and more frequently. In the future, cyclones will get stronger and flooding worse. The Hydra has many heads, but perhaps the most important one is anthropocentrism: the premise that humans are above and apart from nature, and can do with the natural world whatever we wish. There is no debate about the fact that human activity on the planet has caused and will cause increasingly massive climate related damage and will change peoples lives. If we do not integrate our quest for a better humanity with having a better relationship with nature, we are surely doomed. Those born now in 2023, unfortunately, will see a world of climatological collapse and massive devastation to humanity unless we all act with greater urgency now.

Embrace the task
Be humbled but also energized by the enormity of the task before us. Understanding all of the heads of the Hydra and seeing each intersectionally connected to the cancer of toxic othering is an important first step. I urge you to perform acts of allyship, and welcome and give positive reinforcement to those who offer allyship to you.

Let me give you another assignment. As I traveled around Dhaka, I had occasion more than once to ride in a human powered rickshaw. Next time you user this mode of transportation I would ask that you reflect on the extent to which you have been an ally to this person who is quite obviously near the bottom of the social class structure and is thus quite marginalized. What would it look like being an ally to this person? We always have to watch the line between allyship and simply patronizing, but that is a task that I feel, with the proper intentions and heart, can be accomplished.

Please let me know how your quest to be a better ally to other women, and to all other marginalized groups goes. I look forward to your stories of success and growth.

Walk together toward a more just world for all
Let us walk together into the future remaining steadfast with our commitment to a humanity that provides freedom, opportunity, and encouragement for humans all to achieve their maximum potentials.

And I want to again thank all of you for attending this session and for Brac University and the Centre for Peace and Justice for making it possible. It was an honor to be able to speak with all of you, and I will take what I have learned from you and pass it on to my students back at Elon University. I think the idea of a Women’s Peace Café is inspirational and could be replicated in any setting, not just in academic contexts.

We must keep in mind that peace is not just the absence of violence, but the presence of justice. And justice means having no groups marginalized, having a humanity where all humans are treated with the same level of dignity as all other humans. I am very aware that I am saying this to an audience that is predominantly female and living in a culture which has very strong norms surrounding what women can, and cannot do, what woman should and should not do. I know that women such as you are fighting cultural currents designed to limit your agency and pushing you toward compliance with these norms. But I have faith that you are strong, and will move forward together as a sisterhood using each other as allies and that you will welcome the men around you who offer allyship to make a better world for yourselves and for other Bangladeshis. You need to keep in mind that you have responsibility not only as an individual, but as members of organizations. You have the opportunity and perhaps obligation to make those organizations in line with the goals of humanism as I’ve outlined. I wish you all the best in the future.

Finally, I began my presentation by attempting to explain the title, ‘Humanity needs more female voices now!” I do believe in that statement. I believe that a world dominated by female leaders would be a far more humane place than the world we have now. Toxic masculinity has been normalized, contaminating global politics (see for example Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Jair Bolsonaro, and Benjamin Netanyahu), and having more women in positions of leadership likely would be a positive step toward a more just world.

I invite you to remain in contact with me via email and let me know if you have any questions about what I talked about. If you have some input as to the Hydra model you can learn more on my blog. I wish you all the best in the future.

In solidarity,

Tom Arcaro

---

Notes

¹Isabella Baumfree (also known as Sojourner Truth), Maya Angelou, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Patricia Hill Collins, Angela Davis, Audrè Lorde, and Judith Butler

²Humanism is an ideology of human growth and potential based upon an assumption that all humans deserve to live in a world structured such that all humans are not only have the opportunity to but are actively encouraged to reach all of their potentials, including intellectual, spiritual and physical, but that these essential and universal human rights are fulfilled in such a way as any human action honors the fact that we are just one of many species, part of a larger ecosystem, which needs to be preserved for future generations, both human and non-human.

 

[This was written the morning after I had been honored to participate in a certificate awarding ceremony hosted by the Centre for Peace and Justice at the home offices of their Refugee Studies Unit located 1km from the Ukhiya Rohingya refugee camps south of Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. This is a partial draft of what I plan to say to the Women’s Peace Cafe attendees in a couple days from now in Dhaka.]

 

Thoughts on the denormalization of marginalization

I want to use an example to facilitate our understanding of the denormalization of marginalization in action, and that example is on the logo behind me, the Centre for Peace and Justice (CPJ), and the way that this organization is functioning.

Every day CPJ is a perfect example of allyship¹. Not only is it a great example of organizational allyship, every individual within the organization functions as a positive ally. What that means is that they are treating everyone with dignity and everyone the same. This is not just one’s persons opinion. I heard this exact sentiment from the many of the refugees and Bangladeshi nationals I have talked to in during my visit to Cox’s Bazar.

