I and Thou or Social Power Dynamics?

 

Martin Buber, the noted Jewish philosopher, wrote a book titled “I and Thou” emphasizing that the most significant relationship between people happens when two people see and recognize the sacred within each other. In an I-Thou relationship, the people involved do not see each other as any kind of means, but rather each person sees the other as an end in themselves. The other person becomes a reserve of infinite value. We acknowledge the centrality of this I-Thou relationship in our first principle, which recognizes the inherent worth and dignity of all persons.

In Unitarian Universalism, we elevate the I-Thou relationship as much as possible in our worship practices and our social relations. We seek to give everyone a voice, not just a vote. We recognize the power of the individual conscience, that sometimes an individual can see clearly what a society cannot. In our small group ministries, we practice deep listening so that each one of the participants can come to recognize their own inner light, what the philosopher Thomas Merton calls true self.

The proposed revision to Article II, our statement of the shared values and principles of Unitarian Universalists, has de-emphasized the language of I and Thou. It was the Study Commission’s explicit goal to minimize language oriented towards individuals and rather increase language expressive of social power dynamics. The charge to the Commission was to focus on “person, institutional, and cultural change rooted in anti-oppression, anti-racism, and multicultural values.” Furthermore, the Commission was instructed to “de-center habitual practices that enforce white supremacy culture.”

Within the lens of anti-oppression and anti-racism, social power dynamics reign supreme. These social justice philosophies bring new insights into the sources and patterns of oppression in western cultures. It is vital for Unitarian Universalists to study and learn from the insights of these points of view. Yet by placing social justice philosophies at the very center of Unitarian Universalism, the Study Commission and the UUA Board are elevating concerns related to social power dynamics at the expense of more spiritual approaches to human relations.

Within the viewpoints of anti-oppression and anti-racism, social power dynamics are always the dominant forces at play in any relationship. It is nearly impossible for white people to understand the lived experience of black people, or for cis people to understand the lived experience of trans people. The only way to express support is through absolute and unquestioning acknowledgment of what the oppressed persons say. This is why the editor of UU World published an article saying, “Our Story Hurt People” to apologize for an article written by a cis woman about supporting trans people (“After L, G, and B”). Seen through the lens of social power dynamics, a cis person cannot speak on their personal perspectives concerning trans rights without reinforcing the social dynamic of cis people being culturally dominant and trans people being oppressed.

One of the key arguments of those advocating for these new social justice frameworks is that we need to center the stories of historically marginalized groups. I wholeheartedly support this objective. As Unitarian Universalists, we do need to elevate black, gay, trans, and disabled voices. We need to listen to and truly hear their stories. We have just begun to scratch the surface of this need that will feed the spiritual growth of all of us and help pave a path towards mutual understanding and healing.

But what does it mean to truly hear the story of another, of someone who is different from you in a fundamental way? I argue that the most powerful way to listen to the story of another is through the I-Thou relationship. To take a specific example, the path to healing the endemic racial injustice of our society is for white people and black people to develop I-Thou relationships where both parties feel fully respected and deeply heard. The I-Thou relationship requires a symmetry of status, because trust can only be built upon the ground of spiritual equality.

I am concerned that if such a black-white relationship is developed primarily from the perspective of social power dynamics, a profound asymmetry will result. The black person will be listened to, but the white person will be afraid to speak their truth and will listen from a perspective of guilt and shame. The white person will feel fearful of perpetuating the history of white supremacy because any voice they issue might be contaminated with white supremacy culture. It is my belief that true healing can only occur within the framework of an I-Thou relationship between spiritual equals. Every person involved must feel free to speak their own truth and feel safe enough to say difficult things.

So here is my central question: If we put social justice thinking at the very center of Unitarian Universalist theology and minimize the role of individual thought and individual conscience, will there still be space for I-Thou relationships within Unitarian Universalism? Or will our relationships, even within the walls of our UU institutions, be relentlessly examined from the perspective of social power dynamics: Who is the privileged, and who is the oppressed?