James Dean Posted May 12, 2014 Posted May 12, 2014 My mother messaged me on Facebook today with an article about environmentalism. seems like something you could get behind… http://billmoyers.com/2014/04/28/young-people-are-taking-the-government-to-court-over-its-failure-to-address-climate-change/ This is what I replied. They are only petitioning the courts and criticizing the EPA for not having enough environmental legislation when it's environmental legislation that is the problem! AND the US government, and governments around the world, pollute far more than any business or factory ever could. If these kids really cared about the environment they'd want to disband and end the EPA because it's those regulations that cause the problem in the first place. If there's more legislation, all the corporations will just lobby to exempt themselves, and environmental alternatives and small business start ups won't be able to compete and the monopoly is maintained. This is the problem with thinking that the violence of the state can do anything productive. Violence is not the way to solve social problems, and violence will in fact exacerabate the environmental issues. The USSR had the most enviromental regulations on the books of any nation in history, and, surprise surprise, they polluted and destroyed their lands faster than any other country as well. Well intentioned opposition to a non solution? yes.. but trying to fight violence with more violence doesn't solve anything, in fact, it usually makes things worse. her response: They are not going to be able to disband the EPA so instead of doing nothing, they are trying to work within the system to make change. Some change. Your philosophy reminds me of born again christians who just claim that this system is unacceptable at the core and so they wait for the great by and by (in this case heaven) while you're and others are waiting for the dissolution of the state… neither will happen anytime soon. meanwhile, people who could use your help (or animals, the environment) still suffer cuz you're waiting on a different system to be put in place. I felt myself gearing up for a big political discussion and was ready to whip out my big libertarian book of studies and facts, but suddenly remembered to connect with my feelings, 'what was I feeling just then?' I was hurt. I was really hurt. I let go of all the libertarian rage that fuels my political discussions and I could do was cry for a few minutes. I haven't read all of RTR, but I've heard Stef talk about the basic premise and decided to try something new. I'd tell her how I felt. "Your philosophy reminds me of born again christians who just claim that this system is unacceptable at the core and so they wait for the great by and by (in this case heaven) while you're and others are waiting for the dissolution of the state…" When you say things like this, I feel incredibly hurt. I try to approach things logically and empirically and all I get is chastised and compared to born again christians. "waiting for the dissolution of the state" "people who could use your help (or animals, the environment) still suffer cuz you're waiting on a different system to be put in place." again, this is really hurtful. It seems that you characterize my position as just sitting on my thumbs, and sitting idly by while people suffer. Do you understand why that is incredibly insulting and inflammatory? I really don't understand the need for that, and, it really makes me feel dismissed and my love for philosophy trivialized. Not to mention that it's not true. This is what she replied I'm sorry, sweetheart. I am not trying to hurt you. But I think the parallel is an interesting one. I wonder if you can stand outside of the feeling of hurt and see the connection I am proposing. Purely theoretical in that you are very 'certain' with what you think/ believe what the solution is. I don't find certainty compelling whether it comes from the left or the right. Also, and this is not new, I tend not to value standing outside of the system and complaining or chastising if at the end of the day nothing is much different. Again, I see similarities at a meta level regardless of the issue and I tend to point out those things. It's what I do in my work and so it comes second nature to me. Ok honey. I don't know what else to say but 'sorry'…. I am not used to you getting hurt so easily on topics of philosophical nature. I didn't mean to do that and am not really that invested in the topic to continue. Sorry to have drudged this up. You know you better than I do. My response I see the connection you are making, that's what is hurtful. If I compared you to Neo-nazis or african dictators or the spanish inquisition, you get how that would just be more inflammatory and hurtful than productive right? isn't this what you get so upset with your mother about? being unneccesarily inflamitory? This is an important issue that needs to be addressed. I don't want to continue feeling like I have to self erase and self censor around you because I get attacked every time I share my thoughts with you, at least on topics that you disagree with. We don't have to talk about it now, I know I'm having a strong emotional response that might make things more difficult. To which she gave an unsatisfactory apology, and signed off. I'm shaking now as I type this message... this really rattled me and I would *so* greatly appreciate other's insight. Feel free to ask any questions about history or what have you. This follows about 5 months of really head-butting over political issues. Thanks for everyone's support and empathy, I know it's a lot to read. Love, James. Edit: sorry for the font being a little schizophrenic, I was copy/pasting from Facebook, I tried to make it as clear as possible.
Pleiades Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Hi James, So here are some of my thoughts. I'm not sure if they are helpful or tangential. You make several references to having a strong emotional reaction to what is said. It's very good that your passionate and I encourage that, but a concern I have is that you may not have a proper outlet for your emotions. What I mean by this is when you get upset and after a conversation, do you have an activity or hobby where you can use your emotional energy in a productive way so that when you return to the problem you have a clearer and more directed approach. It is very good that you mentioned specific instances of what is hurting you with your mother's approach, and I am sorry that she's not giving you a satisfactory apology. Stefan calls them "bullshit non-apologies" and I think that is an accurate description. I would say give her time to process this. It's always very difficult for people to recognize that their behaviours can be harmful to people that they care about, and sometimes they need to reflect on their actions to properly. Your mother will need to come to her own conclusion whether or not her behaviour needs to be adjusted, and how she phrases her apology to you. The best you can do, and I feel you are doing it well, is tell her exactly what she did that hurt you, why it hurts you and give her the space for reflection. As for the certainty of your approach. I think your passion may be clouding your judgment here. There is always more than one approach and every approach will have their positives and negatives. It gets more complicated as the people affected by the pros and cons are not always the same so it becomes more of a "balancing act". What may be helpful in your debate is identifying the positives and negatives for each group by each approach. The snippet of a 5-month dialogue between you and your mother seems very abstract, and you may benefit from being more specific.
Recommended Posts