0:01

And once I had to

0:03

give up hate, I had

0:05

to find another motivation for

0:08

continuing to do the work.

0:10

And it was not easy,

0:12

but I began to appreciate

0:14

the power of love, the

0:16

power of hope, the power

0:18

of community in a way

0:20

that I had not appreciated,

0:22

as long as I was

0:24

motivated by hate anger and

0:27

revenge. Welcome to

0:29

Point of Relation with

0:31

Thomas Hubel, a podcast

0:33

that illuminates the path

0:35

to collective healing at

0:37

the intersection of science

0:39

and mysticism. This is

0:41

the point of relation.

0:43

The following interview was

0:46

recorded during a previous

0:48

collective healing conference. A

0:50

free online gathering convened

0:52

annually by Thomas Hubel.

0:55

to explore insights and

0:57

share practices for worldwide

0:59

healing and change. Loretta J. Ross

1:01

is a renowned activist, scholar, and

1:03

pioneer of the 1970s movement

1:05

to end violence against women

1:08

that laid groundwork for the

1:10

Me Too movement. She founded the

1:12

first US Center for Creative

1:14

Human Rights Education and has

1:17

deprogrammed hate group members inspiring

1:19

her book, Calling In the

1:22

Calling Out Culture. She was

1:24

inducted into the National Women's

1:26

Hall of Fame in 2023.

1:28

Welcome back to the collective

1:30

healing conference. My name is Thomas

1:32

Ubel, I'm the convener of the

1:35

conference, and I'm so happy to

1:37

be sitting here with Loretta Ross.

1:39

Loretta, one will come to a

1:42

collective healing conference. They're

1:44

having me on. Yes, I'm very

1:47

curious to learn from you because

1:49

you embody... you know many years

1:51

and a lot of experience

1:53

of activism being a voice

1:56

for change in society and

1:58

I think many people think

2:00

of so many people that

2:02

listen to us here at

2:04

the conference, but many people

2:06

that are working on very

2:09

important topics in society. You

2:11

know, we need passion, we

2:13

need fire, we need, we

2:15

need to really care. But

2:17

sometimes we, in the activism

2:19

work, we create a lot

2:21

of polarization ourselves. So I'm

2:23

very curious to learn from

2:25

your experience, so how you

2:28

see that and where you

2:30

are today. in your work

2:32

in the world. But maybe

2:34

we can start with your

2:36

own journey. So given all

2:38

the work that you did,

2:40

where do you feel it

2:42

developing your work at the

2:44

moment is the most interesting

2:47

for you, given all you

2:49

have seen? So what's your

2:51

leading edge, so to speak?

2:53

Thank you for that question.

2:55

I'm one of the 12

2:57

black women who created the

2:59

theory of reproductive justice 30

3:01

years ago. And so my

3:04

current asset around reproductive justice

3:06

is a concept that I'm

3:08

calling reproductive justice futurism. I'm

3:10

actually trying to project into

3:12

maybe 50 or 100 years

3:14

ahead of us right now.

3:16

How will all of the

3:18

genetic and reproductive technologies that

3:20

we... seeing experimented with now,

3:23

really going to have an

3:25

effect on our present day

3:27

inequalities and structural problems. I

3:29

mean, will the benefits of

3:31

science be equally and fairly

3:33

distributed? Or will they be

3:35

only reserved for the people

3:37

with the money to pay

3:39

as they go, for example?

3:42

And so reproductive justice futurism

3:44

takes the human rights base

3:46

reproductive justice and analysis and

3:48

says, well, what will happen?

3:50

when designer babies aren't desired

3:52

to be brown or black.

3:54

What will happen? There will

3:56

be people that's only are

3:59

for those who can afford

4:01

the houses of the and

4:03

thousands of dollars to manage

4:05

their reproduction. What will happen

4:07

when we start doing gene

4:09

selection and then deselect for

4:11

things that the rich and

4:13

powerful see is undesirable. We

4:15

have to ask those questions

4:18

now because the science is

4:20

moving far ahead of our

4:22

moral ability to anticipate the

4:24

unintended consequences. And maybe the

4:26

consequences aren't anything that maybe

4:28

they're working out the way

4:30

they want them to work

4:32

out. But we should be

4:34

questioning all of that. I

4:37

completely agree. So how do

4:39

you work on that practically?

4:41

Like what's your, how do

4:43

you address those topics practically

4:45

in your everyday work? Like

4:47

how can we, how can

4:49

we make those changes or

4:51

build that awareness or build

4:54

that kind of ethical code?

4:56

to relate to science in

4:58

that way and equality? Well,

5:00

I'm one of those people

5:02

who definitely believes in collective

5:04

liberation. So whenever I see

5:06

a problem, I always think

5:08

that the first thing to

5:10

do is to bring light-minded

5:13

people together to talk about

5:15

it, that I don't have

5:17

the capacity or desire to

5:19

think that I can singularly

5:21

solve or address these problems

5:23

by myself. So for example

5:25

on reproductive justice tutorism, I'm

5:27

organizing a conference next March

5:29

at Smith College where I

5:32

work bringing together the leading

5:34

scholars and activists and scientists

5:36

that will accept my invitation

5:38

to come talk about what

5:40

would human rights based scientific

5:42

advancements look like. How can

5:44

we in fact put some

5:46

guardrails up? so that we

5:49

don't deny the possible benefits

5:51

of these scientific developments, but

5:53

that we also don't over

5:55

promise through them. Or a...

