Remembering Our Common Humanity
The crisis of dehumanization and the collective path towards peace
“The moment we allow our hearts to go numb to the deaths of any children, the suffering of any person, is the moment we shut down our humanity.” - Valerie Kaur
Suddenly, I caught myself weeping.
The bombs. The blood faces of ruined people. Wet caked grey with filth and plaster dust and shrapnel and dirt. Mothers cradling lifeless children. Doctors crying. I’m crying. In the three weeks since this whole thing started, I’m finally crying.
The moment is liminal. The video is still open on my phone as I emerge from my anguish. All the suffering in the world was easier to compartmentalise when rationalised into a corner. Into a neat package I could write about.
Earlier this week I wrote about the conflict in Palestine. It’s not really a conflict, it’s a genocide. I wrote words that I felt were true, that were meaningful, that I believe in. Words compressed down into morsels that were white washed and easy to swallow. But I admit I fell short of my own values.
The words themselves were without moral fault per se, but they were also without heart. They were without the full feeling of the calamity unfolding as it casts horror and rage around the globe.
In another time, another place, they would have been the right words. They still are the right words… I just wish I’d written them with the depth of empathy I’d felt just now.
I’m going to share them with you, but first I’d like to take a slower drive towards the emerging dynamics of unity, division and dehumanization present within the growing conflict. And particularly, the ways that we Western bystanders might avoid fuelling the violence with our own inner projections of division.
I. Dehumanization and Grievance
In his dissertation on The Role of Dehumanization in the Nazi Era, psychiatrist and researcher Dr Stewart Gabel defines Dehumanization:
“a process by which a powerful individual or group (the victimizers) actively denies or withdraws a second individual’s or group’s (the victim’s) sense of human worth or personal value.”
Dehumanization, Gabel goes on to explain, is exemplified by the ways the Nazis denigrated Jews and other ethnic minorities as “morally or ethically culpable”, painting them to be seen as less-than-human, ultimately justifying violence while absolving themselves of guilt.
But it’s not just the powerful that are capable of dehumanizing others. As unsightly and unthinkable as the the horrors of the holocaust were, the act of dehumanization is common everywhere. As plumes of smoke rise above Gaza and outrage bubbles across the political landscape, people rush to point fingers and condemn those they believe to have caused wrong.
On one side Israeli leaders have lashed out with frighteningly demeaning comments such as Israel’s Defence Minister Yoav Gallant declaring the siege on Gaza:
“There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel, everything will be closed.
We are fighting against human animals, and we are acting accordingly.”
- Yoav Gallant, Israeli Defence Minister
Meanwhile, anti-semitic attacks have increased 4 fold in the UK, as reports emerge that groups of angry Russians attempted to storm Dagestan airport and mob Jewish passenger arriving from Israel, pointing towards unsettling trends of rising racial tensions.
Between the shocking acts of violence, online debates serve to fuel the fire as extreme positions spill dangerously towards anti-semitism and Islamophobia on both sides. Everywhere there is hurt, there is grievance, outrage, and someone or somewhere to point the blame.
Aubrey Marcus speaks to the mounting division in this post on Instagram:
The dehumanization and vilification of people is the necessity to justify destruction of Life. Whether physically or by assassination of character.
Right now the Devil is licking his greedy lips, because in every direction people are pointing their finger and shouting “Devil! There you are!”
Life sees all beings as having nursed on the breast of the Mother. The Mother is weeping now as the War Machine smiles at the prospect of expansion of this war. A war that has no end.
Indeed the Devil of righteous grievance is everywhere. In his piece Hamas, Israel, and the Devil on my Shoulder Charles Eisenstein tells of this devil in all of us:
The devil on the shoulder, not just of every oppressed Palestinian, but of every human being who has suffered injustice, whether political or in a marriage, job, or other relationship, speaks all the more persuasively the deeper the grievances. I’ve got one on my shoulder too, though he speaks in whispers as my grievances are light. Not so for the people of the Holy Land. Few places on earth have given this devil as much fuel for his tirades. The name of this devil is Vengeance. His abode is Self-righteousness. And his nemesis is Forgiveness.
