Sunday, August 12, 2018
Monday, August 6, 2018
On the current state of affairs
Nearly every time I look at Facebook I regret it. In spite of the fact that Facebook is sometimes my primary means of learning about the lives of friends and family, and indeed sometimes my primary news source, I find it extremely unpleasant. What I most dislike is the amount of rage spewed about. Sometimes people call it hate, but it's rage. We've quite recently seen people spewing rage at CNN reporters and at community leaders who support the use of vaccines.
Let me state again I am not a psychologist or sociologist or any kind of scientist. I am merely an observer of human nature. Here are some of my observations.
Let's take a look at rage versus anger. Neither is a terribly rational emotion (an oxymoron if ever I heard one!), but anger is more immediate. You attack me verbally or physically, and I'm angry at you for the affront that is occurring now. It's a primal response.
People are angry and don't know how to deal with that anger. I've heard it said that feelings have only one logic--to flow. If anger in the moment is not dealt with, it remains with you. Rage is anger stored for later use. You attack me verbally or physically, and immediately my feelings associated with every time this has ever happened to me are unconsciously added to my feelings about the moment, and I react based on the accumulated feelings rather than the moment. This is why rageful reactions are out of proportion to the stimulus. This is why I wind up throwing things because of the way my partner stacks dirty dishes. If it's hysterical, it's historical.
Our current crisis of rage--OK, every crisis of rage--is about pain. People are in pain and don't have a single, black-and-white answer as to why.
Some think it's because the promise of The American Dream hasn't panned out. The life they were led to believe was due to them by virtue of hard work or an advantageous start or an education or even the unspoken privilege of race and sex has not materialized. Some think it is seeing the privilege they didn't even know they enjoyed because of race or class or sex challenged. Some have endured a string of misfortunes.
For whatever reasons, some have chosen to believe the tales they have been told by certain demagogues about where their rage should be directed. In a nutshell, those demagogues are convincing people that any or all of the following are responsible for their pain: immigrants, people of color, gays and lesbians, non-Christians, socialists, and especially liberals.
It's not about hate. People confuse rage with hate. As children, we often think we hate someone because we are angry at that person. I'd be willing to bet most of the members of the raging crowds we see in news reports would not act really hatefully in other situations, or state openly that they hate individuals they know personally.
Therein lies the answer. Not in meeting rage with rage, or meeting hate with hate. To the extent possible, we have to meet individual with individual. There is a lot of anger and rage on both sides. There are lots of platitudes bouncing about saying we should answer hate with love. Well, OK. A better way to say it is to offer understanding. We seek to understand people who differ from us, and we hope they will do the same. Our investment is in our own understanding, not in changing anyone else.
Some are asking why the raging people are not the ones being constantly asked to reach out in love and understanding. Here's your answer: because it's not going to happen. They can't do that in the current situation, and we can. People who are raging are not as rational as people who reach out in love are. Are we more interested an outcome that shows love, mercy, and generosity to our fellow man or in winning the day? Are we more interested in showing rage and seeking revenge, or in seeking to help those in need, especially those affected by current policy?
Ask yourself this question, stolen (and paraphrased) from Inside the Actors Studio: Assuming there is a God, what do you want Him to say to you when you meet Him? Would it more likely be about your acts of vengeance or your acts of goodness?
Let me state again I am not a psychologist or sociologist or any kind of scientist. I am merely an observer of human nature. Here are some of my observations.
Let's take a look at rage versus anger. Neither is a terribly rational emotion (an oxymoron if ever I heard one!), but anger is more immediate. You attack me verbally or physically, and I'm angry at you for the affront that is occurring now. It's a primal response.
People are angry and don't know how to deal with that anger. I've heard it said that feelings have only one logic--to flow. If anger in the moment is not dealt with, it remains with you. Rage is anger stored for later use. You attack me verbally or physically, and immediately my feelings associated with every time this has ever happened to me are unconsciously added to my feelings about the moment, and I react based on the accumulated feelings rather than the moment. This is why rageful reactions are out of proportion to the stimulus. This is why I wind up throwing things because of the way my partner stacks dirty dishes. If it's hysterical, it's historical.
Our current crisis of rage--OK, every crisis of rage--is about pain. People are in pain and don't have a single, black-and-white answer as to why.
Some think it's because the promise of The American Dream hasn't panned out. The life they were led to believe was due to them by virtue of hard work or an advantageous start or an education or even the unspoken privilege of race and sex has not materialized. Some think it is seeing the privilege they didn't even know they enjoyed because of race or class or sex challenged. Some have endured a string of misfortunes.
For whatever reasons, some have chosen to believe the tales they have been told by certain demagogues about where their rage should be directed. In a nutshell, those demagogues are convincing people that any or all of the following are responsible for their pain: immigrants, people of color, gays and lesbians, non-Christians, socialists, and especially liberals.
It's not about hate. People confuse rage with hate. As children, we often think we hate someone because we are angry at that person. I'd be willing to bet most of the members of the raging crowds we see in news reports would not act really hatefully in other situations, or state openly that they hate individuals they know personally.
Therein lies the answer. Not in meeting rage with rage, or meeting hate with hate. To the extent possible, we have to meet individual with individual. There is a lot of anger and rage on both sides. There are lots of platitudes bouncing about saying we should answer hate with love. Well, OK. A better way to say it is to offer understanding. We seek to understand people who differ from us, and we hope they will do the same. Our investment is in our own understanding, not in changing anyone else.
Some are asking why the raging people are not the ones being constantly asked to reach out in love and understanding. Here's your answer: because it's not going to happen. They can't do that in the current situation, and we can. People who are raging are not as rational as people who reach out in love are. Are we more interested an outcome that shows love, mercy, and generosity to our fellow man or in winning the day? Are we more interested in showing rage and seeking revenge, or in seeking to help those in need, especially those affected by current policy?
Ask yourself this question, stolen (and paraphrased) from Inside the Actors Studio: Assuming there is a God, what do you want Him to say to you when you meet Him? Would it more likely be about your acts of vengeance or your acts of goodness?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)