Thank you for writing this. I am grateful to read an assessment that personal responsibility, not being more brutal with their weapons than they are, is the answer. You are obviously correct and the rationality it takes to separate from the emotions of vengeance is appreciated.
You're welcome. It is clear that people in a fear or wrathful state are not thinking clearly and when you can step back from that emotionally tied-up perspective you can see other ways to handle this.
Barbara, this was very persuasive and personally I found it to be a timely reminder to maintain high standards of behavior and to live intentionally to meet those standards.
Also, I think this part of what you pulled from Games People Play was crucial:
"[White] quickly recognized his underlying attitude (NIGYSOB) and realized how secretly delighted he had been at the plumber’s provocation. He then recalled that ever since early childhood he had looked for similar injustices, received them with delight and exploited them with the same vigor."
Psychotherapist Peter Michaelson (https://whywesuffer.com) refers to White's tendency described above as "injustice collecting." His thesis (in part) is that most people are subconsciously attached to feeling at least one of seven categories of unresolved negative emotions that he calls the first hurts of childhood (feelings of being refused, deprived, helpless, controlled, criticized, betrayed, or abandoned), and that becoming conscious of this compulsion to replay those emotions is the key to putting a stop to it. This model of the psyche has been enormously helpful to me not only in trying to overcome my own neuroses, but in understanding why others act as they do.
Thank you for saying you found the article persuasive. It helps to know that I was able to convey my thought process. I think many people are still very emotional and unable to be reasoned with logically in this manner. So the article may not get the reach or likes it could have otherwise. But I thought it was extremely important to share.
I have heard that be called "wound collecting" as well. Thanks for the information!
The saddest thing to me about the cancel culture is how people scapegoat instead of A. Dealing with their own personal demons(shadow work) and B. Go after their fellow humans that are not in “the big club” George Carlin referenced. Cancel Culture is divide and conquer tactics set up by people like George Soros who fund BLM and Antifah. The Golden Rule is so simple but sadly do hard for people to live by. Fear of the unknown and fear of personal responsibility catalyzes the outward projection onto “others” (we are all connected) we disagree with. I like saying the Golden Rule in the apophatic way. “Do not do unto others as you would not have done unto you.” When viewed in this manner it takes on the walking away or disengaging aspect you described. I like James Lindsay’s work too. Fantastic article!!
Scapegoating (blameshifting) rather than dealing with your own issues hurts those people more than they can realize. We live in a culture where that seems to be the norm, rather than the odd thing to do those.
"Cancel Culture is divide and conquer tactics set up by people like George Soros who fund BLM and Antifah."
I don't know that he is solely to blame. That kind of feels like viewing George as a "persecutor." People just like to get revenge when they feel bad and don't want to take personal responsibility.
In my Golden Rule article there is that apophatic version. All of those quotes from the various different religions make up my view of it, but this simple version is the one people know since it's from the bible.
I was using Soros as an example and because you had been discussing BLM and Antifa it seemed relevant. He is by no means the only person pushing Color Revolutions, but he does so. A book that covers this is "Full Spectrum Dominance," by F. William Engdahl. I'll respectfully push back on viewing him as a persecutor. People of his milieu in power do have the money and the social science wherewithal to manipulate opinions, beliefs, etc. This does not abdicate our responsibility to run our own lives and do no harm to others. There are people in this world that do evil and it should be pointed out while simultaneously trying to build the world you want. It doesn't have to be an either or; it can be a both and. I applaud that you write on solutions, sovereignty of self and Natural Law principles; in essence, do no harm. My writing and the work I want to put out focuses mostly on that. However, when trying to pull people out of the muck initially, it's ok to point out the them, they, those doing the what. The most important aspect is the cause which produces the effect. You are absolutely correct, dealing with your own issues is paramount. We are the cause for change (the effect we want). Unfortunately, people who have not done the work on self are prime malleable targets. This group is sadly used as pawns or "useful idiots" (not my term) to project their victimization onto others. Derrick Broze is one example of a journalist who focuses mostly on solutions but still points out the they, them, those doing the what. I like that approach. I look forward to reading more of your articles Barbara.
