Trying to Divide Us
"They're trying to divide us!" You've heard it. I've heard it. You've possibly even said it. Both "Left" and "Right" use this phrase to decry the (alleged) government plan to increase division between the people so that they can consolidate more power/distract from the real problems.
On the surface, it seems blatantly obvious. Everyone focuses on the USA, so I may as well use the most prolific example myself here as well. When you look at the news, or Xwitter, or even YouTube, this message seems to be flooding in from every angle. "They're dividing us against racial minorities. They're dividing us against LGBTQIA+ communities. They're dividing us against immigrants."
Have you considered that perhaps the opposite is true?
They're not trying to divide us. They're trying to force us together into one, nondescript "consumer class". No unique culture. No distinctions. Just consumption. They're trying to erase any sense of identity that you might have. A true sense of identity just gets in the way of increased productivity/consumption. You should be an American™, just like everyone else. They would rather you feel no connection to your community, your race, your religion.
When people talk about this, they stop at the level of opinion. "They're trying to divide us" is just another way of saying "They want you to dislike Group XYZ". But what does the law say? Sure you can have your nasty opinions, that's not illegal (yet). But try implementing them and see how far you get. "I don't want Group XYZ to go to my school/live in my town." The government (USA for reference) will send the military to force you together at gunpoint. At least... that's what they did last time⤻. How very divisive of them.
We can generally do as we please, but only in matters that are irrelevant to the way our society is run. We can believe any religion we like, so long as it aligns with government policy ("Peace, Love, Unity", "Don't judge others", "We are ALL God's children"). Try proclaiming belief in something contrary to the American™ way of life and see how fast you're branded "religious extremists". We can have sexual relations with anyone we like. We can do whatever we want, so long as it is unimportant. But when it comes to important matters like... I don't know... wanting to live in a state that respects you, your history, and your culture, watch how the full wrath of the system can descend upon you.
They're not trying to divide us, because being divided (willingly and peacefully) is a solution to the societal ills people who use this line are identifying (but incorrectly attributing). We aren't having these issues because we are divided; if we were divided (read: separated) there would be no clashes between opposing groups. We only have these societal stresses because groups are being unnaturally combined and forced together, against their will and against their own interests.
Now let me make a seemingly opposite point: They are trying to divide us, but not by group (race, religion, sex, etc). They are trying to divide us within our group. They do not want you to feel any sense of unity with the people you want to. They want you in an environment where you don't really trust the other people there, but you aren't hostile to them because that would be punished. They want you divided from your group, all the way down to the level of an atomized individual so that everyone can be re-combined into one unified group that no one really wants to be a part of: Consumer. American™.
I'm getting into a strange point here where I'm almost making the argument from both sides. But I think what I want to get at is that the phrase isn't wrong per se, but that it needs more discernment to actually be useful. When it comes to unity, perhaps the saying "too much of a good thing" applies. It is not beneficial to be isolated. It is not beneficial to only reside within a small enclave (i.e. cult). But there comes a point where the extent of unity becomes a detriment. I think the line is somewhere around politics. It's probably not beneficial to have unity with your political enemies. Having unity with everyone in your state should be the goal, but your state must have limits. And I think that's the key here. Again, this is not to say that you should have hostility toward those you are not "unified" with. A mature and mutual recognition that you are different, want different things, and have different histories and futures, is the foundation upon which groups should interact. But I'm beginning to ramble and retread points I touched on in this previous post.
Yours Truly,
[Redacted]