Do you ever feel it’s the wrong people who come out on top of disputes?
Why do you suppose that is?
I guess before we can talk about it we have to know what we mean by “wrong.” I bet each of two people in a dispute knows what it means. It means the way the other person is.
I think my definition would be something like this. Consider two antagonists.
Suppose She is honorable, respects others and their opinions. She gives weight to those opinions and offers logical arguments to defend her own. She plays fair and would feel bad if She lied in order to make a point.
He, on the other hand, is unbothered by such limitations. Honorable is an attribute not to be exercised but to take advantage of. A conscience is scoffed at. Lies are a tool, not an unacceptable argument. Fairness is a concept not understood.
Of course, He is the wrong one, at least in my mind.
What chance does She have?
Well, sometimes she does come out on top.
For example, Hitler and Tojo lost World War II.
And a lying, cheating, manipulator representing New York in our national House of Representatives was ejected.
But such examples, important as they may be, seem to be the exception.
How about the aggressive driver who, seeing a parking space opening and a woman aiming for it, chomps on the accelerator and beats her to it.
And a man like Vladimir Putin who can take over a country with lies and force and steer it from a fledgling democracy toward a dictatorship.
Not surprisingly Donald J. Trump epitomizes the evil antagonist, presenting a facade he has developed over a lifetime. He lies so much and so often that one wonders if he even knows what truth is. His sense of decency is so shallow it hardly registers. His outrage at the slightest disagreement is so huge that followers fear crossing him. He cheats people out of payments for services rendered. He scorns loyalty. He thinks he is the only person of value.
Pretty obvious, isn’t it, that he so often come out on top? A fight with him is never fair. How could it be, given his makeup and the relative decency of most of his opponents.
The decent antagonist is easily bowled over by the non-decent one. There are steps She will never consider and there are no steps He won’t consider.
The decent woman headed for the parking space usually would not complain about being beaten by the aggressive pushy driver.
The unpaid contractor might realize he has no chance against the Trump machine, lawyers, and money.
One pays a penalty for being nice.
But there’s an even bigger penalty for denying one’s principles in order to gain an advantage.
Because then you’d have to live with being a person you wouldn’t like.
Why do you suppose that is?
I guess before we can talk about it we have to know what we mean by “wrong.” I bet each of two people in a dispute knows what it means. It means the way the other person is.
I think my definition would be something like this. Consider two antagonists.
Suppose She is honorable, respects others and their opinions. She gives weight to those opinions and offers logical arguments to defend her own. She plays fair and would feel bad if She lied in order to make a point.
He, on the other hand, is unbothered by such limitations. Honorable is an attribute not to be exercised but to take advantage of. A conscience is scoffed at. Lies are a tool, not an unacceptable argument. Fairness is a concept not understood.
Of course, He is the wrong one, at least in my mind.
What chance does She have?
Well, sometimes she does come out on top.
For example, Hitler and Tojo lost World War II.
And a lying, cheating, manipulator representing New York in our national House of Representatives was ejected.
But such examples, important as they may be, seem to be the exception.
How about the aggressive driver who, seeing a parking space opening and a woman aiming for it, chomps on the accelerator and beats her to it.
And a man like Vladimir Putin who can take over a country with lies and force and steer it from a fledgling democracy toward a dictatorship.
Not surprisingly Donald J. Trump epitomizes the evil antagonist, presenting a facade he has developed over a lifetime. He lies so much and so often that one wonders if he even knows what truth is. His sense of decency is so shallow it hardly registers. His outrage at the slightest disagreement is so huge that followers fear crossing him. He cheats people out of payments for services rendered. He scorns loyalty. He thinks he is the only person of value.
Pretty obvious, isn’t it, that he so often come out on top? A fight with him is never fair. How could it be, given his makeup and the relative decency of most of his opponents.
The decent antagonist is easily bowled over by the non-decent one. There are steps She will never consider and there are no steps He won’t consider.
The decent woman headed for the parking space usually would not complain about being beaten by the aggressive pushy driver.
The unpaid contractor might realize he has no chance against the Trump machine, lawyers, and money.
One pays a penalty for being nice.
But there’s an even bigger penalty for denying one’s principles in order to gain an advantage.
Because then you’d have to live with being a person you wouldn’t like.
RSS Feed