![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Empathy In Politics
I wanted to riff on a quote that Ran Prieur recently posted in regards to the increasingly dire situation in the Middle East. Ran writes:
[In] the final chapter of Stanislav Grof’s book Beyond the Brain, in which he identifies two mental states that humans can get into, which he calls BPM II and BPM III. He writes, “Both are closely related to the theme of horror, agony, and death and both are typically associated with the imagery of war and concentration camps.” But in BPM II you identify with the victims: “The general atmosphere of these scenes is that of desolation, despair, anguish, hopelessness, and the absurdity of human existence.” And in BPM III you identify with the aggressors: “The predominant emotional atmosphere is that of wild instinctual arousal involving aggression, anxiety, sexual excitement, a strange fascination, a peculiar mixture of pain and pleasure, and a scatological component.”
It seems like a very interesting way of looking at politics and current events from around the world. When an event occurs, ask yourself the questions: Who do I identify with? What about them makes me identify with them? For bonus points, try for a few moments to put yourself in the other side’s shoes. What would it feel like to identify with them? How might that change your perspective?
Perhaps more importantly though, I’ve been wondering: what happens when you don’t identify with any of the players in the game? I think this is probably what people mean when they accuse others of having political “apathy.” We usually use that word to describe people who simply don’t care, or don’t care enough to take action. But maybe the problem is simply one of identification. No character in the story relates to them enough that they can find a side to identify with.
The other question this leads me to, then, is apathy or lack of identification in politics and current events a good thing, a bad thing or not necessarily either? From the standpoint of social engineering and government control, I would imagine that it would be desirable to mold a group of people so that they consistently and predictably identify with particular groups and causes. If they as a group act together, it will be easier to make plans and manipulate them according to your own ends. Are people who are apathetic less easily manipulated though? The question seems like a hard one. On the one hand, the apathetic may not be drawn into emotionally manipulative games. But on the other, choosing not to play the game is still a method of playing the game, which in itself becomes predictable and can be used by those intelligent enough to mold the “unmoldable” or else just brush them aside.
It would be an interesting thought experiment to re-envision the political spectrum out of left-right dichotomies and into one that uses a graded scale of empathy. Forget if you are liberal or conservative. Instead think about how much you are able to identify with the plight of others. “Others” in this case can be your family, friends, neighbors, other people in your country, business interests, people from other countries, etc. I would imagine once you can place yourself on some kind of “empathy scale” you would then find where your empathic boundaries are. Can you only identify with those immediately in your life, with people who live geographically near you, or with anyone, anywhere at any time?
Another tangent I want to pull into this discussion: I’ve recently heard that certain anti-depressant drugs, such as Luvox, are rumored to lead to a “loss of empathy.” I personally have no experience taking these drugs, so I would have to leave it to others to hear if this matches your own experiences or not. In any event, some have pointed the blame for atrocities such as the Columbine shootings towards drugs such as these:
As Dr. Breggin points out in his earlier book, Talking Back to Prozac, these drugs rob people of their humanity-they lose their capacity for empathy. “A lot of what we are seeing is individuals losing their feeling for the people in their lives. They stop caring about their husbands or wives or children. They stop caring about God.” Though zombie-like numbness may initially be felt to be an improvement by someone with depression, it can hardly be considered healthy, or even desirable. It is this loss of empathy in my opinion, that allowed Kip Kinkel to kill both of his parents, then spend the night in the same room before heading out to shoot his classmates in Oregon. It is precisely why Eric Harris could wander around shooting his classmates in Columbine High School, even kids he liked, and laugh about it.
If that’s true (and again it may not match your experiences, I understand), then we might want to take a close look at why drugs such as these are becoming so popular both to take and to prescribe and what impact this could have on people politically - if there really is a widespread systematic eradication of human empathy being undertaken. Is there really some dark force out there that wants to cut us off from one another and remove our ability to feel each other from the inside?
- Notes: Look for us in the streets
- Mirror Neurons
- Conspiracy Theory, Parapolitics, Whining
- Empathy & “Monkey See, Monkey Do”
- Anarchist Voters’ Guide
- Prev: Do It Together!
- Next: The Orb of Power
July 22nd, 2006 at 4:52 pm
One other reference I think worth pulling in. In that BBC documentary, the Century of the Self, we see Yippie leader Jerry Rubin talking after he has been through EST training. I wrote about it elsewhere and the weird and sad change that seems to have taken root in him:
What strikes me is that it seems as though Rubin learned how to turn off his empathy through EST training. I wonder how widespread a goal this type of thing is within the broader realms of therapy - getting people to focus down on their own problems and their own goals in their lives. Any thoughts?
July 22nd, 2006 at 5:16 pm
Also see the Eight Dynamics of Scientology, in which they make use of this idea of progressively larger concentric rings around the self, starting with individual survival, widening towards encompassing all of infinity. Seems totally relevant to my question above about trying to determine where the boundaries of your empathy lay.
