Sydney M. Williams
Thought of the Day
“Victimhood”
August 15, 2022
“There is a difference between victimization and victimhood. We are all likely to be victimized in some
way in the course of our lives. At some point we will suffer some kind of affliction or calamity or
abuse, caused by circumstances or people or institutions over which we have little or no control…
In contrast, victimhood comes from the inside. No one can make you a victim but you. We become
victims not because of what happens to us but when we choose to hold on to our victimization…”
Edith Eger (1927-)
The Choice: Embrace the Possible, 2017
Too often, we accept victimhood, which can come in myriad guises: A college student cowers under a torrent of “hurtful” words; a banker worries an employee will be offended by the wrong pronoun; a comedian is booed by those claiming victimhood, for humor deemed racist, sexist, or homophobic. The American people were told by elitist Democrats, and “never-Trumpers,” that we were victims of a “fascist-like” Donald Trump. Doing so, freed his political opponents to pursue any means to destroy him: false accusations of Russian collusion; a two-year, multi-million-dollar (and futile) Mueller investigation; two impeachments, and the recent FBI raid on his home at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach. No matter one’s view of the egotistical Mr. Trump, has not he become a victim?
In this surrealistic world, who is the victim and who the victimizer depends – not on facts – but on political ideology. When Twitter or Facebook censor news reports from conservatives to “protect” readers or viewers from “fake” or “malicious” stories, are not they promoting victimhood? If a corporation does not comply with DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) protocols, it is accused of victimizing its employees. Should investment managers seek to maximize portfolio returns, or should they find investments that are ESG (environmental, social, and governance) friendly, regardless of the comparative investment return potential? Have not some pensioners and mutual fund holders become victims to the political aspirations of portfolio managers? The acceptance of victimhood affects the way we value meritocracy and perceive equal opportunity – that past inequities and unequal outcomes make necessary the racial bigotry inherent in affirmative action, which accentuates the divide among people. Is it fair, for example, to lower college admission standards based on race, but not on economic class?
Victimhood subordinates the individual to the group, which is a problem for democracy that depends on individual freedom. This is especially true in the black community. Shelby Steele, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute wrote of this situation twenty years ago in a Harper’s Magazine essay (“The Age of White Guilt and the Disappearance of the Black Individual,” November 30, 2002): “Right after the sixties’ civil-rights victories came what I believe to be the greatest miscalculation in black American history…we were faithless with ourselves just when we had given ourselves reason to have such faith…To go after America’s liability we had to locate real transformative power outside ourselves. Worse, we had to see our fate as contingent on America’s paying off that liability. We have been a contingent people ever since, arguing our weakness and white racism ignite the engine of white liability. And this has mired us in a protest-group identity that mistrusts individualism because free individuals might jeopardize the group’s effort to activate this liability.” It is demeaning to the individual when we do not ascribe success (or failure) to that individual, no matter their color, sexual orientation, or gender.
The consequence of these, (perhaps) well-intentioned but personally degrading, policies is that victimhood is claimed even when victimization never took place. The result is a nation of H.G. Wells’ Eloi controlled by his bureaucratic Morlocks. Victimhood results in dependency, especially dependency on government. Gone are self-reliance, dignity, and independence. Acquiescence to victimhood means avoiding personal responsibility. An unjust accusation of being a victimizer means having to apologize for actions of others, even when those actions took place hundreds of years ago. And, of course, it belittles real victims, like Salmon Rushdie.
The assumption of victimhood means a failure to look within. Craig D. Lounsbrough, a licensed counselor in Colorado, is quoted: “I decry the injustice of my wounds, only to look down and see the smoking gun in one hand and a fistful of ammunition in the other.” A failure to take responsibility injures society, because we live in a world where some people, regardless of color or gender, are victimized. Those that are deserve our help and support. But we should avoid the mantle of victimhood. We should look back on the life of Edith Eger, for an understanding of the difference between true victimization and imagined victimhood.
Edith Eger, whose quote in the rubric that precedes and gives direction to this essay, was born on September 29, 1927 to Hungarian Jewish parents in the Czechoslovakian town of Košice. In May 1944, with her family, she was deported to Auschwitz and then transported to Mauthausen and Gunskirchhen, from which she was released in May 1945 by American troops. Her parents did not survive. In 1949, with her husband and daughter, she emigrated to the United States; she received her PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Texas in 1978. I doubt anyone reading this essay ever suffered victimization to the extent did Ms. Eger during the final year of the Second World War, yet she never declared victimhood.
Comments
Post a Comment