5:57

present-day inequalities. And so that's

5:59

my first step is I

6:01

always bring together people to

6:03

discuss and bounce ideas off

6:05

each other and learn from

6:08

each other and share their

6:10

knowledge is so that we

6:12

can then begin to see

6:14

where are the gaps, what

6:16

is the leadership coming from

6:18

what leadership needs to be

6:20

developed, those kinds of questions.

6:22

I always believe in working

6:24

in collective wage with my

6:27

people. Yeah, I do too.

6:29

And so when you, like,

6:31

how do you relate this

6:33

work, like you're creating awareness,

6:35

you're bringing people together, and

6:37

then there is this capitalistic

6:39

race for profit, that is

6:41

a big motivator in scientific

6:44

progress. So there is a

6:46

very fast train moving that's

6:48

looking, okay, how do we

6:50

fund research? How do we

6:52

fund new scientific breakthroughs and

6:54

how can we make use

6:56

of them to generate revenue?

6:58

And so how can we,

7:00

what is your experience? How

7:03

can we work on or

7:05

the same we see with

7:07

AI at the moment? So

7:09

there is a big race

7:11

and once that train is

7:13

going. So it's very hard

7:15

to stop it somewhere and

7:17

say, listen, by the way,

7:20

here is an issue that

7:22

we need to be aware

7:24

of. So how do you

7:26

see the awareness building and

7:28

what you just said in

7:30

relationship to that fast moving

7:32

economic train that has a

7:34

lot of power to drive

7:36

things forward? Maybe you can

7:39

speak a little bit to

7:41

that. Well, I tend not

7:43

to group all people with

7:45

economic power in one bucket.

7:47

There are certainly ideological differences

7:49

between what we call the

7:51

1%. I think that there's

7:53

portions of the 1%. that

7:55

are amoral, that are just

7:58

about pursuing profits. But I

8:00

think there's portions of the

8:02

one percent that have social

8:04

consciousness and that aren't trying

8:06

to do the right thing.

8:08

And so I don't assume

8:10

that just because somebody's rigid

8:12

and immoral, you know, and

8:15

unhealthy, unsustainable way that there's

8:17

not a way to talk

8:19

to them, to reach them,

8:21

to enlist them into understanding.

8:23

how you can't play around

8:25

with all of our humanities,

8:27

you just can't do that.

8:29

And so I tend to

8:31

individualize people regardless of their

8:34

race class, identity, I tend

8:36

to see where their hearts

8:38

are. And so obviously I

8:40

can't stop capitalism from capitalizing

8:42

because that's what it does.

8:44

But at the same time.

8:46

a rather connesian in thinking

8:48

that it doesn't have to

8:50

do it in such a

8:53

destructive way. There are choices

8:55

that we make all along

8:57

the past around who is

8:59

valued, who is disposable, who

9:01

is exploited, who are the

9:03

exploiters. We can make choices

9:05

along all of them. There's

9:07

nothing inevitable about oppression. That

9:10

is always a choice. Beautiful

9:12

sentence. Do you want to

9:14

share with our listeners a

9:16

little bit? What are the

9:18

topics that you worked on

9:20

as an activist or in

9:22

policy or in your work

9:24

so far? What are the

9:26

core topics that are dear

9:29

to your heart? Well, before

9:31

I do the historical back,

9:33

Rob, I just want to

9:35

bring into a focus. Another

9:37

thing that I'm working on

9:39

that is a leading edge.

9:41

I frequently say you can

9:43

say what you mean and

9:45

mean what you say, but

9:48

you don't have to say

9:50

it mean. That's a choice.

9:52

And so there's a lot

9:54

of us who are now...

9:56

working on this problem of

9:58

brave relations and our families

10:00

and our workplaces and our

10:02

politics. And so I'm bringing

10:05

together a group of them

10:07

in a think tank type

10:09

of meeting in August in

10:11

Washington DC, the compare methodologies

10:13

to see what works, to

10:15

see what doesn't work, to

10:17

address the attack on our

10:19

DEI and other kinds of

10:21

ways of solving our problems.

10:24

That hasn't happened before. I

10:26

don't think a lot of

10:28

us have been in the

10:30

same room together to compare

10:32

what's working or what's not

10:34

and what needs to be

10:36

developed. So I actually have

10:38

two competing leading edge. Probably

10:40

my third one is calling

10:43

in, which you'll get to

10:45

in a minute. But I

10:47

entered Social Justice Human Rights

10:49

Activism as a teenager. I

10:51

went to college in 16.

10:53

Howard University. It was there

10:55

I got teargast. in my

10:57

first demonstration against the police.

