Rage Against the Dying of the Light

Those of you who are reading this blog post may recognize that the title I have chosen for this post comes from the poem “Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night” by Dylan Thomas. The poem speaks not only of the subject of dying but also of living, of how we live.

The poem urges readers to live life while we have the opportunity to do so. It also reminds us that each of us has a purpose, a calling to impact the world in some way, and that we may feel tremendous regret if we realize we have not given our best effort to impact our world in some way.

It is for that reason, and for the power of the words themselves, that I have chosen this title for this post. In the words “the dying of the light” I find my calling to write again after a long hiatus from writing blog posts.

I now find myself living in a nation that I no longer recognize. I must rage against the dying of the light, by exposing the lies, by defending freedom, and by bringing light where there is darkness.

The lies are many. They are long-standing. They touch topics ranging from economic policy to equality of opportunity versus equality of outcome to the creation of categories of “others” by ad hominin attacks on law abiding citizens of this nation, attacks that are not only endorsed by several state and federal leaders but also engaged in by even the sitting President himself.

I am not, and will never claim to be, an expert on economic policy. Thomas Sowell writes extensively on socioeconomic topics and provides an abundance of empirical data to support each of the assertions that he presents in his essays and books.

Larry Elder is also proficient in his inclusion of empirical data in addressing socioeconomic issues, but more so in addressing social issues, such as parenting, policing, and education. Dr. Carol Swain writes and speaks on the topics of social issues including women’s issues, particularly as they relate to women of color, from her own experience. She also addresses issues in education ranging from K through the university; Dr. Swain was a professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University. Readers may find that she knows whereof she speaks on these topics.

Searching out truth in complex areas like economic policy, public education, and even public health policy takes effort. It takes recognizing our own biases and being willing to challenge them. The practice of challenging, of questioning, is currently viewed as problematic.

What is truly problematic is the forbidding of thinking, of questioning, and of arriving at conclusions other than those imposed by the party in power – whichever that may be.

Another current trend that is problematic is the categorizing of people as “others.” What is disturbing, and outright maddening, to me is how willing people are to accept the categorization of the others. It is as though we have learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from history.

Tell me, who were the others at one time in this country? Were they the slaves? Were they the black men and women trying to live in the south? Were they the Japanese after the tragedy at Pearl Harbor? How many of the same people who are abhorred by the treatment of those groups of people are more than willing to wish illness and death on people who choose not to cover their faces in public, or choose not to take a vaccination, or who voted for someone with whom they disagree.

Have we learned nothing from the wrongs committed in this nation’s past? I had thought we had learned a great deal, but now I see that I was wrong. Many people are completely willing to marginalize groups all over again just because they disagree with anything from their healthcare choices to their voting decisions.

Dehumanizing people remains just as wrong now as it was centuries or decades ago.

Dehumanizing the people with whom one disagrees makes it is easier to believe it when one is told that the others are racist, insurrectionist, ignorant, enemies of the state. It frees those who have been told and who believe that they are in the right from the effort that they would otherwise have had to put forth to become curious enough, interested enough, or empathetic enough to understand the other person, to understand why they made the choices they made, or why they voted the way they did, or why they live the way they do.

Sectarianism frees people to sit in their moral superiority, completely devoid of self-reflection and of any willingness to assess their own flaws or biases. Challenging our own biases is difficult, because we all have them – no exceptions. But challenging our biases is necessary if we wish to see beyond the lies that have led to the creation of a category of “others,” and to once again see the beauty in “E Pluribus Unum.”

It is at this point in the blog that I will admit that I am by now likely considered to be an “other.” If you have read my post in the past, you know that I reluctantly chose to get vaccinated. It is not for that reason that I am likely to be placed in the other group.

I support the requirement of identification for a right and responsibility as important as voting for those who will represent us in governance. Still. I am not a racist. No one can so recklessly lay that label on me, because I know who I am.

Not being able to drive due to visual limitations, I have biked to my poling location on warm breezy days, and I have biked or walked to my poling location on cold, wet November days. I share this fact not because I need accolades for my dedication, but rather to reassert a point that seems forgotten. People generally ascribe value or worth based on cost. Voting rights were gained for women and for people of color at a cost. How dare many of our current leaders disrespect their struggle and sacrifice by cheapening the voting process. How dare they insult the effort invested by immigrants who worked to become citizens and to be afforded the opportunity to vote by handing it out to anyone who happens to be around at the time of an election.

I am an “other” because I support freedom, and because I have fought and will continue to fight for freedom, for freedom from government overreach and freedom to live according to the conviction of conscience.

Incidentally, but importantly, though I fight for freedom – or more accurately stated work for freedom – I am not a domestic terrorist. I have been involved with Stand Up Michigan, a grass roots movement that has created change through such avenues as petition campaigns and other legal means only. I have never once seen anyone from Stand Up who has rallied or demonstrated pick up and throw anything, nor am I aware of anyone setting a single fire.

As I listened to a Stand Up Michigan livestream update in the fall, I heard the presenter mention an upcoming rally against vaccine mandates that was scheduled to occur on site at Consumer’s Energy. The presenter directed those who were planning to attend to view the list of guidelines both for appropriate behavior and for appropriate signage prior to participating in the event. Though I was not at all surprised to hear those instructions, I also know that those opposed to the petitions and initiatives of Stand Up have lied publicly about the methods of this group.

Again, I know who I am, and I know that the domestic terrorist or insurrectionist label are more lies that are intended to frighten the gullible and uninformed.

I am not opposed to a government that operates within the roles that the constitution ascribed to each branch thereof. Though it is cliché, government is a necessary evil. The government that delineates and defends its nation’s borders, that effectively maintains its nation’s, states’, and local municipality’s infrastructure, and the government that provides for services now accepted as necessary, such as emergency services and utilities, is appropriate for without it chaos is a likely result. However, the government that seeks to bore its way into every aspect of the private lives of its citizens is heedless and self-focused and needs responsible citizens to remind it of its roles, and of its limitations.

I unapologetically support people’s rights to live their lives as free from excessive control by a government as is practical, and in so doing, I – we the freedom fighters, support the rights of those who disagree with us as well, even though those who disagree with us seem to be unable to comprehend that truth.

Ultimately, I need to remind myself that no government in existence can provide the peace and stability that humanity seeks. It is only the truth that sets people free. As a woman who sees the wrongs of the past and present, I can become very angered by the wrong that I see – by the lies, by the othering, by the capitulating, but I also need to remind myself that the truth must be shared in love.

I need to be cognizant too of the words that appear earlier in this blog. I choose to strive for a nuanced view, rather than a binary view, of complex issues. I choose to seek to better understand the people with whom I may disagree. I choose to rage against the dying of the light.