Maybe the most important rule when involving
less privileged individuals (see blog post seven) is to not perceive them
as ‘them’. They are ‘us’. They are part of the same body we all are part of -
society. And it is our society we are defending against FIMI, not ‘them’, and not
‘us’ (see blog post four).
Effect of ‘them’
What is the danger of labeling people 'them'? When we start referring to parts of society as ‘them’, we can label them. And, more often than not, these labels are the consequence of our prejudices. For instance, we can make 'them' co-responsible for FIMI by calling them 'gullible', 'intellectually challenged', or just 'lazy'. By doing that, we are one step away from denying 'them' a voice in our discourse and in the elections; we are one step away from betraying our democratic principles by excluding groups of people.
Changing beliefs
As we saw in blog post ten, we all possess mechanisms to sustain our beliefs. Giving up core beliefs that align with our identity is an experience of an excruciating disequilibrium; it provokes in us a flight-or-fight reaction. Were we or anyone to be gullible, intellectually challenged, or lazy, we would permanently change core beliefs. We would be in a permanent, hurtful state of crisis. Fortunately, most of us are not.
That is not to say that people can’t change their beliefs. We encountered mechanisms to sometimes successfully counter beliefs in blog post eleven. Especially when our beliefs are reflective (see blog post eight), we can let non-fitting information through without feeling any pain, as a result of ‘knowledge neglect’ (we fail to notice that it is contradictory) or the ‘illusory truth effect’ (something is repeated so often that it appears true).
Adult education
I have personally encountered many
professionals and volunteers in the field of adult education who call their
students ‘them’, often with a sentimental tone in their voice. It is as if ‘these
people’ are noble savages or likable pets. And as if we, adult educators, are
contemporary do-gooders because we share our time with these unfortunate
creatures. This is the 'them' attitude.
Child participation
Professor of Law and Education Lotem Perry-Hazan describes the ‘them’ attitude in her study on children’s participation in Israeli parliament [Knesset] committees. Children are a specific group to encounter the ‘them’ attitude since they are seen as intellectually challenged.
Perry-Hazan summarizes the ‘them’ attitude that children encounter as “either fawning or dismissing”. “Some of the fawning responses included excessive compliments, such as “You're so adorable, adorable, adorable, I'm speechless; So much fun!,” or “This meeting [with children in the Knesset] is wonderful… amazing… It has so much charm and grace. It is fantastic that you are so involved.””
Dismissive responses are rather condescending and sometimes make children uncomfortable: ”One of the MKs (Members of the Knesset) corrected a child's language error, /.../ and said that she “could not hold herself back.” In another case, an MK asked a girl if she was popular among her friends.” And sometimes “children's comments were ignored, aside from a polite “thank you”.”
'Us' attitude
This is not to say that adopting an ‘us’ attitude will automatically guarantee the complete absence of fawning, dismissive, and ignoring responses. But it does help us serve our goal better: defending all of our society against FIMI.