11:00

For some reason that I

11:02

didn't think tear gas caterships

11:04

could reach me if I

11:06

was on the seventh floor

11:08

of a building. And I

11:10

was wrong. But my first

11:12

job in social change was

11:14

as executive director of the

11:16

DC rate crisis center, which

11:19

I took that job in

11:21

1979. And the DC rate

11:23

crisis center had been the

11:25

first rate crisis center in

11:27

the country. It was founded

11:29

in 1972. So I see

11:31

my circumstances been on the

11:33

ground for the movement to

11:36

end all violence against women,

11:38

which again expanded to all

11:40

violence against other people. At

11:42

that job, I became active

11:44

in reproductive politics because I

11:46

was sterilized when I was

11:48

23. And of course, that's

11:50

a big wake-up call that

11:52

you need to pay attention

11:55

to your plumbing. when people

11:57

are trying to take your

11:59

right to reproduce away from

12:01

you. And then I ended

12:03

up in the women's movement

12:05

by the 1990s. I was

12:07

working against hate groups. I

12:09

was running in research department,

12:11

that opposition research department, that

12:14

monitored hate groups like the

12:16

Kuberts Plan, and the neo-Nazi

12:18

movement. So I ended up

12:20

being white supremacist, found myself

12:22

having the most improbable unlikely

12:24

conversations in the world. And

12:27

then I started a national

12:29

center for human rights education

12:31

because the population of the

12:33

United States is abysmally ignorant

12:35

about human rights. Intentionally, by

12:37

the way, our government has

12:39

never made a full-throated commitment

12:42

to educate its population about

12:44

human rights. And a survey

12:46

that we did still been

12:48

only seven percent of the

12:50

American public, the U.S. public.

12:52

and even heard of the

12:54

Universal Declaration of People and

12:56

Rights. So 93% of our

12:58

country is unaware of these

13:00

global agreements that we should

13:02

be honoring and respecting and

13:05

implementing. And so for a

13:07

decade I ran the Human

13:09

Rights Education Center doing human

13:11

rights education to over a

13:13

million people. And most recently

13:15

in 1997 I have co-founded

13:17

organization called Sister Song. which

13:19

is a women of color

13:21

reproductive justice collective and been

13:23

working on reproductive justice for

13:25

a long time co-wrote three

13:27

books on the topic and

13:30

then my most recent word

13:32

is on calling in and

13:34

I'll just let that go

13:36

right now but we're going

13:38

to talk about that I'm

13:40

sure. Wow, first of all,

13:42

it's impressive to hear all

13:44

the things that you already

13:46

did and and it's also

13:48

impressive to hear how that

13:50

formed you over the years

13:53

more and more to to

13:55

who you are today and

13:57

all the wisdom that that

13:59

generated for you and that

14:01

you pass on to everybody

14:03

you work with. So thank

14:05

you for all the work

14:07

that you have been doing,

14:09

such an important work. And

14:11

so how does this all

14:13

relate now to calling in,

14:15

calling out? I mean, we

14:18

are living in a time

14:20

where the cancel culture. be

14:22

saying the right thing at

14:24

the right time calling you

14:26

said it. You can say

14:28

what you mean, but you

14:30

don't have to say it

14:32

mean. I think that's how

14:34

you said it before. I

14:36

like that sentence. It's great.

14:38

And so can you speak

14:41

a little bit to how

14:43

how we create a cancel

14:45

culture? Why do then how

14:47

we can move on from

14:49

that? So the whole calling

14:51

in, calling out. Maybe you

14:53

can speak for us a

14:55

little bit to what that

14:57

means for you. Well, I

14:59

think people have been calling

15:01

people out and canceling each

15:03

other as long as it's

15:06

been human history. So it's

15:08

certainly not anything new. Whenever

15:10

we want to criticize what's

15:12

going on, either in individuals

15:14

or with the government, I

15:16

mean, Martin Luther, you know,

15:18

thing on the Wittenberg Chapel.

15:20

I mean, we have all

15:22

of these instances where people

15:24

call out the abuses of

15:26

power and they want to

15:29

hold them accountable for it.

15:31

So it's certainly not anything

15:33

new. What is new is

15:35

the virality of it, the

15:37

way that instead of one

15:39

person saying something negative or

15:41

criticizing an individual or government

15:43

or a corporation. Now I

15:45

can get 10,000 people to

15:47

do it in a matter

15:49

of hours. And so there's

15:51

been a real democratization of

15:54

how you can a mass

15:56

power and use it to

15:58

affect or influence people. And

16:00

that can be very. positive,

16:02

but it also can be

16:04

very negative. And so I'm

16:06

more interested in its unintended

16:08

negative consequences. Obviously, I love

16:10

the fact that people with

16:12

a person with a keyboard

16:14

can bring attention to an

16:17

unnoticed or unmarked or acceptable

16:19

harm. We shouldn't be passive

16:21

in the face of injustices.

16:23

We should be able to

16:25

speak out against them. and

16:27

call attention to women, organize

16:29

people who are experiencing that

16:31

injustice to take action. So

16:33

that's the good uses of

16:35

calling out. But the destructive

16:37

uses of calling out are

16:39

actually what I'm more concerned

16:42

about because it is used

16:44

to divide people who should

16:46

be working together. That's where

16:48

I'm really concerned that we

16:50

have this false theory that.

