If Robert W. Fuller's hopes for the human race were to come true, the world would be a better place. In his new book,
All Rise: Somebodies, Nobodies, and the Politics of Dignity, he describes a dignitarian society where everyone is valued that would transform our interactions at the personal, local, national, and international levels. Fuller doesn't argue that everyone has equal skills, abilities, or position power but suggests arbitrary delineations of "rank" are used to give people cover to treat others disrespectfully or abusively. (His web site is www.breakingranks.net)
Fuller describes "rankism" as a label comparable to racism, sexism, and ageism, where one uses the external characteristics of a person or group to render that person invisible or less worthy in some regard. While sometimes the offense is deliberate as in the case of discriminatory policies or legislation, often the questionable behavior is unconscious and unintended.
I confess that the reason why Fuller's message feels so natural to me is that these principles have always been my guideposts. His work gives a name and recognition to these values.
* My parents taught me to judge people by their character and behavior not by their race, religion, sexual preference, or economic status--they openly advocated against the concept of rankism.
* My mother was a high school teacher. She always treated the janitors as respectfully as she did her colleagues and the principal and she modeled that equitable behavior for me so I could apply it in my own professional life.
* I have had the benefits of a great education and interesting jobs since I was 14 years old. I'm versatile and competent team player in a variety of disciplines, subjects, and roles but my enthusiasm hits a brick wall when I am treated like a Nobody.
* I despise bigotry in all its forms and feel that fighting prejudice is worth putting one's life on the line. I was too young to travel to the south as part of the Civil Rights movement but that was the upheaval in society that spoke to my soul more than the anti-war movement or the rejections of materialism in the late 60s and early 70s. (I went to my first anti-war protests with this latest incursion into Iraq and wrote my novel partially in reaction to the cancer of corporate greed that is damaging the health of our country.)
* I appreciate people who are gentle, kind, and respectful. Over the years I have had the opportunity to meet people of great accomplishments and talents and discovered how many of them are generous and genuinely interested in the opinions and (accomplishments) of people who have yet to fulfill their potential.
Think about it. Here is action that is totally free and within every individual's power to control. It provides psychic pleasure to everyone involved and is capable of making a profound difference in our own lives and the lives of others. It's like a smile, and just as contagious. It doesn't solve all of society's ills but--if it caught on--we, and democracy itself, would be taking a giant leap forward. Related ideas like "common sense, common decency, basic good manners" all suggest the fundamentals are within everyone's grasp.
In fact, it's difficult to think of a reason not to behave as Fuller suggests at least at the personal level. The obvious barriers are one's own insensitivity, insecurity, ignorance, or spite. Let's take the first case--insensitivity--maybe there's someone you know who engages in rankism but doesn't realize it. He doesn't know the name of the person who cleans the office or the guy who cares for his lawn. She never bothers to look a waiter or a busboy in the eye. In fact, even if an accomplished professional is presented as the friend of a friend, that person won't be seen as "noteworthy" unless perceived to be of sufficient stature.
Fuller suggest that the way to get through to the unconscious rankist is to frame the situation from how it makes us feel rather than to accuse the person of engaging in such behavior. This approach is related to one style I've found to be effective when broaching political differences.
Insecurity and ignorance are the motivations behind much unpleasant behavior associated with rankism as with all the "isms." Ignoring the common humanity of others routinely leads to bullying, put-downs, bigotry, as well as economic exploitation and outright abuse. Labeling a protest as "politically correct" instead of recognizing what might be behind the comment, trivializes the feelings of the person or group being disrespected. As a society, we try to avoid acknowledging how the systematic disempowerment of entire groups can result in wage slavery that subsidizes the more comfortable lifestyles of the middle and upper classes.
If we are to be generous, we should try to educate and reassure others when possible as to how their actions are impacting others. Fuller realistically concedes our ability to change perception is limited by our own rank in a given situation. If we outrank the abuser or he or she is a peer, we're more able to have an influence than if we, as the abused person or an independent observer, are much lower in rank. Every case is different and Fuller suggests there aren't standard rules of engagement, (except perhaps when monitoring our own behavior.)
This is where the notion of a political movement enters the picture. As the Civil Rights and Women's Suffrage movements demonstrated, the author makes the case that sometimes it takes the collective actions of the disrespected and their supporters (who enjoy greater status in society) to force or inspire social change. Look at the recent marches and rallies of low paid workers through the lens of rankism, rather than immigration, for just a moment. It's easy to imagine these individuals, who we normally overlook, wanting to be seen and valued. The balance of power didn't change, but for one day they felt like they belonged in our society.
I don't know whether this will catch on as a movement, per se, and while I think there could be some improvements in the verbal "packaging," I completely buy into the fundamental concepts. I found the book to be straightforward and easy to read. It contains many thought-provoking "bridge ideas" that will appeal to people of various political perspective. Clearly, it will need to have traction beyond the progressive community but this is a good place to start.