On August 28, 1963, the world stood with poise as the beloved Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his most infamous speech, “I have a dream.” His fearless voice was heard, and many remain in awe that such a man once walked the streets of this country that we proudly call our own. Years pass and memories fade, but on this day of his celebration, I ask, “What is your dream?”
As for my dream, I dream that difference—the quality of human difference—becomes something not to fear—but to long for and seek. I agree with the late president Franklin D. Roosevelt who said, “That the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”
During the Civil Rights Movement, African Americans spoke up, and many people who weren’t supposed to listen began to. It took an openness towards difference, a paradigm shift of sorts, for human relations in the United States to be reshaped, and its shaping and reshaping continues. Ultimately, it was conversation, the ongoing push and exchange of ideas, the struggle to overcome domination, that made the dream less of a dream and more a reality.
The act of conversation becomes political when the political climate suggests that you remain quiet. Even imperfection communication is better than no communication at all.
And the conversation continues.
15 Comments
Megan, I don’t know anyone who has had all positive experiences on line. It’s just like real life!
True, true…I have known those who limit their internet usage to have far more success with such things, however. Just a thought…
Megan, yes, it would have taken 30 minutes and we woul dhave additional visual clues, and all that. BUT in real life becuase of geography and age differences, we’d have never met in the first place. Also, your perception that first meetings on line bode well for a relationship is borne out by research. I think you’d like the ideas in Consequential Strangers. See if your local library has it. It touches on a lot of this stuff. Also, I’m now writing an article about the Internet, so this is great fodder for me. Do you mind if I quote you? Maybe we could also talk–now there’s a concept!
I suppose that any further discussion would depend greatly on its context. I can definitely see both sides, but not always having the ‘happy-funtime’ online experience may not make me the best candidate for any quoting…
@Megan Agree. We could have easily exchanged these ideas in less than 30 minutes. Funny and frustrating indeed. Two of us on the west coast and one on the east. Should we meet in the middle?
Megan, a way to describe at least some of your online friends is to think of them as “consequential strangers”–people other than family and close friends. But I’ll bet that many of your online exchanges are with people you know in both contexts–on and off line.
My dream is that we stop calling online relationships “virtual” and questioning whether they’re “real.” My dream is that we begin to appreciate and value all relationships and to think of those that matter, in small or great ways, as “meaningful,” regardless of where we meet or how deep the level of intimacy. Our social ties span a continuum, from stranger to soulmate, but because close ties have been studied more and, until recently, talked about more, acquaintances somehow seem unimportant. But they’re not.
Implicit in Martin Luther King’s I Have a Dream speech was the idea that once we all look past the outer trappings, whether skin color or status, and dare to cross traditional lines, we will be better able to appreciate our similarities and see our differences as benefits. And every bit of research I’ve uncovered over the last three year confirms this as well: The more we “integrate” our lives will all sorts of people and all sorts of relationships, the healthier, happier, and more successful as humans we will be.
I worry about the perils of online socialization, too. But if we’re conscious and careful–if we learn to manage our (relatively new) online lives so that we reap the benefits of having so many others to call on–the advantages will outweigh the risks.
Besides, the genie is out of the bottle: Every day we make new connections at an unprecedented rate and volume. We consume tens, maybe hundreds, of byte-sized morsels of “conversation”–through emails, in chat rooms and on bulletin boards, and via social media.
Perhaps this avalanche of acquaintanceships will overtake us. Or perhaps we will look back a few years from now to realize that many of the definitions we grew up with have changed and we simply had to adapt (for better and worse) as earlier generations had when newfangled technology threatened the status quo. Either way, we’re all standing on the same hillside.
Thanks, Jason, for more stimulating conversation. You inspired my own blog entry on this subject at: http://www.consequentialstrangers.com/2010/01/22/i-have-a-social-dream/
Melinda -
I definitely think they’re real in the sense that they exist – but because of past relationships I’ve had with people, I remain guarded about who I consider a friend. Some people seem to think a “friend” is anyone who adds you on whatever social media you use. To me, a friend is someone you can spend quality, comfortable time with, without a computer between you.
I realize that “virtual” relationships can often (and do often) turn into real ones – I’ve had it happen before. But I’ve also had it completely backfire, when the person I was supposedly “friends” with had completely misrepresented themselves, and that relationship with them did not last. Some relationships are better online, some not so much.
I guess I should have been more clear – part of me is hesitant to go with the technological flow as it were, but if I truly look back at some of the friendships I currently hold very dear, some of them were indeed initially cultivated in an online forum. It just seems much easier to do that now, which is why media like FaceBook often feel disingenuous and rushed to me. My husband, for example, is a musician. He has fans. A lot of his fans add his FB page, find me, and try to add mine. The only reason they want anything to do with me is because I’m married to him – the things I put on FB are a lot more personal than the things he usually posts – and I don’t feel comfortable allowing total strangers into our lives like that. But that’s just me.
Obviously, this creates an entirely different discussion over whether or not allowing a stranger to know you makes them not such a stranger anymore, but like I said, my life experience gives me reason to have caution, and it’s just a leap I’m not always willing to make. I know we’re too far along to prevent it now, but that doesn’t make it any easier to deal with sometimes.