16:52

if everybody doesn't see the

16:54

world exactly like I see

16:56

it and use the words

16:58

I prefer that they use

17:00

and then the tone that

17:02

I prefer that they use

17:05

then they by definition are

17:07

causing harm to me and

17:09

should be treated as an

17:11

enemy. But like whoa wait

17:13

a moment I mean because

17:15

in my opinion when many

17:17

different people think many different

17:19

thoughts, but they move in

17:21

the same direction, that's how

17:23

you build a human rights

17:25

movement. But when many different

17:27

people think one thought and

17:30

the thought you think they

17:32

should think, and they move

17:34

in the same direction as

17:36

a cult. And so why

17:38

are you using cult-like behaviors?

17:40

And not recognizing that's what

17:42

you're doing, where you're putting

17:44

on all of this unnecessary

17:46

pressure. on people to totally

17:48

agree with you, totally align

17:50

with you, see everything through

17:53

your lived experiences, not theirs,

17:55

when it's unreasonable, unnecessary. is

17:57

creating a lot of fun.

17:59

And so I am really

18:01

concerned mostly about the progressive

18:03

wing of the human rights

18:05

movement, self-destructing, cannibalizing each other,

18:07

focusing on purity politics, just

18:09

treating people we should be

18:11

in solidarity with. as if

18:13

we were auditioning to marry

18:15

them or something. And they

18:18

have to stop in very

18:20

perfect. I can't work with

18:22

them. And it's really led

18:24

to a lot of unfortunate

18:26

fallout and caused a lot

18:28

of movements to splinter. I

18:30

think it caused the movement

18:32

against fascism to become weaker,

18:34

while the people who are

18:36

imposing authoritarian thinking and regimes

18:38

on people. They have a

18:41

discipline that is very focused

18:43

on gaining the power as

18:45

a minority group to overwhelm

18:47

and dominate everyone else. And

18:49

those of us who should

18:51

be and resist us to

18:53

this authoritarian bent are turning

18:55

our best weapons on each

18:57

other. That's right. Remaining singularly

18:59

focused on this existential threat

19:01

that we're dealing with. I

19:03

have a book coming out,

19:06

Call Call In, on February

19:08

4th of 2025, published by

19:10

Simon issues there. And in

19:12

it I lay out, not

19:14

only the theory of calling

19:16

in, but some practical advice,

19:18

so glad to do it.

19:20

Oh, beautiful. Great. So congratulations

19:22

on your book. And tell

19:24

us a little bit more,

19:26

like, how can we practically,

19:29

you said, like, how can

19:31

we practically... meet the calling

19:33

out culture how can we

19:35

change our own organizations how

19:37

can we deal with it

19:39

when we're in the middle

19:41

of it, like maybe you

19:43

can speak a little bit

19:45

about the practical steps or

19:47

what we can do to

19:49

improve that or make it

19:51

better. Well, one thing that

19:54

I teach, because I also

19:56

teach it online in classes,

19:58

but what I teach is

20:00

that first we've got to

20:02

analyze the patterns of call-out,

20:04

because you can't really deconstruct

20:06

something if you don't know

20:08

how they're constructed in the

20:10

first way. And so I

20:12

talk about my 5C continuum,

20:14

where there's calling out, canceling,

20:17

calling in, calling on, and

20:19

calling it off. You have

20:21

those, that many choices. When

20:23

you're getting ready to engage

20:25

in a conflict, then you

20:27

need to calibrate which tool

20:29

is going to be the

20:31

most effective for you if

20:33

you want to continue a

20:35

conversation instead of a fight.

20:37

Don't assume that you always

20:40

have to be called to

20:42

calling people out. or canceling

20:44

them when you have many

20:46

other options available to you.

20:48

When you call people in,

20:50

it is an accountability process,

20:52

just like calling out years,

20:54

but instead of doing it

20:56

with anger, blaming, and shaming,

20:58

you're choosing to do it

21:00

with love and respect. You're

21:02

choosing a different methodology, one

21:05

that is more likely to

21:07

engage someone in conversation instead

21:09

of condemnation. And that's so

21:11

important, I believe. because we're

21:13

not supposed to automatically agree

21:15

with each other. We're supposed

21:17

to have the lively debates

21:19

over pluralistic society. That's our

21:21

strength. It should not be

21:23

seen as a weakness. And

21:25

so that's the first thing.

21:28

But then I teach people

21:30

simple techniques. For example, one

21:32

of my participants in my

21:34

online class told me that

21:36

she was blind. And every

21:38

time she has to walk

21:40

through a door or step

21:42

up there, this hand comes

21:44

from nowhere and tries to...

21:46

guide her to help her.

