Equality Through Conformity? PART TWO

Today I feel hushed. It's one of those days which leaves you feeling quiet. I sit here at my computer screen wondering who my words will touch, and wondering whether I should deviate too far from the 'plan'.

The 'plan' was to offer up some healthy questions regarding last Saturday to help illustrate the importance of thought and questioning when it comes to our actions and dogma. I suppose I will get round to it. Yes, I will. I'm just distracted today, that's all. I'll address that in the future; I'll address this now.

Equality Through Conformity?

I want to talk about the meaning of the word ‘truth’, and what and why we believe. This is a topic I’ve been discussing a lot recently, because I believe that it’s wrong to go out onto the streets and shout about something you don’t fully believe in, or worse, don’t fully understand. It was for that reason that outside Marks and Spencer on the 2nd of July I wasn’t joining in with the ‘free Palestine’ chants. I am not at all in any way an authority on any of the facts regarding the reasons for the chant and, more simply, I don’t fully understand the problems that Palestine face.

If you don’t understand something, why shout about it? Why pretend that you do? Does it stem from a desire to fit in, or just because you presume that people around you who agree with you on other things must be saying something you agree with about everything else?

So of course the answer is simple: research. Look it up, read about it, make your own mind up. That’s what I need to do before I have the right to shout anything in the street, or even suppose it in my own mind. That’s my project; I need to learn about it for myself. From multiple sources. Perhaps someone can explain their angle on Palestine for me. We’ll do a trade - I’m quite good on British Wildlife if anyone wants to swap some info. My topics also include horses, tree climbing and writing poetry.

I think the most important question is the following. It is the question from which all other questions are implied.

Why do you believe what you believe?

There I said it. I needn't explain the implications and connotations of that question. I'm just going to leave it at that.

The Conformity Bit

Everyone's been commenting on Charlie Veitch's odd behaviour recently, and just as many people have been commenting on the comments.

The genius of Stanley Milgram (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment) and Solomon Asch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments) spring instantly to mind for me when I think of people's comments on Charlie.

And it worries me rather that people are ready to hold onto their beliefs to the extent that they will direct hatred at other people. I might be way off - hell I'm just a kid - but I thought that the groups focusing on causes such as 9-11 or the abolishment of war would be loving, caring people who aimed to spread peace, not hatred and certainly not threats.

So this must mean that the people are angry and disappointed with him. I do understand the implications of his 'u-turn' but, vitally, I respect his right to an opinion no matter how he came to it or what it is, or what his previous words and actions are. If no one had the right or ability to change their minds, then what would be the point of the truth movement at all?

Where did the anger and disappointment come from then? Why are these supposedly lovely peaceful people acting so out of character? One of the possibilities is that a lot of these people needed a leader and saw Mr. Veitch as fit to be just that. Many people are addicted to the security that comes hand in hand with someone else being responsible. And when their responsible, replicable leader strayed from the cause, these people were left alone. Scary, eh?

It all just highlights how, although it's lovely to be a part of something, it's vital to a great extent that we must all be our own leaders. Of course it's frightening that if this was the case our actions would solely be our own responsibility - no one there to blame or hate if we realise we were wrong. It would mean that we would have to truly, deeply believe our own convictions and use our own creativity in order to communicate this to others. But I think that would make a better world; a world full of analytical, pensive, meditative people who believed what they believed because they saw it with their own eyes, or saw the appropriate evidence for it.

So stop hating Charlie Veitch. I agree that his change of mind was suspicious and yes I certainly do question it. But I will NEVER have the right to abuse him for it. After all, isn't this whole thing about freedom?

(Although I do think this video is very silly)