Today I planned to take a break from LinkedIn. It seems that, at least when it comes to my posts, this network and I have been at odds for some time now. I thought I’d simply not write anything for a day.
But certain situations compel me to change my mind. Not because I think I’ll change the world with a single post, but because there are things I don’t want to remain silent about.
That’s the least I can do.
Today, a certain situation reminded me once again that, as a society, we’re quick to judge people by what sets them apart from us, and only then by what they’ve actually done.
Someone has spent years helping families in need, supporting institutions and people for whom that help means far more than the amount of money involved. Yet sometimes, instead of recognizing the value of those deeds, we first try to determine who that person is, how they think, and how much their beliefs align with ours.
As if a good deed must pass a test of affiliation before it earns our respect.
In Montenegro we see the past, present, and future through many lenses. Our beliefs, identities, and experiences shape us. I don’t expect us to give up those differences, nor do I think a society where everyone thinks the same way would be one I’d want to live in.
Yet I’ve never understood why differing beliefs should stop us from acknowledging the good someone has done.
If someone has helped a family in need, the value of that help does not depend on how much we agree with their views. Nor does gratitude for such an act mean we have accepted all of their positions.
These are two completely different things.
And this is precisely where I believe we, as a society, have a lot of room to grow.
I wish we could openly acknowledge someone in Montenegro for their actions without first stating which side we’re on. That we could thank a person we disagree with, without being seen as abandoning our own convictions.
If we start measuring the value of good deeds by who did them, we gradually lose the ability to judge people fairly.
We don’t have to think alike. We don’t have to agree on history, politics, or anything else.
But we must preserve the ability to recognize what is worthy of respect.
If we can acknowledge a good deed only when the doer thinks like us, we are not truly valuing the deed.
We are valuing group affiliation.
A society that forgets this distinction may one day find itself with many convictions but too little mutual respect.
Comments