21:48

And she said, because I

21:50

can't see it coming, I

21:53

go into instant nuclear reaction

21:55

because it feels like an

21:57

assault to me. And she

21:59

said, I'm tired of people

22:01

touching me and I'm tired

22:03

of going off. What else

22:05

can I do? And so,

22:07

first of all, why don't

22:09

we refrain that as bad

22:11

kindness? They were trying to

22:13

be helping, but they were

22:16

doing it badly. You don't

22:18

want to discourage people from

22:20

being kind. You just want

22:22

to show them how to

22:24

do it better. So the

22:26

first thing you do is

22:28

thank them for their attempt

22:30

to kindness, validate that kind

22:32

impulse. You don't want to

22:34

discourage that. And then the

22:36

second thing you do is

22:38

set a boundary. When you

22:41

say, you know, I don't

22:43

like people laying hands on

22:45

me because I'm blind and

22:47

I can't see it. But

22:49

if you want to help

22:51

me, here's step three. Let's

22:53

talk about what you could

22:55

do to be helpful. That's

22:58

how you turn a call out

23:00

into a call ahead. You

23:02

don't give a pass to what

23:05

offends you or what is oppressive,

23:07

but at the same time, you

23:10

don't dehumanize the person. So that,

23:12

and that you see them as

23:14

an equal partner into doing things

23:17

better together. That's beautiful. So

23:19

there's a lot of reframing. of

23:21

some of our own mindsets when

23:24

that happens. And so when

23:26

we open our own minds to

23:28

a different way of looking at

23:31

situations, we can build some deeper

23:33

bridges or better bridges with

23:35

each other. That's what I heard

23:37

right now and I listen to

23:40

you. Absolutely. And these are

23:42

learnable by anybody. I mean, I'm

23:44

right now working with someone to

23:47

develop calling in lessons for kindergartners.

23:49

So it's imminently learnable. at any

23:51

stage and at any age. Their

23:54

basic kindness lessons, but not self-offacing

23:56

lessons. other words, you're not

23:58

going to fail the whole accountable

24:01

people who do harm, whether it's

24:03

intentional or unintentional. It's not

24:05

about just a stability lesson or

24:07

a niceness lesson. It's a strategic

24:10

choice to be more effective in

24:12

creating change, but it's also a

24:15

philosophical choice of envisioning the kind

24:17

of world that we're fighting to

24:19

create, not just organizing the

24:21

world we don't Exactly, that's beautiful.

24:24

That's beautifully said, like how we

24:26

envision a world that we

24:28

want to live in and how

24:31

to create it, not just cancel

24:33

the one that we are in.

24:35

That's beautiful. And so when,

24:37

how can we apply that, for

24:40

example, I mean, something that's very

24:42

hot right now is the

24:44

political divide, the political polarization, and

24:47

the rifts in between different camps,

24:49

political camps. So how would we...

24:51

How can we apply that when

24:54

we feel we disagree with the

24:56

values, we disagree with some values,

24:59

but we still want to

25:01

create bridges? Because some people say,

25:03

oh, if I'm creating a bridge,

25:05

I agree to whatever I

25:07

disagree with, I have to agree

25:10

with you. And so how can

25:12

we work? Is that creating bridges

25:15

doesn't necessarily mean agreeing to

25:17

a different value set, for example,

25:19

or a political agenda or any

25:21

kind of behavior? Well, agreeing

25:23

to listen to someone doesn't mean

25:26

agreeing to believe them or agreeing

25:28

with them. So obviously that's basic

25:31

conversation one on one kind of

25:33

thing, but a lot of us

25:35

live in echo chambers where the

25:38

only information we're getting reaffirm

25:40

is what we already know our

25:42

belief so that we're not developing

25:45

the skill to have conversations

25:47

with people who think differently from

25:49

us. So I use in my

25:51

trainings what I call my fears

25:54

of influence model. example, I

25:56

think that most of the people

25:58

that I encounter in my political

26:01

and work life are what

26:03

I call 90%ers, people who agree

26:05

on so much of a worldview

26:08

that we are intelligible to each

26:10

other. So I say something like

26:12

capitalism or homophobia or racism. We

26:15

know what we're talking about. We

26:17

don't have to stop and

26:19

explain those terms to each other.

26:22

And I call them, I call

26:24

us 90% because that's the

26:26

high level of unity we have.

26:28

It's not that we were 90%

26:31

of the population, but we have

26:33

a high level of immunity.

26:35

And the problem we have is

26:38

90% percenters. I see is that

26:40

we're spending entirely too much

26:42

energy trying to turn 90%ers into

26:44

100%ers. That last 10% disagreement is

26:47

the most urgent thing to resolve.

26:49

And once we get that resolved,

26:52

they will get to the other

26:54

people. Why do we have to

26:56

be a cult in order

26:58

to attract other people? And so

27:01

outside of the 90%ers, I see

27:03

what's called the 75%? These

27:05

are people who share large portions

27:08

of our worldview, but they don't

27:10

use our 90% indoor language. As

27:12

a matter of fact, when

27:14

we start talking about federal normativity,

27:17

their eyes please over like we're

27:19

talking Washington or what because.

