Will McMichael
In response to the “respect diversity of thought” article from two weeks ago, I disagree that the approach to a more respectful and diverse community can be as simple as referring to The Scot’s Key. There is a limit to what can be integrated with the reasoning of diversity. Although opposing values may not be ac- cepted, it does not mean that you cannot accept the people who hold those values. On the most fundamental level, we all want the same thing; we just differ in our understanding of how to get there. Being intolerant and hating opposing views does not weaken them, it strengthens them. While opposing certain viewpoints may be justified, opposing the people who hold those opinions is vastly different. “Let no man pull you so low as to hate him,” — Martin Luther King Jr. This quote may sound religious or idealistic, but it contains an important message that is relevant to the political climate. If anger and hate is the reaction towards others’ anger and hate, it feeds into a cycle and progress will not be made. Avoiding groups of people with opposing viewpoints may be a refuge, but it only widens the gap between you and other people thus creating a lack of understanding be- tween viewpoints.
We have to understand each other to work together effec- tively, and the only way to un- derstand people is to embrace them with kindness even if we disagree with their values or viewpoints. This short story explains how lessons I learned helped me cultivate an open mind towards views of conflicting stances.
I have been eating a vegetarian diet for almost a year and a half, the last four months of which I have been eating a completely plant-based diet (vegan). At the pinnacle of my realization that meat was unethical and unnecessary, I learned that having a plant-based diet was much healthier for the environment, healthier for my body and mind and would also absolve me from horrible conditions that industrial farming and slaughter creates for animals. I still hold these beliefs as true, but something I no longer continue my critical attitude towards meat-eaters. In the past, I had sat around the table at dinner with friends and asserted well-studied facts on the horrible effects of the animal agricultural industry, and meat has on the planet and your body. In my past philosophy, the more shocking and gut-wrench- ing the better. I supported these actions with the belief that the value of justice was much greater than the value of the people’s egos I would have to step on to get there.
There were two necessary things that I hadn’t taken into account. One, I had once been a meat-eater, I really loved meat, and, even worse, someone who may have judged vegetarians as weird. Second, and more importantly, is the fact that no battles of justice are won through condemnation or aggressive tactics. In the end, did anyone follow my advice or listen? No, and it was because the moment I was critical to others actions, the people I advised around me naturally took it personally, were no longer receptive to the information and mostly tried to defend themselves and their opinions, which they hold dear, as “good” and “right.” It was not about the facts; it was how I present- ed them that led to the defense of their current perspectives as “correct.” I led them to further reinforce their current beliefs by debating with them.
Only you can decide what’s right for you, so take my words with a grain of salt. It’s not easy trying to change the people around you, and it’s definitely not easy to love and accept everyone, but if we could see the humanity in our “enemies,” conflicts would dissolve and disappear. If you find a way to fix yourself, you might just end up fixing the world.