I rarely call out any individuals, but in this case I will. My close CPJ colleague Azizul and I will be walking down the street and he will be making a point, saying ‘he or she’ when talking about some kind of action that could be done by either a male or a female. That is, he is being gender inclusive not just in front of an audience of males and females, but in private conversation with another person, in this case me. He is normalizing the act of gender neutrality, and subtly fighting a misogynistic assumption that only males have agency.

Another example includes what happened a couple days ago at the CPJ Refugee Studies Unit down near the Ukhiya Rohingya refugee camps, Kutupalong. We had an incredibly beautiful certificate awarding ceremony that included learners both from the host community -Bangladeshi nationals- and from the refugee camps, Rohingya refugees.

Leading off and acting as master of ceremony for the Certificate Awarding Ceremony was a female, Tamanna Siddika. By her actions taking the lead she was modeling the fact that women can be in positions of authority and take command when appropriate.

CPJ was, by putting her in that position, acting as an organizational ally, and as she was speaking and organizing the flow of the program, she was modeling women’s empowerment. And so, both the males and females in attendance were being communicated with, not overtly and being hit over the head, but rather subtly, making a point that was reaching those attending more at a subconscious level. Instead of just talking about gender inclusivity CPJ was modeling such.

A second example of organizational allyship is that literally sitting side by side were Bangladeshi nationals and Rohingya refugees, both groups having had strong co-equal representation both in our online course (for which this was the Certificate Award Ceremony) and in this in-person ceremony.

The event was filled with short speeches of appreciation by many of our learners, stirring vocal performances, and hundreds of post-ceremony photographs. That learners took the time and effort to be at this ceremony is the true  appreciation they have for CPJ and its staff earned through now years of exemplary allyship.

Both individuals and organizations function better when they have accumulated substantial social capital, and earning this capital through allyship actions has been part of the CPJ brand from the beginning.

Denormalization of marginalization
And so, we fight the normalization of marginalization by engaging in the denormalization of marginalization with our actions that sometimes are conscious and explicit, but many times are subconscious and implicit, having become a matter of social habit. What I meant when I said that the world needs to hear women voices now² is, among other things, the idea that women need to speak out whenever they can or take progressive actions whenever they can, not just for themselves, but for the model they present to other women around them, and other men around them as well.

As a parent, I know, and perhaps some of you know as well, or will realize when you do become parents, every moment is a teachable moment, and every moment you are around your child, they are learning from you, absorbing your views and behaviors just like a sponge, soaking up every nuance. Indeed, most of the communication that happens between humans is passive and subconscious. Our way of being-in-the-world can be never fully hidden from others. If you truly believe in dignity for all in your heart, you will act toward others as such, showing them that you honor their right to dignity, and treat them in a way that will facilitate them feeling a sense of dignity. Based on the idea of the looking-glass self, they in turn will see themselves now as more worthy and hence be empowered to treat not only themselves in a more dignified fashion, but others as well.

Just as the normalization of marginalization took a long time to fully take hold with all of the heads of the Hydra, the denormalization of marginalization will also take a long time and will be the product of an infinite number of individual actions.

But we must keep in mind that we are all members of organizations, some formal, some informal. At the household level, we can model the denormalization of marginalization by subtly addressing toxic othering in our interpersonal behavior. When we engage with others at work we can model the denormalization of marginalization with our workmates, both with peers and those with higher or lower statuses.

And as members of organizations we can find ways to address those policies or organizational cultural practices which add to the normalization of marginalization and suggest changes in policies and procedures, and ways of being around the workplace, addressing any toxic othering embedded within the corporate culture. Confronting toxic othering is something which comes from the heart and comes after a personal acceptance of basic human rights for all, acceptance of the fact that we are all one human family.

Bending the moral arc toward justice
The moral arc of the universe is indeed long, and I do believe bends towards justice. But this bending toward justice is not an accident. It is the cumulative impact of millions of individuals each taking thousands actions who have committed first consciously and then subconsciously to the basic humanitarian ideals, that no human is more human than any other human. Let us join together and make the world a place imagined by the authors of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Let us work together to close the gap between the real in the ideal, between how things are -a world full of toxic othering- to how things can and should be, a world filled with justice and dignity for all humans.

---

¹ “Allyship is a lifelong process of building and nurturing supportive relationships with underrepresented, marginalized, or discriminated individuals or groups with the aim of advancing inclusion.” My extended definition emphasizes the fact that organizations and governments can also act as allies.

² “Humanity needs more female voices now!” is the title I am using for my talk with the Women’s Peace Cafe in Dhaka.