27:21

It's again, group language of a

27:24

90% or that doesn't even make

27:26

sense to someone that's not in

27:28

the 90%. And so obviously I'm

27:31

an ardent feminist, and I believe

27:33

in abortion rights, but my 75%

27:36

would be the Girl Scout,

27:38

where they may not need a

27:40

troop to defend an abortion clinic,

27:42

though I wish they would,

27:44

but they still believe in girls

27:47

and women's empowerment. And so they

27:49

are definitely my allies. even if

27:52

they don't like this language

27:54

that I would use within a

27:56

90% and what I'm talking them

27:58

I don't use 90% language

28:00

because it's unintelligible to them. Outside

28:03

of that are what I call

28:05

the 50%ers. They're 50% is because

28:08

they could go to the left

28:10

or the right depending on who

28:12

most influences them. I certainly would

28:15

put my parents in that

28:17

category because my father was a

28:19

very conservative military man, hyperpatriotic, national

28:22

rifle association. My mother was

28:24

a southern evangelical Christian woman, so

28:26

they had very conservative values. I'm

28:28

not quite sure why they were

28:31

still in the Democratic Party,

28:33

because they were more conservative than

28:35

both. But I found that when

28:38

you're dealing with the 50%er,

28:40

if you go underneath their words,

28:42

let's speak to their values, you

28:45

can find a lot of common

28:47

ground. After I say the Pledge

28:49

of Allegiance, that my father is

28:52

American Legion, I talk about how

28:54

the American Legion let campaigns

28:56

defeat homeless people. And then I

28:59

say, but as a human rights

29:01

activist, I question why they're

29:03

homeless in the first place. We

29:05

have coddling ground. And generally they

29:08

say, yeah, we're going at the

29:10

same problem, but in different ways.

29:13

That's how you talk to 50%ers.

29:15

The reason I call them that,

29:17

because they could easily. go

29:19

to the right and say, well,

29:22

the homeless are homeless because of

29:24

their own bad choices or

29:26

lack of personal responsibility, which is

29:29

the rightly drunk that you hear.

29:31

Outside of them are the 25%

29:33

of you. These are the

29:35

people who basically have drunk the

29:38

cool hate on individualism. In the

29:40

United States, there's a magga

29:42

people who make America great people

29:45

who vote for Donald Trump and

29:47

everything mean and fascistic about him.

29:49

We probably as 90 appreciators have

29:52

little purchase to have a conversation

29:54

as productive with the 25% here.

29:57

Because my definition of liberty

29:59

might be freedom from repression and

30:01

their definition of liberty is a

30:03

freedom not to wear a

30:05

mask in the area of good.

30:08

So we've got vastly different world

30:10

views that can't be bridged in

30:13

casual conversations generally. And then

30:15

outside of 25% or the zeros.

