Marshall Rosenberg on Power & Privilege | Nonviolent Communication

[@CupofEmpathy]

How’s the video landing for you? Any other topics you'd like me to dive into?

[@relationshape9590]

Love this overview, would love to hear more about the topic, practical examples of dialogues etc..

[@CupofEmpathy]

Let me know if you have any specific type of dialogue you'd like to see examples of!

[@meganbliss]

A valuable video thankyou ❤ cis is another label, to which I do not consent. But your message is super important and well presented ❤

[@CupofEmpathy]

thank you! and what do you mean about not consenting to the cis label? you dont like to use it for yourself? you dont like it when others use it?

[@meganbliss]

@CupofEmpathy I don't use it myself and I don't consent to it being used to label me. Self determination is a wonderful right we have according to certain covenants and declarations. I believe my stance is non-violent. Thanks for asking 💙

[@nomadrose]

Very important

[@lordofthstrings]

I'm really curious to hear what some of the things you take issue with are. For me it's that, as far as I can tell, NVC doesn't offer a lot of guidance on what to do when you're someone with little power or privilege and NVC doesn't work and you're seemingly back to resist or comply. To continue with the guitar case example, what if they insisted on taking the case and potentially damaging the guitar? The unfortunate reality in today's world is that there are oftentimes people with power over us who are just unable to be reasoned or collaborated with and they can be incredibly dangerous to our well-being, both as individuals and as a society. Sometimes all you can do is resist or comply and I do find that many people (myself included) who use NVC end up not resisting because they're absolutely sure there's some way to get to use NVC to avoid having to face that painful reality

[@CupofEmpathy]

thank you for this, yes, i can def see your concern..

[@feyzacelik723]

The power privilege we have is because of social perceptions of people about us even though it has nothing to do with what is alive in us. But the label itself doesn’t matter much, except to the extent of honouring the person for whom it matters. So what happens when a person sees a Muslim woman as oppressed due to the headscarf? Or what happens when a person views an LGBT person as immoral? When we are working with power privileges it’s really important to acknowledge that the cause of the privilege is not the label in itself. There are simply people who use power over for reasons of not being connected to their heart. This is why I’m uncertain about using the word privilege… I am not sure if I made sense.

[@CupofEmpathy]

thanks for sharing, i dont think i follow what you are trying to say..

[@feyzacelik723]

@@CupofEmpathyhmm. I’m just wondering if the labels you refer to as part of the power and privilege may be too descriptive for Marshall’s liking? He doesn’t like descriptions as it creates the image and the thoughts that perpetuate enmity. I wonder how that lands with you? I also wonder if we can contribute to social change without focusing on the labels that distinguish us and illustrate power.

[@feyzacelik723]

@@CupofEmpathyin other words, words like “immoral” and “oppressed” are playing the same game as “white / privileged / man / Christian / straight” etc.

[@kjnoah]

Nope, you got it wrong. You lost my sub.

[@antopolskiy]

could you elaborate on what she got wrong in your opinion? I'd love to have a broader view on this

[@CupofEmpathy]

Yes Im curious too, what is it you dont agree with?

[@kjnoah]

@@antopolskiy Since you both asked in such a kind and respectful way, I feel obligated to respond in kind. I took some time to review and this is my attempt to answer those points I feel were not articulated in accordance with Marshall Rosenburg's writings or recordings or which are in conflict with logic as I understand it. As an example, I can focus on "white men" as that may be a perspective I can authentically speak to, please do not consider my example to imply I am speaking for or defending all white men, that would be insane. Please substitute any other category and test my arguments. intersectionality: It's crucial to acknowledge that these dynamics intersect with other aspects of identity like class, sexual orientation, and disability. Not all white men experience the same level of privilege, and some may face disadvantages in other areas. Individual vs. Systemic: While some perspectives can point to systemic advantages, it's essential to avoid generalizing about individuals. Not all white men consciously exert "power-over," and many actively work against inequality. Use of categories outside of individual scenarios is what leads to bigotry and over generalization. When making claims of "systemic" it is best to identify the exact cause, not the perceived effect simply targeted at a likely suspect by percentage alone. The same assumption of power some bigots display is also displayed in the inverse by those claiming such power structures exist and demanding consideration from an inappropriate source that cannot equalize an imagined power imbalance. The exact way that an individual exercises power imbalance must be articulated in a manner the accused can remedy, or the request is inappropriate. I cannot be required to pay another what someone who was not me stole from them or inflicted on them, just as I cannot imagine some offense and require someone else fix my problem without articulating how they personally are required to do as I request. I agree it is good to be aware of how some may perceive me and yet that is not my problem unless i am going about intentionally putting judgements and requirements on them. If I am doing it unintentionally, it becomes my problem once I am informed or otherwise become aware. At that point, I may still need to be approached with a request before I can remedy any imbalance as being aware of a problem does not always coincide with being aware of the correct solution to balance the power. Even so, it is impossible to balance imagined imbalances that come without evidence or I become victim to everyone that claims to be a victim of me for any reason they can imagine. Equal Opportunity: In a truly meritocratic system, individuals are selected and promoted based solely on their qualifications, skills, and performance, regardless of their background or identity. In such a system, the percentage of representation would ideally reflect the distribution of talent and ability within the relevant population. Logically, in a country of majority white men, the majority in any other category also being white men is normal and not a power imbalance, as it is equal to the the local population, not an artificial tokenized representation of all possibilities. To force such a thing woudl be systemic favoritism, which woudl lead to a power imbalance, favoring the minority over the majority. Fair and Transparent Processes: A merit-based system requires fair and transparent processes for recruitment, evaluation, and promotion. These processes should be free from bias and provide equal opportunities for all individuals. IN a merit based system, the most qualified reach the positions of power. Considering the disparity of IQ among men, they are destined to inhabit the majority of the lowest positions and the highest positions of power, women would occupy and out-compete the majority of mid-level positions, with relatively few by percentage of women, exceeding the smartest men. The imbalance in IQ is not caused by humans, but is a result of our genetics, same as many other immutable characteristics which in the US at least are illegal to discriminate against. Many people have said they are offended if you get scared and assume a black man will rape you, simply because he is black. The potential for abuse of power does not require the holder of power to cede that power, but to remain in control of it, for the benefit of themselves and those around them. A beautiful woman may be able to convince men to protect her, pay for her and treat her like a queen, but that is not an abuse until she refuses to balance the power by allowing the men to have power in some other area or to receive adequate compensation for what they gave to her. Ideally such a woman would have humility to recognize she has needs the men are meeting and would ensure their needs are met in return. The reverse is true for men or for the intelligent or the powerful. Nobless oblige. With great power comes great responsibility. While a percentage of representation can be a useful indicator of potential power imbalances, it should not be interpreted in isolation. It's crucial to consider the context, the possibility of systemic barriers, genetic advantages, and the potential for merit-based representation. A comprehensive analysis that includes both quantitative and qualitative data is necessary to draw accurate conclusions about the relationship between representation and power.

[@antopolskiy]

​@@kjnoah Thank you for the detailed answer, I really appreciate you've taken the time to respond. I will rewatch the video and re-read your response to better understand your position, but I think I've grasped your main ideas. Thanks again