Tolerance Isn’t Enough Anymore
On January 16th, 2016, the Hotchkiss community erupted over a Facebook post regarding the merit of celebrating Robert E. Lee’s birthday. As these heated discussions took place, I casually scrolled past the initial post to view comedic videos and pages rather than consider the lack of racial awareness within my supposedly inclusive community. However, in the days that followed, the school-wide MLK, Jr. Day event made me realize that I had created a dichotomy in my life represented by two boxes: one that represented everything I could connect to and the other containing everything else. Prior to that day, I felt that I could leave these heated discussions to others who felt more immediately affected. I told myself I was tolerant because I accepted others, but I started to see that tolerance could be used as a shield or, worse, an excuse for ignorance. People may use tolerance as an excuse for passiveness rather than engaging in the fight against injustice. In order to reach George Washington’s ideals of peaceful co-existence beyond the concept of tolerance, we must be concerned and active advocates for others because without this mutual concern, divisions arise.
As an Asian-American male, I have witnessed the long-lasting influence of passive tolerance. My community has historically dismissed racism targeted at us with the reasoning that it was unavoidable due to our recent immigration from Asian nations and long-time military conflicts. Until recently, we accepted that our representation and voice would be sidelined in larger discussions. While other minorities protested against the social injustices, we continued to ignore, tolerate, and excuse it. In a sense, we learned to tolerate these inequities because these inequities had no immediate effect on our personal lives. Unfortunately, it was tragedy that awoke the Asian-American community to our role in passive tolerance.
When Akai Gurley was killed on November 20, 2014 by an Asian-American police officer, Peter Liang, the Asian-American community woke up to find themselves divided over the discussion of police brutality. After it was revealed that Liang had fired the bullet, which had killed Gurley, and faced charges that no other Asian-American officer had faced previously, thousands of Asian Americans rallied behind Liang without truly understanding the details of the case. Years of tolerance and ignorance of the injustices against other minorities had convinced my community that Liang had a higher chance of being indicted due to the fact that the victim of this interracial violence was African-American. As a person who at first believed this notion as well, I soon realized that ignorance had compelled my community to jump to conclusions. My own revelation prompted me to think about how there needs to be a way to generate a connection between different groups of people; there needs to be a way to instill in people like the members of my community the sense of obligation to participate in fighting the social injustices affecting other minorities; there needs to be a way to create empathy so that presumptions don’t dictate our actions. There needs to be unity in our society.
As our society struggles to embody this unity, I have seen another problem arise as a result of the continued push for personal interests. After Liang was indicted on February 10, 2015, the controversy disappeared from the news. Bolder headlines took its place; news about ISIS, Syria, and Donald Trump caught our attention. It wasn’t until Liang’s trial this year that I once again revisited this event. As the trial was almost concurrent with Hotchkiss’ own recognition of inclusivity, I recognized that public interest in major incidents tied to racism and other social problems dies away just as quickly as it comes to life. The quick turnover of events frightens me as it indicates the shifting philosophies of our country. We treat events as if they are toys; the next one gifted to us is more worthy of attention while we leave a discarded pile behind us. But our society does not have to fall prey to this cycle.
The mutually respectful society that Washington envisioned in his 1790 Letter To Touro Synagogue will only come to fruition when the barrier that separates personal interests from societal interests finally crumbles. When people only focus on matters that pertain to their interests, they create a polarity that misguides individuals and develops a passive ignorance. King, in his writing, noted that “shallow understanding from people of good will [was] more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will.” As we aim to create this ideal society, perhaps we must no longer look at America as a “melting pot.” Rather, we must view our country as though it is a body, where organs must work in unison to sustain itself. To sustain our well-being, we must work in solidarity as a collective “us.” America has all the resources to achieve this goal. The question now is: are we willing to pursue the collective good over our personal gain?
Bibliography
King, Martin Luther, Jr. Letter, “Letters from Birmingham Jail,” April 16, 1963.
