Something happened today that doesn't happen often - I took myself out of a discussion. It was between some friends in a chat and I felt that my position would only upset one of the members and while I don't mind upsetting people and I do think that they can take it, it wouldn't have lead to much discovery for them at this point, as they weren't ready to actually listen. Instead, I watched from the sidelines quietly until the conversation moved onto other things.
Social movements.
Social movements are generally looking for some kind of closing of gaps, with a reduction in some kind of perceived inequality - some fairness - as if "fair" exists. What is interesting is that most of the arguments are centered around economic disparity and related issues - yet the movements do not seem to address this at all, other than complaining about rich people and making sweeping statements about how easy some groups have it compared to them.
I think that the most effective way to combat inequality is through developing economic literacy and ownership, yet most movements focus on the taking of value and destruction of property. It is a mindset problem, because even if the movement is "successful" in destroying their oppressors, without the skills to manage the new economy and take responsibility and ownership, the result is going to be more turmoil, more corruption, less community -
One for one, all against all.
No wonder the world is a mess.
The conversation I removed myself from was about people who make excuses for their bad behavior based on their desperation due to conditions and feeling like their survival is threatened. If this is put into another context however, I am not sure it holds up. For example, a husband who beats his wife because she cheated on him - is this okay because of his conditions and feeling that his survival is threatened - Or should he learn some emotional control?
The discussion was concerning Americans and the conditions and disruption they are facing there, as if people in other countries aren't facing similar, or haven't faced similar in the past. I am sure there are billions of people who have felt desperation and that their survival is threatened as they stress about how to put food on the table and a roof over their head, chronic illness or all kinds of emotional distress - but, do they all explode and are those who do explode excused for their behavior?
I find the lack of willingness to take responsibility for emotional reaction childish. I find it insane that people spend their time supporting social movements without first finding some semblance of emotional balance in their own lives - as if desperation is a good position to act from for a greater good. It is frustrating to watch millions of people focus their energy on the surface conditions of a problem, not at the root.
It is like trying to fell a giant oak, by plucking at the leaves within arms reach.
but, do you see the problem? People do not seem to link the conversations together - social movement, emotional control or economic literacy and ownership - they see it them as disconnected from each other. What I think is part of the problem is that people love to identify themselves with aspects that they think affect them, without tying those things together into a consolidated worldview - they treat each individually without recognizing that they are fragmenting themselves into a thousand shards - and wonder why they feel that their survival is threatened. They aren't protecting themselves as a person, they are protects narrow slices of themselves, but are charged as if each slice is a whole. It is schizophrenic with split personality disorder thrown in, but each personality acts as if it is the only one that exists and that its actions do not impact on the others.
We expect everyone else to act well - while we justify why we do not have to ourselves.
Move, while I stand still.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
