So difficult that you close off any perspective but your own.
That’s when you lose your own perspective.
If all you want is to be acknowledged as a victim and to demonize the perceived perpetrator of your identity victimhood, good luck ever ending the actions of victimizes.
Asan indigenous person, I was taught by my elders to walk a mile in the shoes of those who persecute you. Seek first to understand and then be understood. If you can’t imagine how another feels, how can you expect to alter their behaviour if they are harming you?
It’s the same strategy used in couples therapy. And family therapy. Assume & explore the perspective of the person you have a conflict with and try to comprehend how they feel.
Most only focus on their own feelings. Seeking validation and recompense for being harmed.
I’m not afraid of conflict. Because resolving conflict and working through issues that create animus is an opportunity to connect to our humanity and the humanity of your opponent.
But it’s a lesson in humility when you are a victim.
I’m not suggesting to assume the perspective of a rapist, a racist or a misogynist. Those are seriously damaged people and their perspective is warped.
But I am suggesting we all spend more time trying to view the world through the lens of people we have shared interests with and try to figure out what they see and how they feel.
This is not so difficult when you practice it frequently.
Seeing the world through other’s eyes is easy. Every parent does this instinctively with their children as those children reach developmental milestones.
We revel in our children’s joy and excitement when they achieve a milestone or master a skill.
Nothing gave me greater pleasure than seeing my children walk, ride a bike, drive a car or get their first job. Their joy was my joy. I could sympathize and empathize.
Shared emotions connect us to our humanity. It’s when we are most human. It comes naturally.
So does compassion for those who feel fear. For women who have experienced sexual assault, we feel sympathy and compassion. And for those of us who have experienced similar circumstances, we experience empathy. We know those feelings intimately. We’ve felt them ourselves.
Resolving human conflict is the same process. Call out culture eliminates that human connection as a possibility. Rejecting the perspective of others when it is in conflict with our own is human nature. We are all selfish egotistical entities that just want to be validated.
Human nature is to protect yourself and reject the aggressor when we experience emotional pain. Especially from the person we view as causing that pain.
But try to imagine a world where no one ever expressed empathy or compassion for another’s emotional pain.
That’s the world the far right and the far left are creating with right and left libertarianism.
Individualism is paramount. It no longer matters how others feel. The common experience is rejected. Only your feelings count.
Only your experience of the world counts and it must be validated.
Isn’t that the clarion call of extremists on both ends of the political spectrum? “Fuck your feelings!”
Libertarianism seeks to make empathy and compassion redundant and pointless. It doesn’t matter how the opposition experiences the world. It only matters how I exoerience the world and that I get through most of life without experiencing any pain or frustration.
There’s a term for that value & belief: consequentialism.
When you view the world as a sum of its consequences.
Libertarian consequentialists view their experience as the only morality worth acknowledging. The problem: every other libertarian consequentialist feels similarly.
So if their perspectives are polarized, as left and right political ideology tends to be, then they can NEVER experience the world from a different perspective. Because only their experience matters, & only consequences of their pain is relevant.
That’s a heavy investment in victimization and why so many adopt that identity.
Worse, many take their consequentialism to the extreme. Preferring to dole out consequences for experiencing pain.
People that value administering consequences for their victimization are hedonist sadists.
They’re only satisfied when their victimization is acknowledged fully and consequences for their pain are administered.
It’s known as ethical hedonism & is a form of consequentialism.
That’s what libertarians are advancing as the primary belief and value in society.
Don’t acknowledge how others feel. Just work to advance your feelings and perspective. And call out those who seek to advance their own feelings amd perspective if it doesn’t match your own.
That’s also known as cancel culture. It’s occurring on both ends of the political spectrum. It’s antithetical to pluralist society and democracy. Because it reinforces tribalism & homogenous philosophical thought.
Agree with me and acknowledge my pain, or you’re cancelled. Either way, your feelings don’t matter. Just mine do. So it’s best to adopt my worldview. Then I can acknowledge your pain. Because it’s similar to mine.
That’s libertarianism’s definition of compassion and empathy.
I despise every example of it.
As human beings, we are preprogrammed instinctually to be social animals. It’s in our DNA. We can’t escape it.
Those with political motives to eliminate democracy & plural society are working overtime to convince us a homogenous society is best.
So many have turned their pain, fears and suffering into weapons. Wielding consequences of expulsion from society if their feelings aren’t validated.
That’s cancel culture. It’s the intentional elimination of diversity of perspectives.
I pity those who have suffered pain, humiliation, degradation and discrimination, in any form, and believe their only recourse is to have others validate their perspective or suffer excommunication from their homogenous tribal community.
Life is so much richer when you seek to understand others.
Conflict is a blessing and an invitation to join another human being in compassion and emotional connection. Libertarians are trying to escape their own humanity.
What a limited experience and how entirely terrifying it must be to view the world through that lens.
I guess “cancelling” anyone who challenges you would be the subsequent response. What a sad existence. No wonder there so much conflict in the world.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There will be naysayers that mention the job is incomplete. But thousands of FN have safe fresh water because of the Liberal government. More have been completed than remain to be done.
That’s progress. Yes. It’s taken five years. But that’s how bad the problem was.
This is so true. I think I was 6 when I saw my first flasher. I’ve seen several since then. Why some men feel the need to show off their junk, I don’t know. No one wants to look at that thing.
I slugged a classmate who slapped my behind once. He never did that again. We actually became friends and he had much respect for me. I didn’t slap him, I punched him in the nose. Said a few expletives and walked off.
When I was 18 and legally able to drink, a bar manager asked me to give him a blow job to get after hours drinks. He’d called me over to a dark corner. I was drunk. So I went. But I called him out when he flashed me and made the offer. I said I was drunk, not stupid.
What most don’t realize is that Singh completely understands the division of responsibility. What he’s doing repeatedly is selling acceptance of nationalization of all authority.
Meaning, he’s promoting autocracy replace the constitution.
People keep stating Jagmeet Singh doesn’t understand section 90 and 91 of the constitution.
He does understand. What he’s doing is recommending the federal government override those sections and impose central authority to get policy implemented.
That’s a big difference.
We must stop mislabeling politicians rhetoric and call it out for what it actually is.
Singh is repeatedly recommending a central overall authority.
But that’s not how Canada is set up. Canada is a confederation of 13 separate authorities. Ten provinces and 3 territories.