30:17

The zero concerners are like, we

30:19

have nothing in common, and

30:21

I'm very clear that because you

30:24

are a proud, card-carrying member of

30:26

the neo-Nazis or the Ku Klux

30:29

Klan or the Patriots or the

30:31

Proud Boys or whatever formation you

30:33

are, you are dedicated to my

30:36

elimination and destruction, and honestly,

30:38

I'm dedicated to disempowering you. I

30:40

don't want to destroy you, but

30:43

I've got to make sure

30:45

that you're in a position to

30:47

do the least amount of harm

30:49

you can do. And so what

30:52

I believe is that Lee

30:54

is 90% of us can have

30:56

our best impacts on the 75s

30:59

and the 75s can best

31:01

him back the 50s and the

31:03

50s can best him back the

31:05

25s and 25s can't have an

31:08

impact on the zero. So it's

31:10

about working strategically. It doesn't mean

31:13

that you can't have a conversation

31:15

with the Nazi, I've done

31:17

that. But that takes a particular

31:20

skill set. It takes training. It

31:22

takes training. you're not going

31:24

to do it. And the real

31:26

question I asked is, why would

31:29

you overlook your 75s and 50s

31:31

to pursue a zero? That's

31:33

just your ego and you were

31:36

just talking. That is not a

31:38

strategic choice, because we have

31:40

to build the power to overwhelm

31:42

the zeros under 25, so that

31:45

they're not in position to cross

31:47

on. And it's beautiful in my

31:50

work at Colis. Let's go where

31:52

the water flows and let's not

31:54

go through the wall where

31:56

the water does become. that we

31:59

go where the doors open up

32:01

and I think what you

32:03

just described makes a lot of

32:06

sense to me also in my

32:08

body when I listen to you

32:10

why to try to overcome

32:12

hard walls when we can when

32:15

we can have much more influence

32:17

where we where the water

32:19

flows which doesn't mean that we

32:22

ignore with the other side of

32:24

you know that where it's more

32:26

difficult or harm can be done

32:29

this needs to be stopped I

32:31

agree. But so when you that's

32:34

a lovely thank you for

32:36

explaining the whole chain of influence

32:38

that you just mentioned how how

32:40

in your experience because you

32:42

said it before I mean just

32:45

at the beginning of our conversation

32:47

you said you had. conversations with

32:50

neo-Nazis or people from the

32:52

KKK I'm a bit interested how

32:54

you felt or what was the

32:56

outcome of this conversations because

32:58

if you already have this experience

33:01

I mean what what was your

33:03

experience being in that and what

33:06

was the impact that that had

33:08

because you said also one thing

33:10

just now you said if you

33:13

have this kind of conversations

33:15

you need to have the appropriate

33:17

training. And so maybe you can

33:20

speak a little bit for

33:22

all of us that are listening

33:24

now, that are in more, let's

33:26

say, dense or difficult conversations. What's

33:29

the training we need or what

33:31

are the skills we have to

33:34

have to be in these conversations

33:36

maybe in a more effective

33:38

way? Well, you have to have

33:40

different techniques for different... people in

33:43

relationship to you. So a

33:45

conversation you have with a family

33:47

member or a loved one that's

33:50

contentious is going to be handled

33:52

differently than if it's a

33:54

stranger in a clan group. So

33:57

you're certainly not going to use

33:59

the same techniques, but you're

34:01

going to use the same philosophical

34:03

orientation. And that is, they're members

34:06

of the human family, and you've

34:08

got to respect their human rights,

34:11

even if they're violating yours. I

34:13

think that calling it is going

34:15

to be as important to

34:17

the human rights movement in the

34:20

21st century as nonviolence was to

34:22

the civil rights movement in

34:24

the 20th. A statement of how

34:27

we value the work, how we

34:29

value our opponents, and how we

34:31

value our own integrity. So

34:33

that's very important. By the time

34:36

someone defects from the white supremacist

34:38

movement and calls on a

34:40

person like me or my organization

34:43

for help, they've already had their

34:45

own personal epiphany because they stayed

34:47

in the movement if they hadn't

34:50

had a whole change of heart.

34:52

So the question becomes how believable

34:55

are they, are they, what

34:57

are we going to do to

34:59

help them? Do we want to

35:01

help them? And I have

35:03

to honestly say, when I first

35:06

had to deal with defectors, I

35:08

didn't give a damn about what

35:11

happened to them. I was

35:13

like, okay, you joined a hate

35:15

group and you got burned by

35:17

it, so what? I mean,

35:19

it's very safe for a black

35:22

woman to say she hates the

35:24

Ku Klux Klan. No one's going

35:27

to criticize me for that, right,

35:29

except the Klan. Right. Once I

35:31

got to know them, I learned

35:34

that my opinions of them

35:36

were always informed by my own

35:38

fears and on ill trauma. So

35:41

I wasn't able to see

35:43

them as the hurt human beings

35:45

that they actually were. And fortunately

35:47

I had mentors like Reverend C.T.

35:50

Billy and who was my

35:52

boss. He'd been an aide to

35:54

Dr. Martin King. who really told

35:57

me, said, Loretta, if you

35:59

ask people to give up eight,

36:01

then you have to be there

36:03

for them when they do. Wow.

36:06

he told me that I was

36:08

angry, because he can't, I couldn't

36:11

curse out a preacher. I mean,

36:13

I didn't say to him

36:15

what I actually thought. And so

36:17

I walked away for that conversation,

36:20

so frustrated. And he had,

36:22

his words, looped me in a

36:24

way. And once I started talking

36:27

to the ex-clans, when ex-neonachines, ex-whatever,

36:29

Motion that then what motivated

36:31

them wasn't hate. For the first

36:34

part when it started out, it

36:36

was rejection, loneliness, getting bullied

36:38

themselves, feeling like no one took

36:40

their pain and suffering seriously. There

36:43

were a lot of emotions there,

36:45

but he was something they had

36:48

to learn to embrace. It didn't

36:50

start out and see. And so

36:52

once I... started understanding that

36:54

about them. I began to see

36:57

how people who are alienated from

36:59

their families and from society

37:01

can easily be sucked into these

37:04

alternative universes and do a lot

37:06

of damage. But that's because they're

37:08

damaged people to begin with.

37:10

And so we have to take

37:13

their suffering seriously as we take

37:15

our own. But that's what

37:17

I'm talking about learning that skill

37:20

set. If you're not at peace

37:22

with your own trauma and your

37:24

own pain, then you're not going

37:27

to be able to offer anything

37:29

to someone who's still dealing with

37:32

their trauma and pain. That's

37:34

very powerful. You said so many

37:36

powerful things that touched me deeply,

37:38

like just in this last

37:40

answer. Like when I want to

37:43

highlight just the last part that

37:45

you say if you're not in

37:48

peace with your own trauma

37:50

you cannot offer that to somebody

37:52

else who is in pain. So

37:54

I think that's a very

37:56

powerful sentence. I also heard say

37:59

that once that sentence also touched

38:01

me once somebody gives up hate

38:04

you need to be there for

38:06

them. It's a very powerful sentence.

38:08

I like the sentence that touched

38:11

me deeply. I just wish

38:13

you weren't true because I took

38:15

a lot of fuel from hating

38:18

people who hurt people. It

38:20

was a very motivating thing and

38:22

once I had to give up

38:24

hate. I had to find another

38:27

motivation for continuing to do the

38:29

work. And it was not easy,

38:32

but I began to appreciate the

38:34

power of love, the power

38:36

of hope, the power of community

38:38

in a way that I had

38:41

not appreciated as long as

38:43

I was motivated by hate anger

38:45

and revenge. Yeah, that's very powerful.

