I’m suspicious of anyone who advocates for unity, whether they are politicians or scholars. My hermeneutics of suspicion reaches its peak when I hear unity rhetoric. Who gets to define unity? Who benefits from it? Unity often serves as a tool for those in power to marginalize others on the fringes. We should question the motives of those who promote unity. Instead, we should strive for multiple groups with no single center of power. We should embrace uncertainty and allow for ambiguity in some situations. My goal is to challenge and deconstruct the deceptive language of forced unity. See who is talking about unity.