I think that social networking is (obviously) a good way to meet people you have things in common with, but one of the main problems with social media as a communications tool is that speech inflections/sarcasm/deadpan humor, etc is obviously not detectable, as you very likely know. I think in some way it’s a good idea, and in others, it’s not. I’ve had experiences, for instance, where I’ve been “online friends” with people who have felt that they knew more about me than they did, or had the exact opposite view of who I really am, because the only way they “knew” me was through FaceBook or LiveJournal, etc. I think if people are able to share ideas and cultivate relationships, it’s great, but really, there is no electronic substitute for talking with other human beings face to face. I have started referring to online “friends” in quotes, simply because I grew up with a different definition of what a “friend” really means.
There is also the other problem with people feeling more free to project more negativity when they’re behind a computer screen (which, sadly, I have witnessed far more often than I really have ever needed or wanted to), and I feel that it divides people who could otherwise be friends if they didn’t have the computer to hide behind, or online gossip to contend with, if that makes sense.
I FAR more enjoy dealing with other people in person than I do online – there is more quality there. But I don’t disagree that social networking can help sort of push those relationships along, so I suppose in that way it’s good.
Was that too long a way of saying that I basically agree with you, with a few caveats? haha!
@Megan You make some very good points. I believe that nothing can ultimately replace face to face conversation, but that online conversation can complement, and vice versa. What I hope is that the conversational culture (openness) on Twitter, Facebook, and other social networking websites carries offline. Valeria Maltoni created an eBook called Twittertales with stories of connections made on Twitter. It was rather inspiring.
I think my “dream” is for people to give a damn about each other, and less of a damn about themselves. Sadly, there has been a lot of really negative and terrible comments coming out of people in regards to the recent situation in Haiti, and it is so very beyond my comprehension how people can be so uncaring. I truly can’t fathom it. If I had a dream, it’d be for people to wake the hell up to what’s going on around them, and actively desire to be better people- not only for themselves, but for those they share the planet with.
Unlike King’s dream, however, I don’t know that it will ever be realized. And even his dream has a little further to go.
@Megan I agree that even Kings’ dream has a little further to go.
I think that creating opportunities for people (friends and strangers) to meet, greet, and talk in relatively safe places is the only way. Facebook, Twitter, and so forth create opportunities for people to talk about whatever matters most to them. I wouldn’t have met you online if it wasn’t for our common interest in the Seattle Mariners, and because of it, we met in person. And so I value you. So, I guess it’s ultimately about relationships (online and offline). What do you think?
I can not get a handle on how the reply function works here. ha!
It is interesting, to be sure.
I personally have an easier time being up front and open online than I do in person – and I think that’s part and parcel of being able to sit here with my laptop and edit what I want to say to someone, while if I was talking to them face to face, I wouldn’t have that luxury – then again, since I deal so heavily in sarcasm, face to face is better.
I definitely think social networking can compliment normal human interaction, but I also feel like the definition of what’s “normal” is changing, and I’m not entirely sure I like it. There are tales of employers firing people and people breaking up via text message, and I just think that’s cowardly, and it doesn’t help people deal with the unpleasantries that pepper life – and I think we NEED those unpleasantries (am I spelling that wrong?) to build character as human beings.
HOWEVER, I totally see your point – as an example, I feel far more comfortable talking to a handful of Mariners fans in person, or even meeting them for the first time (which I hope to do at FanFest) specifically because I’ve shared thoughts and humor with them online – so there surely are benefits to Twitter, FB, etc. I might not know any of you -even virtually- had it not been for those programs.
Sorry it’s taking me so long to respond, this week has been a bit nuts.
Megan, I totally get your point, and it’s well-taken. There are plenty of “issues” around the Internet, and we all need to figure out how to draw boundaries. Writing on a PDA so must be brief.
@Melinda & Megan. I’m sorry for not replying to your exchange sooner. Generally, humans have a natural tendency to otherize, to differentiate oneself from others who look and/or perceive the world differently. Historically, people have had to do this to survive, to know whose who.
However, globalization and the information revolution has made it advantageous to friend or at least become acquainted with people who have something different to offer. It’s in my best interest to be familiar with people who know something that I don’t. And there is so much that I have yet to learn. I believe that when two or more people meet (face to face or online), their original perceptions of each other have the potential to be challenged; not in a negative way though. I believe that when strangers become more consequential (using your terms), how they perceive each other complexifies. And this complexification is good for relationship building.
My background is in Conflict Resolution and mediation is a process in which a third party facilitates communication, so that concerned parties can move forward, resolving their issue(s) (whatever they may be). Often, both parties share near absolute points of view and are unable to negotiate. A good mediator is able to effectively ask insightful questions that encourage the concerned parties to question their positions, to create some degree of doubt. In essence, the complexification of issues usually creates uncertainty, and a little uncertainty often moves things along.
Anyways, I’m not particularly worried/concerned with what defines a “real” vs. “virtual” friend (though it’s an interesting subject) etc. I’m interested in creating opportunities for people to immerse themselves in conversation (face to face and/or online). Ultimately, I believe that any conversation is a conversation that matters regardless of the subject. And in some respects, the act of conversation is conflict resolution.
I’m anxious to hear what you think.
I’d like to just toss another idea onto the fire, really.
We’ve been having this discussion, officially, for a week now. Had the three of us been sitting somewhere face to face, these ideas could have been exchanged in the matter of 30 minutes, tops. I find this both funny and frustrating at the same time.
I certainly don’t disagree with conversation mattering, however.