This morning, I convinced people that they could save humanity by killing themselves with petroleum based mRNA injections.
This afternoon, I co-opted Liberals to support and finance the war machine aka The Military Industrial Complex.
My cocktail hour was interrupted by the failed assassination - aka Deep state fuck up.
But tomorrow I hope to make up for what has to be the biggest deep state fuck up in modern history by getting several enormous government contracts for building nuclear power plants.
I’m going to dog and pony the first round of the investor pitch that nuclear is a Tech Play.
There is such a multitude of convolutions of context that we end up in a slippery assimilation fallacy, which states that because individual situations can vary by slight amounts, we cannot make judgments about large differences. The example in textbooks is usually that because variations in weight can be so small between 100 lbs and 300 lbs, we can’t really call anybody fat.
Same goes here, where the gamut can run from “Bodega Bro” getting canceled for saying there are weird things about New York
to doctors who have sworn oaths to do no harm and are in a position of public trust and are “on duty” 24/7 have implied they wish a human being dead.
I really just think if your beliefs are causing you to fail at your duties that you were hired for, then you shouldn't be allowed to work there. But if you're beliefs don't affect your work, then you shouldn't be fired for your beliefs. Of course, the problem will come down to each individual business haven't to gauge that. But we already have a working system for that.
Home Depot made a decision to fire the woman. They didn't have to. Although as someone else pointed out, Home Depot may have fired her out of fear of bad press (not because she was bad at her job). But if that is the case then I suppose that means her comments were a detriment to her job (giving Home Depot a good reputation).
Thank you for writing this. I am grateful to read an assessment that personal responsibility, not being more brutal with their weapons than they are, is the answer. You are obviously correct and the rationality it takes to separate from the emotions of vengeance is appreciated.
You're welcome. It is clear that people in a fear or wrathful state are not thinking clearly and when you can step back from that emotionally tied-up perspective you can see other ways to handle this.
Barbara, this was very persuasive and personally I found it to be a timely reminder to maintain high standards of behavior and to live intentionally to meet those standards.
Also, I think this part of what you pulled from Games People Play was crucial:
"[White] quickly recognized his underlying attitude (NIGYSOB) and realized how secretly delighted he had been at the plumber’s provocation. He then recalled that ever since early childhood he had looked for similar injustices, received them with delight and exploited them with the same vigor."
Psychotherapist Peter Michaelson (https://whywesuffer.com) refers to White's tendency described above as "injustice collecting." His thesis (in part) is that most people are subconsciously attached to feeling at least one of seven categories of unresolved negative emotions that he calls the first hurts of childhood (feelings of being refused, deprived, helpless, controlled, criticized, betrayed, or abandoned), and that becoming conscious of this compulsion to replay those emotions is the key to putting a stop to it. This model of the psyche has been enormously helpful to me not only in trying to overcome my own neuroses, but in understanding why others act as they do.
Thank you for saying you found the article persuasive. It helps to know that I was able to convey my thought process. I think many people are still very emotional and unable to be reasoned with logically in this manner. So the article may not get the reach or likes it could have otherwise. But I thought it was extremely important to share.
I have heard that be called "wound collecting" as well. Thanks for the information!
The saddest thing to me about the cancel culture is how people scapegoat instead of A. Dealing with their own personal demons(shadow work) and B. Go after their fellow humans that are not in “the big club” George Carlin referenced. Cancel Culture is divide and conquer tactics set up by people like George Soros who fund BLM and Antifah. The Golden Rule is so simple but sadly do hard for people to live by. Fear of the unknown and fear of personal responsibility catalyzes the outward projection onto “others” (we are all connected) we disagree with. I like saying the Golden Rule in the apophatic way. “Do not do unto others as you would not have done unto you.” When viewed in this manner it takes on the walking away or disengaging aspect you described. I like James Lindsay’s work too. Fantastic article!!
