wemaking

34
We-making Daniel Vaarik

Upload: daniel-vaarik

Post on 07-Jul-2015

209 views

Category:

News & Politics


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Wemaking

We-makingDaniel Vaarik

Page 2: Wemaking

Who are “we”?

Page 3: Wemaking

Every definition of “we” changes the world

Humans

Old people

Parents

Startuppers

Etc etc etc

Page 4: Wemaking

We-making is always they-making

The creation of “them” is vital for making “us”

Page 5: Wemaking

Some “we’s” and “they’s” are fairly new

Generations

Nations

Car owners

Page 6: Wemaking

In Spring 2010. Theatre NO99 created an experiment.

Page 7: Wemaking

An audience member was asked to come to an empty stage.

Page 8: Wemaking

People were encouraged to join her. “Because she is so lonely down there!”

Page 9: Wemaking

People started coming to the stage to support her.

Page 10: Wemaking

Soon many people filled the stage.

Page 11: Wemaking
Page 12: Wemaking

But not everyone left the seats.

Page 13: Wemaking

And even after being asked many times, some people never went to stage. Suddenly there were “we” and “they”. The audience was polarized.

Page 14: Wemaking

Unfortunately...

... polarization is also a main mechanism of making sense of the world…

...it is also the easiest way to get votes in politics

Page 15: Wemaking

“If you came from the planet Mars, it would have been harder to make distinctions between the new guard and the old. But you could tell that the new ones were happier, they wore Baltman ties. The old ones were sad and angry, they had monochrome ties from the Leningrad trouser-factory number 3”. (Daniel Vaarik, “Praktikaaruanne”, 2012).

I’ve been polarizing too

Page 16: Wemaking

Absolute “we” is impossible

… since “we” always requires “them”...

... since without different viewpoints the world as we know it, would end.

!

Page 17: Wemaking

“We”/“They” creates suspicion

Who are these strange “they”?

Are some of the “they” among us?

Is this person perhaps an agent of the “they”?

Page 18: Wemaking

Violence can secure the “we”

“Violence gives some form of certainty ...” (Arjun Appadurai, Fear of Small Numbers)

Page 19: Wemaking

Minor differences as major anger points

In fact, minor differences can become the least acceptable ones. How dare you come between us while we are ALMOST “we” now?

Page 20: Wemaking

Animals as “we”

Swans are seen as part of natural “we” in Estonian media.

Cormorans are seen as intruding “they.

Page 21: Wemaking

Jokes as symbolic violence upon “them”

nationalities

gays

Page 22: Wemaking

Government and “we”

Official “We” becomes destiny

!

Page 23: Wemaking

How nations define “we”

Ethnic

Multiethnic

Page 24: Wemaking

“Estonian Russians or Putin’s”?

Page 25: Wemaking

Bringing the “we” together

Push: military, money, legal stuff

Pull: soft power, culture, inspiration

Page 26: Wemaking

Maintaining the “we”

Not so much what is said, but how it is said

Page 27: Wemaking

Avoid final polarization

Don’t say that: “who is not with us, is our enemy”

Learn to stop the radicalization cycles

Page 28: Wemaking

Mandela: a master of soft power or a pussy?

Page 29: Wemaking

Symbolics of “we”

If apology, then pure

If monument, then beautiful and inclusive

Page 30: Wemaking
Page 31: Wemaking

Silent gradualism of “we”

Role models

Everyday practice

Page 32: Wemaking

that every “we“ is imaginary

In the end, remember…

Page 33: Wemaking

We can imagine very different “we’s”

Page 34: Wemaking

Thanks.