GUILFORD — Although I am a white guy, I share Curtiss Reed Jr.'s outrage about what happened to Shela Linton and what has been happening to other people of color.
I support Curtiss's call for action, including action by those he has labeled as “allies.” But to me, “allies” is a positive label for people banding together in a common cause, such as was used during World War II, conveying the willingness to take decisive action to achieve that cause. Being an ally does not mean an unwillingness to engage proactively with fellow community members, as Curtiss implies.
In working with kids in a school environment, including kids of color, I strive to gain their trust and to have them view me as their advocate in helping them succeed in that environment and to find healthy ways to overcome the obstacles and prejudices they might encounter. I do not want to encourage them to become “conspirators,” which Merriam-Webster defines as: “A person who is involved in a secret plan to do something harmful or illegal.”
The words we use are important, especially when they are calling for some type of action. “Co-conspirator” conveys a subversive approach.
Although the argument might be made that we have to fight fire with fire, I think Gandhi showed great wisdom by saying: “An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind.”
I suggest that the phrase “an active advocate for human rights and social justice” is a better choice of words and has a better chance of bringing about positive change in a very troubled world.