CAMP Spirit

As a cultural observer, it never ceases to amaze me, particularly in the political and religious spheres, how great our need seems to be to label people. Sometimes we believe that if we can categorize ourselves and others, we just might be able to figure people out and promote dialogue between adverse parties. However, it occurs to me that, more often than not, such labeling results not only in a summation of an individual’s or a group’s character and beliefs but also a dismissal of those whom we perceive as "other." Historically it has been the case for generations that the stances of white, upper class, European/North American, straight, white men were seen as normative or universal, with the result that the views of others were just that—Other. In recent decades people of color, women, GLBTQ folk, and those from the Two-Thirds World have made their voices and their presence known, with the result that postmodernity is beginning to recognize that there is neither a grand meta-narrative nor a universal human person.

Nevertheless, the labeling continues in ways that might appear quite benign on the surface. For example, whether one is a Christian or not provides helpful information about one’s belief systems; whether one is "gay" or "queer" or "supportively straight" or "homophobic" gives the "heads-up" some of us need to prepare ourselves for discussion. "Democrats" have one set of beliefs, Republicans another—and we can anticipate what someone thinks or how s/he votes based upon which label we can affix to them. I would submit that this type of labeling says more about those doing the labeling than those who are labeled, for lurking beneath the label is frequently a judgment, intended or not, that indicates not only what the labeler stands for but what kind of threat is posed by the labeled.

Labels say more about "us" than "them." Here’s how I see it. We need to be "right." There’s only so much truth to go around; if another’s view contains truth, that means my truth may be less true. But what are we so afraid of? I would hope that there is enough truth to go around so that a majority paradigm does not have to be the only way of seeing things. Isn’t that what happens in a democracy? Supposedly, but the "thought and label police" do their jobs exceedingly well in our contemporary world, for people’s fears give rise to labels that are not just helpful categorizations but brutal bludgeons. Our labels of others not only summarize and categorize them but also judge them and dismiss them. If you are a liberal, you must be in favor of abortion and gay marriage; if you are a conservative, you must be misogynistic and

homophobic. Behind such labels, however, lurk some basic inhumanity and a refusal to see the human person as multi-faceted, unique, and unfinished.

I have witnessed discussions among clergy and laypeople and among various groups of "Americans" that have left me feeling a bit ill and afraid for our spiritual integrity. As a result of such discussions, some people feel excluded and unwelcome, while others appear rigidly dogmatic and exclusive in their beliefs. But I ask again, what are we so afraid of? Can I not believe in Christ as the Savior of the world and yet acknowledge that God and Allah are just as legitimate? Can I not allow that Buddha and Krishna might be avatars of the Divine without denigrating the importance of Jesus? Can I not be a patriotic American and still oppose the war in Iraq or the U.S.’s behavior vis-à-vis other nations? If I disagree with the resident of the White House does that mean the FBI should arrive on my doorstep and escort me to their office for questioning? If I have opinions about Middle Eastern culture does that make me an automatic racist? Where did the basic democratic right to free discussion go? Has it been swallowed up in political correctness or frightened into silence by an authoritarian government?

What if we were to go beyond the labels and actually talk openly about what we think, whom and what we fear, how far we are willing to go to protect our rights and our freedoms, and just what constitutes freedom of religion or true patriotism? We might not solve any of the world’s or our nation’s problems, but we would certainly know each other better. We would at least be aware of other beliefs besides our own; we would possibly entertain the idea that people different from ourselves have access to truth and goodness and different forms of government and worship of the Divine. It is fear that precipitates the unthinking labeling, categorization, and dismissal I’ve been describing; but what we know we can no longer fear. Knowledge gives strength and the ability to make informed decisions. It’s when our fears become so big that they engulf us that we lose the ability to decide important issues that affect everyone’s destiny.

I say these things not to indict any one group of people, nor to shake a finger or cast blame or guilt, but merely to stimulate discussion. So often I feel that these columns go out into a vacuum, for I rarely hear anything pro or con; but I hope if any of my articles cause people to think and dialogue and talk back it will be this one, for—at the risk of sounding alarmist and paranoid—our very lives depend upon our ability to recreate an open atmosphere for differing viewpoints, opinions, faith claims, and, yes, even criticisms or harsh words. For at least we will be thinking and not just relying on uncritical, monolithic truth that helps no one.