Societal Dynamics

I grew up white-trailer-trash, we were poor, and our seven family members lived in a two-bedroom, single bath trailer 10’ wide by 55’ long. I spent most of my time outside the family abode as the small space aggravated our tempers and agitated my abusive parents—because of my environment, I learned to survive on the streets. It was because of my skills and scrappiness that I excelled as a youth outside the framework of education—and for the greatest portion of my life, relied upon my wits to better myself, and my family.

In society, scrappiness and wits will only take one so far—there is an institutional framework that keeps those who have not paid the dues of higher education from succeeding beyond a middle-class existence. Society and institutions prefer established norms, the status quo, and what-is because it promises stability, which minimizes risk and exposure. The privileged like constancy, but we also know that human and institutional growth inflates during times of instability—and so we have a societal contradiction—to become better we must become uncomfortable, but few of us like to live in that state for long.

Privilege and oppression are two sides of the same coin. That coin is named “bias.” In America, if one is white, educated, and male, bias tilt’s in their direction, and we call it privilege. We like to pick on white, educated men because they as a demographic group, populate the majority of affluent positions across our country, but privilege extends well beyond one demographic group—it extends to all of those who have benefitted from institutions—some more than others.

Regardless of advantage, both institutions and individuals share a self-centric viewpoint that is difficult to dismiss. Insecurity and fear motivate folk to make decisions that favor themselves, with greed and trepidation fueling our decision making. The dynamic at work though, is that the opportunity that benefits us, can many times oppress others. People are messy, and institutions which are populated with people are messy too. Some would suggest that instituting policy to referee the boundaries and fouls of institutional players—but doesn’t policy reinforce the oppression of the institution?

For much of my life I have watched the results of institutional oppression across many of its stakeholders—in the name of “it’s best for all,” and though the overt policies have limited a certain amount of turf-wars, I have never seen any lasting benefit to the policies, with the only sustained endeavor—the passive-aggressive pettiness against fellow workers that follows. There seems to be a dynamic at play, what gives an institution privilege, tends to oppress those that create the success—some, of course, would argue that financial rewards are the result of success, but I would argue that monetary rewards are short-lived, superficial and nothing more than carrot-and-stick incentive.

I posit that there must be a way in which the dynamic between institution and individuals, between the privileged and the oppressed can be mitigated, that the fissure can be eliminated. There has to be a way where institutions can profit without exploiting fear in the workplace, and stakeholders can collaborate in an environment where individuals can share from their experiences and insight, without being judged or dismissed as irrelevant.

I share from my own insight here, not as a professional, but as a learner. I have watched and experienced oppression the greater part of my life, but I have also experienced tremendous privilege—and I consider at this point in my education to abide in the realm of both opportunity and oppression. I think the take-away for me at this point is to spend less time thinking on my gain, and more time strengthening and building up others through the privilege I have been granted, perhaps this may generate enough discomfort to keep me other-minded.