So we all woke up one morning this week to the electronic thunder of the first salvos being fired between members of probably the most famous family in our country. Since then, the rat-a-tat-tat of machine gun fire has continued to sporadically break out from one side or the other, with accompanying shots from interested bystanders as well!
I have no interest in adding bullets to the skirmish, other than to observe that, as in real war, cyber-warfare may be just as deadly! I'm sure we've all experienced it ourselves. Someone sends us an antagonistic email at work. Someone's rude to us on Whatsapp or Facebook or Instagram. Our pride is stung, our sense of outrage and injustice is invoked, our itchy trigger fingers snap into action and a sharp reply is issued (and sometimes cc everyone else so we can all keep score).
Just happened to me this week. Got a rude message on Whatsapp, my quick temper flared, and before my brain truly engaged, my emotions did, and so my fingers moved. About 10 minutes later, I regretted it, but... no one can run fast enough to retrieve a bullet.
Often, conflicts are more effectively resolved in the private arena, and wherever possible, face to face. In the private arena, the risk of one's pride being damaged or having to be salvaged is diminished. In public (or when there are 15 people on cc!), the tendency is to want to show the rest of the world that you're not to be trifled with. When face to face, you can quickly change your tone and your message, soothe the atmosphere, and the poisonous words can vapourise into the air. On email, Whatsapp or social media, well, the words just sit there looking at you, accusing you, and demanding a response. So, even as I write this myself, I remind myself to be courteous and considered!
There's another aspect to social media that is quite disturbing to me, and that is the phenomenon of people posting rants or videos to shame other people. There are even dedicated websites for this. Why? If we have evidence of a crime, just send it to the police. Otherwise what we're basically trying to do is achieve kangaroo court justice - hey all my friends on Facebook, if you see this guy, lynch him for me ok!
If someone's cut in front of you in his car, maybe he really is a selfish and dangerous driver. Or maybe he's trying to get his pregnant wife to the hospital. If someone's behaving weirdly or confrontationally, maybe he really is a boorish nuisance. Or maybe he just lost his job or a loved one, or has been told he's terminally ill, and so he's having a hard time taking it in.
My point is, we don't know until we've stepped in his shoes. I get that bad behaviour can be incredibly infuriating. But let's consciously decide to take the high road. As the saying goes, before we say anything, consider if it is (a) true; (b) helpful and (c) necessary. And in these internet days, (d) if it's necessary to be said to the whole world - as Mark Twain said, a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes!
And on a related note - an issue that really matters to me personally. The democratisation of news, such that social media becomes as influential on public opinion as the mainstream media, has many benefits. For one, I get to share my thoughts on this blog, little-read as it is! But it does also facilitate mob rule viz. lynch that guy who cut in front of me!
A recent kerfuffle arose when the Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore (ASAS) told Cathay to remove an advertisement in support of Pink Dot, the LGBT event. Now, all you readers know I am a Christian, so obviously you know where I stand on this. But I fully accept that this is a secular, multi-religious country, and on many issues, it is absolutely essential for us to learn to harmoniously agree to disagree.
So my very deep concern is the quick mobilisation of resources to dig up the personal backgrounds of the ASAS leadership, point out that the Chairman is Christian, and then on that basis, put out statements on social media that "Christians cannot be trusted... especially in positions of authority". The rest of the community then jumped in with comments like "this is exactly the sort of **** from religious ****tards" and "everything the church touches is **** and so are the stupid sheep in them".
Let's be clear. People *are* allowed to express and act on our religious beliefs in our daily living, and this includes our work. This is called *freedom of religion*. My faith tells me I must be honest. I must love my enemy. So at work, I strive to be honest, and I strive to love even those who oppose me. This is all fine by most people, because they generally agree with those values, and they say, great, you have religious freedom.
But my faith also tells me, for example, that the meaning of marriage = one man, one woman, for life. So, for example, if it ever came up at work, I would equally oppose providing support for LGBT events (this sole fact, by the way, would today disqualify me from a job at many European and American companies. Conversely, I would understand an atheist's opposition to providing support for a religious event. Except he wouldn't lose his job over that, so, lucky him). At that point, what does the world say? Well, now your faith doesn't agree with my views, so, sorry, you're not allowed to have religious freedom. And to help me win the argument, I'll conveniently label your views as "hate speech" and mine as "freedom to love". In a nutshell,
your religious freedom only exists as long as you agree with me.
And if you don't agree with me, I'm going out to label you - "Christians cannot be trusted in positions of authority", "****", "stupid sheep". You know what that is? *Hate speech*. Pretty ironic.
I've said this before - the world is often happy to say these ugly things about the Christian community because a fundamental tenet of our faith is to love our enemy and turn the other cheek. It's pretty fun to bash someone whose standing instructions are, don't punch back. And then when he finally cracks and does punch back, can get additionally labelled as "hypocrite".
For those of us who are Christians - are we proud to say, I believe, and I act on that belief. What do we stand for? What social media tells us, or what God tells us? Do we go shopping around until we find friends or even a church that accords with what we personally want or believe? Who is God in that kind of relationship? God, or you? Or are we instead prepared to bravely stand up, get slapped, and then stand up again? To love, and speak in love, and act in love, and not to hide, and hide and hide?
In several parts of Nazi-era Europe, Jews were required to wear an armband or a cloth patch with the Star of David, tagging them as Jews as a mark of shame. In a number of instances, this backfired on the Nazis, as the discriminated Jews were obviously not the cause of Germany's troubles, and citizens took to tipping their hat to the Jews as a form of protest against the government. It is recorded that the Czechoslovakian government eventually had to ban hat tipping to Jews!
Do we fail to speak up and stand up, and eventually leave our children a world in which they must either hide or abandon their faith, or be compelled to wear the equivalent of a "patch", barred from and distrusted at work and in positions of authority? And if it came down to it, would we still be willing to proudly wear that patch?
In our politics, in our personal lives, in our social interactions in person or online - make our choice. Refuse to join in hate speech, and to refuse to accept hate speech.
Comments