Scapegoating (blameshifting) rather than dealing with your own issues hurts those people more than they can realize. We live in a culture where that seems to be the norm, rather than the odd thing to do those.
"Cancel Culture is divide and conquer tactics set up by people like George Soros who fund BLM and Antifah."
I don't know that he is solely to blame. That kind of feels like viewing George as a "persecutor." People just like to get revenge when they feel bad and don't want to take personal responsibility.
In my Golden Rule article there is that apophatic version. All of those quotes from the various different religions make up my view of it, but this simple version is the one people know since it's from the bible.
Thank you. I'm glad you enjoyed the article.
I was using Soros as an example and because you had been discussing BLM and Antifa it seemed relevant. He is by no means the only person pushing Color Revolutions, but he does so. A book that covers this is "Full Spectrum Dominance," by F. William Engdahl. I'll respectfully push back on viewing him as a persecutor. People of his milieu in power do have the money and the social science wherewithal to manipulate opinions, beliefs, etc. This does not abdicate our responsibility to run our own lives and do no harm to others. There are people in this world that do evil and it should be pointed out while simultaneously trying to build the world you want. It doesn't have to be an either or; it can be a both and. I applaud that you write on solutions, sovereignty of self and Natural Law principles; in essence, do no harm. My writing and the work I want to put out focuses mostly on that. However, when trying to pull people out of the muck initially, it's ok to point out the them, they, those doing the what. The most important aspect is the cause which produces the effect. You are absolutely correct, dealing with your own issues is paramount. We are the cause for change (the effect we want). Unfortunately, people who have not done the work on self are prime malleable targets. This group is sadly used as pawns or "useful idiots" (not my term) to project their victimization onto others. Derrick Broze is one example of a journalist who focuses mostly on solutions but still points out the they, them, those doing the what. I like that approach. I look forward to reading more of your articles Barbara.
Do you think cancel culture was not normalized years ago?
I’ve seen a decade of people from the Conservative side being sacked from jobs or having to shut business’ due to The Left mob.
I mean just look at the Christian bakery. Trying to cancel him through lawfare by continually suing him. It’s wrong.
It’s been a busy day:
This morning, I convinced people that they could save humanity by killing themselves with petroleum based mRNA injections.
This afternoon, I co-opted Liberals to support and finance the war machine aka The Military Industrial Complex.
My cocktail hour was interrupted by the failed assassination - aka Deep state fuck up.
But tomorrow I hope to make up for what has to be the biggest deep state fuck up in modern history by getting several enormous government contracts for building nuclear power plants.
I’m going to dog and pony the first round of the investor pitch that nuclear is a Tech Play.
You know … For The People
There is such a multitude of convolutions of context that we end up in a slippery assimilation fallacy, which states that because individual situations can vary by slight amounts, we cannot make judgments about large differences. The example in textbooks is usually that because variations in weight can be so small between 100 lbs and 300 lbs, we can’t really call anybody fat.
Same goes here, where the gamut can run from “Bodega Bro” getting canceled for saying there are weird things about New York
to doctors who have sworn oaths to do no harm and are in a position of public trust and are “on duty” 24/7 have implied they wish a human being dead.
I really just think if your beliefs are causing you to fail at your duties that you were hired for, then you shouldn't be allowed to work there. But if you're beliefs don't affect your work, then you shouldn't be fired for your beliefs. Of course, the problem will come down to each individual business haven't to gauge that. But we already have a working system for that.
Home Depot made a decision to fire the woman. They didn't have to. Although as someone else pointed out, Home Depot may have fired her out of fear of bad press (not because she was bad at her job). But if that is the case then I suppose that means her comments were a detriment to her job (giving Home Depot a good reputation).