Standing Up for Sitting Out

“You MUST stand against Hamas,” someone tells me, “Stand Up for Palestine!” another insists.

After watching a dozen YouTube videos on the history of the region and the conflict, I still can not decide. Analysts from both viewpoints make perfectly rational arguments why their side is correct and just. I've spent hours flip-flopping from being terribly outraged at one side, and then the other, and feel I am no closer to making an informed decision on 'where I stand' than when I started. I'm exhausted, outraged, and want to shout at everyone. I need a breather.

Does it matter?

Would me “standing” for one side or the other make any change for the people in Gaza and Israel? Somewhere deep in the occupied territories, an armed man shouts, “Hey, Scott on the other side of the world said something on Twitter. Let's call off the attack!”

I think not.

The only consequence of my declaration would be to join a group of (probably online) people who are angry at another group of people, who are feeling the same sort of outrage back in the other direction.

Do I have the Answer to the World's Hardest Question?

We don't ask people who are unskilled at math to attend a Calculus class and then solve an equation after one lesson. Why do we ask people to read a news article about the Middle East, a place they've probably never been, don't understand, and don't speak the language, to suddenly decide the correct 'stand' on an immensely complicated conflict that has a three thousand year history? I don't have the answer.

What Body Language?

Do we so often make firm judgements on far-away, complicated conflicts because our language makes it easy to do so?

I've noticed that most expressions involving politics use the verbs for standing or sitting: we stand for elections, we sit out of a debate, we stand in solidarity, we sit on the fence. Maybe our pre-linguistic ancestors communicated with manic gestures and people standing or sitting in a confusing game of charades.

At the end of the game, whoever was left erect on two feet was “standing up” t0 go wage war on the next village.

“But, I didn't know what I was voting on,” the man above mumbles non-verbally in his head.

When the decision on who was to attack the next village occurred, I hope my ancestor was sitting down and enjoying some peace and quiet. The laws of Darwin make that highly likely to have been the case.

But...

“But, this time, THIS ISSUE, is really important!” they say.

Really?

Looking back on the previous decade, we've had a half dozen events that were predicted to be 'the END of EVERYTHING!' A pandemic, Brexit, fires and hurricanes spurred on by global warming, America being defeated by Afghans in slippers, Kim Jong-un smiling behind a nuclear bomb, Trump gaining/losing office depending on which side you are on. But we are all still here, aren't we? And pretty much doing the same thing we were all doing before. At least I am.

I get it. Things get emotional. Some of you will want to tell me about some horrific suffering or despicable act of violence that I just can't ignore.

Before you do that, consider this: there are 195 countries in the world, and something terrible has happened in each and every one of them today. If CNN covered them all, we could all be on a 24-hour hamster wheel of outrage at events from Tajikistan, around the globe to Paraguay, and back again.

If a lone wolf in Alaska barks for a lost puppy in Patagonia. Does it really help?

Things to Lay Down For

Let's sit down and have a heart-to-heart. There are indeed things we should care about. Mostly things that affect us and the people immediately around us.

Since all the standing up for faraway violent conflicts has mostly caused a lot of young men to bump elbows and start wars with each other, I think we should think about transitioning to a new political posture.

So, if anyone is looking to “lay down for global peace”, “lean back for racial tolerance”, or “lounge for shorter working hours”, you've got my vote.