1. We-making
Daniel Vaarik

2. Who are “we”?

3. Every definition of
“we” changes the world
Humans
Old people
Parents
Startuppers
Etc etc etc

4. We-making is always
they-making
The creation of “them” is vital for making “us”

5. Some “we’s” and
“they’s” are fairly new
Generations
Nations
Car owners

6. In Spring 2010. Theatre NO99 created an experiment.

7. An audience member was asked to come to an empty stage.

8. People were encouraged to join her. “Because she is so lonely down there!”

9. People started coming to the stage to support her.

10. Soon many people filled the stage.

12. But not everyone left the seats.

13. And even after being asked many times, some people never went to stage. Suddenly there were “we”
and “they”. The audience was polarized.

14. Unfortunately...
... polarization is also a main mechanism of
making sense of the world…
...it is also the easiest way to get votes in
politics

15. “If you came from the planet Mars, it would
have been harder to make distinctions between
the new guard and the old. But you could tell
that the new ones were happier, they wore
Baltman ties. The old ones were sad and angry,
they had monochrome ties from the Leningrad
trouser-factory number 3”.
(Daniel Vaarik, “Praktikaaruanne”, 2012).
I’ve been polarizing too

16. Absolute “we” is
impossible
… since “we” always requires “them”...
... since without different viewpoints the world
as we know it, would end.
!

17. “We”/“They” creates
suspicion
Who are these strange “they”?
Are some of the “they” among us?
Is this person perhaps an agent of the “they”?

18. Violence can secure the
“we”
“Violence gives some form of certainty ...”
(Arjun Appadurai, Fear of Small Numbers)

19. Minor differences as
major anger points
In fact, minor differences can become the least
acceptable ones. How dare you come between
us while we are ALMOST “we” now?

20. Animals as “we”
Swans
are seen as part of
natural “we” in Estonian
media.
Cormorans are seen as intruding
“they.

21. Jokes as symbolic
violence upon “them”
nationalities
gays

22. Government and “we”
Official “We” becomes destiny
!

23. How nations define
“we”
Ethnic
Multiethnic

24. “Estonian Russians or
Putin’s”?

25. Bringing the “we”
together
Push: military, money, legal stuff
Pull: soft power, culture, inspiration

26. Maintaining the “we”
Not so much what is said, but how it is said

27. Avoid final polarization
Don’t say that: “who is not with us, is our
enemy”
Learn to stop the radicalization cycles

28. Mandela: a master of
soft power or a pussy?

29. Symbolics of “we”
If apology, then pure
If monument, then beautiful and inclusive

31. Silent gradualism of
“we”
Role models
Everyday practice

32. that every “we“ is imaginary
In the end,
remember…

33. We can imagine very different “we’s”

34. Thanks.