Be informed:
Seeking Dialogue

Is there any right to look away or is there any privilege to ignore. A mental game.

Imagine you are sitting in a classroom just before the final exam. All 29 other students are sitting in the same room. Each person at his or her own table. Everyone is facing the blackboard. There are five neat rows, each with six classmates. The teacher is in the front, pompously announcing the all-important final paper: “Write your name onto the top right-hand corner of a lined A4 sheet of 80gsm paper. Then crumple it up.” The teacher lifts a red bucket and places it on the floor directly in front of the blackboard: “Finally, throw the paper ball into this bucket. Whoever hits it, has passed!”

Of course, this scenario is fictional, but in fact the problem it describes is non-fictional. Although the instructions for the sheet of paper are so precise that it might appear to be a uniform, controlled and therefore repeatable test situation, the people in the front row, especially those directly in front of the bin, have the best chance of hitting the bucket and passing the scenario.

Some are systematically advantaged, the others are disadvantaged without any fault of their own

Now, when people in the second row complain that they have a more difficult task hitting the bucket than those in the first row, we can imagine those in the first row smiling and wishing their classmates good luck, safe in the knowledge that they are fine. And of course, that does not mean that everyone in the front row will hit the bucket. Maybe someone cannot throw very well, has a bad day, accidentally overturns the table while throwing. Maybe someone in the front row even knocks over his/her own water bottle so that it hits the person sitting next to him/her, who thus misses the bucket while losing concentration – in short: Just because some have a greater chance of hitting in this scenario it doesn’t mean they will, or that there can’t be other problems that make it difficult for them to throw. The fact is that some are systematically advantaged and others disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

Let’s further imagine how from the last row, in the left corner near the window, a person shouts how unfair it is. If someone in the front row reflects on how the test is structured, that person will also notice how unfair the situation is. But the room is still loud with the laughter of others in pole position, the rustling of those further back, sliding unhappily back and forth on their chairs, undecided whether to say something or just try the throw and hope for their own talent or luck. Perhaps the complaint is not heard and so someone speaks up from the right-hand corner next to the door: “What the hell! I’ll never manage that! The test is rubbish!” The person is obviously upset, who would not be? Many turn to her and nod. Those from the front row are less willing to do so. After all, the test is perfect for them. And even if they do not want to confess: The smaller the number of people who pass, the more valuable it feels to pass!

Most of those in the front row have already thrown and are loudly celebrating their passing, while in the back rows there is more and more resentment. Now there is another problem: If the test is changed again, will those who have already passed continue to pass or will they have to throw again – with the risk that they will fail this time?

We, the readers of this fictional situation, agree that the test cannot be the pass mark for anything -except paper ball target throwing – nor does the set-up allow equal opportunities for all participants. As readers, we probably agree that everyone should at least line up and throw from the same position, one after the other.

Therefore, the question now is: Why have some already thrown? Is it blind faith in the test because it is from the teacher’s authority figure? Have they simply not noticed that the test is “wrong” in so many aspects? Do they not care? How can someone be indifferent to the fact that others are in a worse position?

Are people allowed not to care if other people are systematically in an even worse position?

In other words, should people not care if other people are systematically in a worse position? Do we have the duty to look around before throwing, to assess whether the system is fair before we give our consent by participating?

Should they forego a sure pass in solidarity with others in the back rows and wait for another test?

Imagine sitting in the front row, right in front of the bucket, it is easy not to turn around. You still have to be able to throw in order to pass the test. You will feel as if you have deserved passing, as if you have done everything right.

The more privileges an individual has, the easier it is to ignore systematic disadvantage. The more you sit further back or – to transfer the allegory – the fewer privileges you have, the harder it is to ignore the disadvantage. Looking away, thus, is a privilege that results from other privileges. Probably it feels like a legal right because it is the product of other circumstances.

In real life, however – outside the paper ball target throwing scenario – privileges are harder to identify than chair rows in a room. However, they are not invisible and not identifying them is just as much a refusal as not turning around.

There is no right to look away, but rather the privilege to ignore things that do not concern you.

In the global North, climate change also becomes apparent in more frequent and more extreme storms, which you can survive very comfortably and with moderate losses in a stable house with a stable electricity and water supply. Inhumane conditions in refugee camps can be endured in a comfortable armchair with a hot chocolate and the certainty that you yourself would never flee. Famine in war zones? Racism in North America? Unequal education opportunities in Germany? Racism and xenophobia in Germany? Perhaps the examples are still so general that people get lost in the crowd. An internet research removes the anonymity of the many victims of the privilege-preserving systems in which we live. To ignore is a privilege and not a legal right, it is a decision and not a neutral attitude. Looking away is legitimizing the suffering of real people.

Exception:

People whose mental state cannot bear the suffering of others additionally without further harm are the only people who have the right to look away in order to heal themselves.

Sarah Besler