Eisenstein hits home where I believe it is most important: the war that rages is not just a function of far-out externalities, but emerges out of the internal worlds of those who participate in it, including you and I and all those who are watching. Wherever there is unjust suffering and feelings of grievance, the devil on the shoulder is ready to tempt us to dehumanize, demonise, and rationalise acts of retaliation and vengeance.1
My initial attempt at writing about the internal dilemma of righteous grievance produced the words below, which feel more at home on an Instagram carousel than a Substack essay. But perhaps in their bullet sized punch there is a meaningful cadence for how the conflict relates to our inner and outer relationships, as well as the work we each have ahead of us if we are to collectively end the cycles of conflict.
II. The Conflict Dilemma
Us humans are tribal creatures.
Left vs Right, Us vs Them, Black vs White.
The primal human mind forms attachments to who is right and wrong in order to respond to the world and survive.
However…
The tribalism of rightness and wrongness is what perpetuates conflict at all levels:
The conflict of nations that spills blood in the name of justice.
The conflict of culture that separates into echo chambers.
The conflict of relationship that spirals into rupture.
The conflict of self that perpetuates self-degradation.
It’s this internalised tribalism that keeps us separated from unity and peace.
When it comes to resolving conflict there are really 2 meaningful sides:
Those who perpetuate violence by treating their aggressors as ‘evil’.
Those that de-escalate violence by treating their aggressors as human.
When two sides in opposition fail to see each other’s humanity, both are likely to justify righteous retaliation. And so choose the path of continued suffering.
But when two sides in opposition succeed in acknowledging each other's humanity, both have the opportunity to de-escalate the retaliation. And so choose the path of peace.
This concept applies to all conflicts.
Inner, relational, familial, inter-cultural, corporate, governmental, geo political.
It's as true for one as it is another.
The real dilemma is moving beyond our egoic instinct to seperate and divide.
To cast good against evil.
And instead evolve our sense of compassion and humanity to include the world.
If we want peace,
If we want to end the cycles of oppression,
If we want good for all people,
We actually must dismantle our own propensity to dehumanize those that we perceive to have done wrong.
If we can find it in our hearts to instead access our shared humanity, we have a shot at at ending the cycles of violence that plague humanity at every level.
So these were my words. Perhaps still meaningful, yet detached from the true horror faced by those currently in the depths of unthinkable suffering. As I open my heart to the pain of the world I feel my own humanity, and I feel the humanity of those suffering also. How can we even begin to approach such tragedy? What meaningful act could possibly involve us?
As I look within I feel a surge of hope amongst the heartbreak I feel for humanity and the low pits we still seem to be stuck within. I dream of be better way. A more beautiful world where people see the humanity of others always. Where the depths of warm, loving connection flow through our homes onto the streets, into our schools, workplaces and houses of government. A type of society where conflict is resolved by deep empathy, listening, and earnestly navigating the problems between one another to find common ground solutions that break the win-lose convention of our time, and bring the coming of a win-win era for all.
Perhaps such hopes are naive, but if anything this conflict has illuminated in my heart, it is that grievance, dehumanization and the violence of hatred is truly a lose-lose scenario for everyone.2
What would it take for an internal revolution? If we were all to relinquish our self righteous grievance and seek resolution via non-retaliatory means? What would that world look like?
Even as I feel into the great potential for transformation, I also see that the inner work is not the only avenue of meaningful engagement. To answer the question “what can we do?” I’ve identified a few small political actions anyone can take to attempt to lessen the damage done by at least the larger of the forces, and reduce the risk of violence of our more radical neighbours. Take these as suggestions, for those who feel willing and able to act.
As much as possible, don’t look away. As soon as we allow ourselves to go numb, we begin to shut off from our humanity. Empathy is the genesis of peace.
