“Blaming the wolf would not help the sheep much. The sheep must learn not to fall into the clutches of the wolf.” Mahatma Gandhi
“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has his foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.” Archbishop Desmond Tutu
In my belief it’s one of the great paradoxes of life. However much you blame the oppressor the oppressed are often still somewhat to blame, sometimes even when they’re trying to do something to stop this state of affairs. So as one would not like to take the side of the oppressor taking a neutral side becomes your only option; but as Archbishop Desmond Tutu says, taking the neutral side is as good as taking the side of the oppressor.
I see this often in every day life, people who for some reason are being bullied or *attacked* by others but seem unable to change the aspect of their behavior which brings this on. Sometimes they can even tell you what the problem is, but rarely can they fix it. They must learn to avoid the wolf, but maybe also we should protect somewhat from the wolf.
The real world and the Internet are very different places. If I walk into a job interview knowing everything about the subject and being fully equipped to do the job but without a degree and five years below the age they were expecting I’d probably be thrown out or laughed at. Online few such prejudices are present, if you can do what you’re needed to do then nobody will complain about you being 15, or having many years of school left. The Internet is not a replacement for real life, but it is very real; if I were to count the number of times someone has said to me ‘but that isn’t real’ (and I haven’t complained about the conjunctive at the start of the sentence) and I’ve challenged their concept of reality I would get very bored. The Internet is real, but it’s a different and rebellious cousin of reality as we know it. The money I earn is certainly real, the people I talk to are certainly real, the phone calls I make involve real voices and the work I’ve done at the end of the day is real.
Even though the Internet is real, I don’t think that it can be considered a legitimate replacement for face to face communication. I can work all day, speak to hundreds of people but find a conversation with someone in the flesh far more satisfying.
So in this safe haven which is the Internet there should be less prejudices, less cause for wolfishness and for the victims. I believe this is true, but only to an extent. There are still trolls, some of whom worm their way into authority to gain themselves some level of diplomatic immunity, and they’ll attack the weak. Often they’ll blame them for all the ills in vicinity but when the target leaves or is removed they’ll change to another target.
In real life you get similar problems, in a group of people there always seems to be someone who doesn’t entirely fit or is used as a general target, someone is always the joker and someone always the target. It never ceases to amaze me how cruel people can be, civilized people who you’d never dream have a nasty side can release the most vicious and vindictive attacks on others. If someone just really pushes a button which causes you discomfort it’s surprising how much you’ll begin to hate them. This is almost illogical hate, you don’t really hate them, you hate their actions; yet soon everything they do will become abhorrent to you and you’ll take any action you can to degrade and deface them.
This, of course, is if you’re the type of person who lets this get to you. Some people will teach you that all of life’s events are built up from energy/energies and that events and people leave energy/energies behind them. Furthermore they’ll tell you that keeping anger, resentment, angst, or whatever you want to call it will cause damage to yourself. I believe this to be almost entirely true, people who become angry and hold resentment against others seem to become eaten with this emotion and crazed by a desire to outlet it. When they do vent it doesn’t seem to do anything for them because they don’t seem to release any of the emotion permanently but purely expose it to the view of all and sundry.
But those who annoy can avoid it, for example I could have used better grammar and not started with a conjunctive. I’ve never tried the art, but I’m informed that it takes two to dance the tango; this is a very apt illustration for anger. If someone gets annoyed with you then avoid speaking to them or being around them, when they challenge you back down and avoid confrontation. Less bad energy will make you feel better about life and I believe it may eventually lead them to even like you. On the other end of the seesaw those who are annoyed by people should avoid them and attempt to not take the bait when they proffer something which normally would give you reason to provide an outburst. Often these outburst are disliked by more people than will admit it.
So, we have decided that both ends are partially to blame for most conflicts but what should the third party do? Archbishop Desmond Tutu will tell us that taking neither side and turning a blind eye is the not the best thing you can do. I admit that I try to take the side of the oppressed whenever possible, the only time I avoid this is when I believe the aggressor is in the right; however if I see the aggressor is stepping over the line then I may switch sides. I find this very hard, especially when both sides expect me to be on their side as I’ve befriended both of them at some point.
I think that where you stand in any argument should depend heavily on your morals and how you feel, what you believe and not who your friends are.
Your opinions please. Kind regards, Robert.
Wall RSS Feed