38:48

I mean, this transition is also

38:50

something maybe we can... the

38:52

next question I have I will

38:54

come back to this and then

38:57

and then you said something

38:59

very powerful before that if when

39:01

you started to answer that state

39:04

with me too you said we

39:06

need to respect human rights even

39:09

if the other person doesn't we

39:11

said it in your own words

39:13

but that's how it landed

39:15

in me like and I think

39:18

that's also such a profound sentence

39:20

like how we because then

39:22

we joined the same that joined

39:25

the same camp, basically. And these

39:27

are all, I think, very powerful

39:29

human transformation sentences. I think

39:31

if we take that deeply into

39:34

our heart and just stay with

39:36

those three sentences for some

39:38

time and see how that relates

39:41

to us. Maybe if you want

39:43

to speak a little bit before

39:45

we close about what you just

39:48

said, like... When hate was my

39:50

fuel, they gave me a lot

39:53

of fire, but when I

39:55

felt that was melting... or that

39:57

melted, I needed to find a

39:59

different fuel. Maybe you can

40:01

speak a few words to that

40:04

change that you experienced in yourself

40:06

and how the new motivation or

40:09

the new fuel is now

40:11

operating in your life. Well, I

40:13

try to pay attention to my

40:15

elders and my ancestors, and

40:17

they always offer wise advice, but

40:20

it doesn't always sink in first.

40:22

And so I had people like

40:25

Audrey lower talking about the power

40:27

of love. Martin Luther King talking

40:29

about the power of love. Malcolm

40:32

Penn talking about the bar

40:34

and law. I'm like, yeah, but

40:36

I'm never turning the other cheek.

40:39

I mean, really? Yeah, that's

40:41

good for you, but no, I'm

40:43

not doing that. And it wasn't

40:45

until I realized that my anger

40:48

and trauma were incinerating me

40:50

inside. They weren't even protecting me.

40:52

they weren't even helping me. And

40:55

I realized I'm holding on

40:57

to a whole lot of stuff

40:59

that ain't even helping. And so

41:01

why am I choosing to do

41:04

that? Can I make different choices?

41:06

And it turns out that a

41:09

lot of it came from our

41:11

childhoods. I mean, if we

41:13

made a mistake as a child

41:15

and we were to really punish

41:18

for it or humiliated for

41:20

it, then we think it's normal

41:22

to punish and it really ate

41:25

others. And so all of that

41:27

kind of cascaded together in

41:29

my line when I was trying

41:31

to self-forgiveness and loved us despite

41:34

making a mistake and showed

41:36

us what we could learn for

41:38

the mistake, then we learned the

41:41

power of self-forgiveness and we're not

41:43

so hard on others because we're

41:46

not hard on ourselves. And so

41:48

all of that kind of cascaded

41:50

together in my line when

41:52

I was doing these eight programming

41:55

of these white supremacy. and realize

41:57

that I could be stronger.

41:59

thought I could be. I could

42:02

actually be more compassionate than I

42:04

thought I could be. And the

42:06

best part of it for

42:08

me was that I can live

42:11

my life showcasing my integrity the

42:13

way I want to instead

42:15

of worrying about my reputation. The

42:18

reputation is always based on what

42:20

others think of you, but your

42:22

integrity is based on what you

42:25

think of yourself. And

42:27

so I want to spend all

42:30

my time protecting and guarding my

42:32

integrity and and demonstrating my integrity

42:34

by how I treat other people.

42:36

Wow, it's too deep. I feel

42:39

very touched just. by listening and

42:41

what you just shared with us.

42:43

I think there are so many

42:46

pearls in this last part of

42:48

the conversation that I think are

42:50

deeply transformational for us as human

42:52

beings. If you want to hear

42:55

you, as you said, sometimes you

42:57

listen to elders or teachers in

42:59

society and it doesn't really go

43:02

in. But if we want to,

43:04

so we can learn from what

43:06

you just said, I think there

43:08

is a lot of deep human

43:11

transformation for ourselves and also would

43:13

we pass on to others. That

43:15

was really beautiful. Thank you, Loretta.

43:18

This was really a great conversation.

43:20

Thank you for giving us your

43:22

time and your wisdom. And I'm

43:25

sure many people can take a

43:27

lot away from this conversation. So

43:29

thank you very much, Loretta. All

43:31

right. Thank you for having me.

43:36

Visit collective healing conference.com to listen to

43:38

featured talks from our most recent conference

43:41

and sign up to be the first

43:43

to know when the next conference is

43:45

announced. Thanks for listening to Point a

43:47

Relation with Thomas Hubel. Stay connected and

43:49

get updates about new episodes by visiting

43:51

our website. Point of Relations .com by

43:54

by subscribing to

43:56

the Woble YouTube channel. If If

43:58

you enjoyed this

44:00

video, please like it

44:02

and share about

44:04

us with your community

44:06

on social media. on

44:09

Thank you. Thank We

44:11

appreciate your support. support.

44:31

you