Decompiling Oppression #146
Sam McVeety
Over the past week, I've noticed that whenever I permit myself to look for updates on the shooting in Utah, I feel it in my body for hours afterwards. The feeling that is most present is dread, amplified by the stream of dangerous, escalatory statements issued from the highest halls of power. I want to listen to this residual dread, and think about what it is telling me. I take it as a sign, that it's something I should take some time to dwell on, and be curious about, as hard as that might be.
This is a challenging moment, for so many reasons. While there is much to say about the actions that led us to this moment, I won't linger on them here. (Though, I understand if that's where you are feeling stuck, and I see you.) That is not to say I haven't made space to process those messy emotions, with those closest to me, who can share in the dread and frustration of the moment without it colliding with grief of others. Because yes, people are feeling real grief right now, and denying that grief won't bring any of us any closer to liberation.
Instead, in this precarious time, I want to share some of the resources that have been speaking most strongly to me. If we are spurred to action, there are clear ways to make that action constructive. Let's begin with an empirical basis: G. Elliott Morris has an extensive analysis of the actual rates of support for violent action among all Americans, and it's worth specifically repeating them here: only 4% of respondents support the use of violent felonies or using violence if the other party wins. This should be broadcast far and wide.
This 4% number might be surprising, given the frequency with which larger numbers are quoted, owing to imprecise survey design (and perhaps a desire to grab headlines and attention). This imprecision is itself irresponsible and dangerous. It normalizes and accelerates the acceptance of political violence. Partisans are more likely to support violence if they believe that "the other side" does, creating an (entirely preventable) cycle of escalation. Social media plays an outsized part in amplifying this effect, tending to display the extremes of all viewpoints with a disproportionately higher frequency than moderate or nuanced ones.
Another hopeful thread in the analysis above is that our response to violence is not predetermined. In the wake of an attempted assassination in 2024, support for political violence dropped across self-described members of both major political parties. Perhaps when rhetoric becomes reality, we find ourselves staring into an abyss that we reflexively recoil from.
When it comes to shaping public opinion, Scot Nakagawa points to the work of HOPE-PV and their work to build a wide coalition against political violence. In a moment when we might feel powerless, he lifts up the fact that this is a time when we can frame a strong, unequivocal opposition to political violence as a unifying message, as we simultaneously defend against state overreach in the name of reactionary safety. If ever there were a time to push back against the recent erosions in content moderation and the corresponding explosion in inflammatory rhetoric online, it would be now. However tired it may seem, this truth bears repeating: you cannot simultaneously be a free speech absolutist and then attempt to blame political violence on online rhetoric.
More broadly, there is scholarship from Erica Chenoweth and others demonstrating that nonviolent movements are in fact more likely to succeed (particularly in the long term). A recent paper of hers delves into some of the nuance that emerges when we confront the reality that movements are rarely monolithic. Disagreements over tactics can emerge, but empirically, the presence of violent elements tends to reduce the chances of success for the overall movement.
Still, it is one thing to recognize these trends, and another to go about the task of living through these challenging and perilous times. None of this is easy, but we don't have to do it alone. More than ever, it is a time to turn towards each other, to support each other in answering that vital question: how will you meet this moment?
Here are this week's invitations:
Personal: What skills do you have in de-escalating conflict? What skills would you like to build?
Communal: How can we respond to political violence in ways that truly make our communities safer?
Solidarity: Support HOPE-PV and their work to harness community power to put an end to political violence.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FAQ
Can I share this newsletter with non-Googlers? Yes! Feel free to forward this note externally; it does not contain confidential information.
Is this an official Google newsletter? Nope. The views expressed in this newsletter are not the official position of Google, and we are not affiliated with any particular ERG.
I am leaving Google or transferring to another bet. Can I still receive this newsletter? Yes! You can join the external list here.