Use your voice to amplify the plight of those in need. Resharing information that spreads awareness is a low hanging fruit. Share it with compassion.3
Write to your local political representatives demanding a ceasefire.
Attend peace rallies. It doesn’t matter if the rally is organised by pro-Palestinians or Israelis - If the call is for ceasefire and peace, then by attending we send a strong message to the governments of the world who are watching.
Call out anti-semitism and Islamophobia. If you see it happening, call it out. Let’s agree now that racial persecution and dehumanization is not the way, regardless of which side of the narrative you lean towards.
While these small political actions can make a meaningful difference in the short term, I believe the more radical of the transformations is the one we make within. Not just for the conflicts waged between the oppressors and the oppressed, but for relationships everywhere from the inner to the global.
“Healed people heal people.” - and that which shifts in the microcosm ripples out into the macrocosm. Where can the change start, if not within us?
I’d like to finish by sharing this post by a fellow friend in music and ecological activism, Mia Bloom who’s words struck the chords of my heart in the way I wish my words could:
“The most powerful response to the horror in Palestine and Israel, is not to surrender our humanity.
You will hear from both sides, our fear is more justified than their fear. Our aggression, the only response to their aggression. Our grief more devastating than theirs could ever be. But this hierarchy of pain is the old way” - Valerie Kaur
War is fuelled by dehumanization and othering, the belief that the other is fundamentally different, corrupted, and that their lives matter less.
Getting swept up in the anger of the collective during times of war, especially as we empathize with those who are grieving can feel alluring. However, it is vital to not dehumanize any group or dimish the suffering of others. We must be conscious of the roots of conflict, which thrive on division.
When we sow the seeds of division, we inadvertently contribute to the cycle of war, and guarantee a yield of perpetual disagreement, conflict and ongoing fighting.
If our intention is to promote peace, then we must refrain from aggravating the conflict by participating in divisive identity politics, regardless of our affiliations, as doing so aligns us with the agendas that perpetuate conflict and we buy into the war. The culture makes it easy to spiral into hatred towards a perceived national enemy.
This is not primarily a matter of politics, but a matter of humanity.
Every loss of life is a tragedy.
To end this war, we must foster unity, not division. We must treat everyone as equals, as human beings.
Australian vs American spelling: to keep uniformity with quotations I decided to spell ‘dehumanization’ the American way for the entirety of the article despite writing from Australia. However being a stubborn upstart for heterogeneity, I kept Australian spellings for other ‘ize’ words which looks particularly funny in this sentence - “dehumanize, demonise, and rationalise”
I acknowledge along with this statement that the absence of violence doesn’t necessarily mean a win-win situation for all. In the case of Palestine who have suffered under brutal oppression of Israeli occupation for decades while the global community looks on with no meaningful solution in sight, I can in no way claim that self determination and the right to resist occupation with violence are illegitimate means to seek sovereignty that has been forcefully taken away. I cannot say what is morally right or wrong, but I can say that by leaning into as much empathy for self and other as is available that we may reduce violence to the lowest viable means. By comparison, if attacked in the street one may need to defend themselves, but if the option is available to incapacitate ones attacker rather than annihilate ones attacker in furious vengeance, then with empathy we should strive to seek the less violent end.
To those reading who are Israeli, Jewish or to whom this list of political actions may seem one sided or unfair: my reason for this is that from my removed vantage point it is unclear whether there is political action that could meaningfully alter Hamas’ actions. However, as a first world country and ally to many Western countries including my own, I know that Israel could be incentivised to take the lesser path of violence with enough international scrutiny from governments and corporate interests. As the stronger, richer, more allied and militarily dominant force in the conflict, I am calling on the ‘older brother’ to lead the de-escalation of violence, even if it appears that the ‘younger brother’ was the first to strike. And yes, in this context I will use ‘younger brother’ to refer to Hamas which has been designated a terrorist organisation. There will be no dehumanization on my part. While I don’t agree with their actions, I refuse to stop seeing the humanity of these people, however misguided. The inner work starts here.
Beautiful piece, thank you.