DISAGREEMENT

 IT IS OK TO DISAGREE;

IT IS NOT OK WHEN DISAGREEMENT ITSELF BECOMES UNWELCOME.

My Take

We, the People, are very quick to judge someone else’s opinion, point of view, or desires. Sometimes very vociferously; sometimes quietly, but no less vehemently.

This is OK. Or should be.

That is, unless you live under an extreme totalitarian regime that strongly represses and castigates those who dare to express independent thought.

But a more interesting question is this: What happens when you live in a country where the government itself is not the oppressing factor, but where a segment of society becomes a well-oiled machine determined to destroy any vestige of freedom of thought and, God forbid, expression?

Unless, of course, that expression agrees with what the members of that particular segment of society choose to espouse.

When agreement or acquiescence is not forthcoming, the response can become a carefully orchestrated “public outcry,” branding an individual a non-conforming pariah, persecuting and prosecuting them in social media and in the pages of sympathetic press outlets. Sometimes, even physical aggression is not out of the question.

The result is an atmosphere in which only the very self-assured and toughest are willing to stand their ground.

We have seen this onslaught happen often enough. We have witnessed the anger, hate, resentment, and venom it can spill. The willingness to destroy a person, a reputation, or even an entire group of people can somehow be transformed, in the minds of those participating, into an act of heroic proportion.

I see these “heroic actions” quite differently.

To me, they are often expressions of insecurity and of dislike, perhaps even fear, of anyone strong enough to think and speak independently. This becomes especially apparent when the message expressed goes against the grain and against the wishes of those who, sitting comfortably at the top of the complainer column, orchestrate the willing who, like working drones, do the bidding of their “Queen Bee.”

And before anyone says, “You’re not a psychologist,” I will pre-empt the cries and readily admit that indeed, I am not.

I can only speak from the vantage point of someone who has lived enough years to begin to understand some differences; someone who, over those years, has interacted with thousands of individuals in almost fifty countries and witnessed many social upheavals of one kind or another.

Perhaps we have not yet understood, as a society, something remarkably simple:

While it is our right to disagree with another person’s viewpoint, it is also that person’s right to hold and express that viewpoint.

An integral part of freedom of thought and freedom of speech is that well-defined line that says:

Your rights end where the rights of the other person begin.

Disagreement is not merely a way of expressing an opinion. It is an integral fiber of freedom of expression itself.

We should argue.

We should challenge.

We should question.

We should disagree.

But disagreement should never, ever, be construed as the right to oppress.

It is OK to disagree.

It is not OK when disagreement itself becomes unwelcome.