July 22nd, 2006 at 5:41 pm
it depends on what you mean by empathy and for whom your empathy lies. empathy for the self, or as i like to say, unconditional love, means that you become politically immune. politics is a device that functions to split the person from any spiritual growth and holds them in a sort of anger/resentment state. maybe jerry rubin simply just woke up to the basic futility of it all through est or whatever and decided on a more unattached approach to existance………
July 22nd, 2006 at 5:49 pm
You bring up some mighty good points Tim. Stuff that I’ve long wondered about myself.
I don’t know if you know it or not, but I’ve been taking Luvox for about ten years by now. In the days of my “nervous breakdown” it turned out to be quite the godsend. What I was looking for were “answers” where there were none. I had to find them or else I would die in a horrible way — probably taking, I feared, people I loved with me. Once I began taking the fluvoxamine maleate and in a slow, few month long progression, what happened was not so much that the existential questions I needed answers to went away, but that the empathic sting of not having or getting them receded so that I could “function” again. But then I’ve long self-medicated anyhow.
Some drink to remember
Some drink to forget
Of course, fwiw, I am now down from 250mg a day (which is a lot for Luvox) to about the same in a week. Slowly, ever so slowly weening myself off. Don’t think for one second you can just go off the shit kids. You have to be patient as all hell.
Of course, one of the reasons I have been in a years long process of nixing Luvox from my drug intake is for the simple reason of this side-effect of that all SSRI’s seem to foment in some lucky customers called Akathisia.
Let me describe what akathisia is like. Keep in mind it comes on in the middle of mundaneness, such as cleaning or walking alone:
whatsthatidontknowiseethisthatarararararafuckfuckfuckwhosthat
dontknowcanttellnobodyshereimcrazyhurryuphurryhuphurryup
It took awhile to figure out from who, where or what I was getting these spells. The only “cure” I was able to find was slamming two three beers quickly and turning on at full blast every media device I could find. Only then would these confusing, out of this world sense of a demon inside me subside. The longer term fix turned out to be getting myself off the crap.
July 22nd, 2006 at 5:52 pm
Not unless you start re-defining what empathy actually means: “Identification with and understanding of another’s situation, feelings, and motives”
“Empathy for the self” then may communicate a value which is worthwhile and important to describe and feel somehow but it’s not empathy.
July 22nd, 2006 at 6:33 pm
I always empathize for the guys on the side that is geting killed, which usually is everyone involved.
On a semi-related note; Is it just me, or is the whole fucking world tearing itself apart. I know the “The End id Near” thing is as old as time itself, but things seem pretty bad. Examples:
Middle East
Global Warming (hurricanes)
George W. taking away our rights
blah blah blah, you know the rest.
It just seems that instead of getting better, things are just getting started. I am actually considering preparing a fallout-type shelter. Am I insane?
July 22nd, 2006 at 6:45 pm
Nope, it’s the culture that’s insane.
http://www.popocculture.com/11/the-politics-of-experience-by-rd-laing
July 22nd, 2006 at 7:05 pm
I would suggest you read “Physical Control of the Mind, Toward a Psychocivilized Society” by Jose Delgado, if you haven’t already. This was research being done in the late 60s/early 70s.
Dr Jose Delgado, a neurophsiologist at Yale University School, was especially interested in Electronic Stimulation of the Brain. By implanting a small probe into the brain, Delgado discovered that he could wield enormous power over his subject. Using a device he called the ’stimoceiver’ which operated by FM radio waves, he was able to electrically orchestrate a wide range of human emotions. These included rage, lust and fatigue.
July 22nd, 2006 at 8:57 pm
of course the precise term for empathy is about feeling the plight of others…….i got overbought in my point about rubin`s transformation. it wasn`t semantic so much as conscious. my belief is that one has to focus on feeliing something purposeful for the self to build something subtantial to be able to be empethetic, but the paradox is that in our youth we are empethetic to the point of self-harm by devoting so much of our time, effort and money to causes that we are unable to do anything but subsist. as any parent will tell you, law school or med school are expensive. rubin has been called the sell out of the hippy generation, but really, is he? or is it just plain normal to want to be middle class and be able to feed, clothe and shelter one`s self and family in a reasonable way?
July 22nd, 2006 at 9:05 pm
and jk? cold turkey on ssri meds or mao inhibitors is a journey into hell. i took paxil and celexa and a number of similar drugs about ten years ago to deal with anxiety issues and initially it was a god send. deep restful sleep and less of the emoional roller coaster stuff, but after a while i wanted my personality back. i got sick of sleeping all the time and listening to the dial tone so i tried to ween off and entered into a psychotic state where i was afraid to come out of the basement for almost three days. thank god for my discipline in thinking and physical training otherwise i would have ended up in the psych ward or worse. i hve since found that st.john`s wort and co-enzime q-10 seems to take the edge off the raggedness of my consciousness somewhat but overall it`s my mental discipline that has got me through all of what used be a roller coaster ride.
July 22nd, 2006 at 10:30 pm
I’ve been on Paxil before and also Lexapro. One of the reasons I didn’t like being on either drug was the subtle, but still perceptible, loss of empathy, or rather a connection with the external world. In short, I became a bit sociopathic. (But also there were some physical side effects I didn’t like.)
So I weaned myself off the drugs both times. I can’t say it was pleasant getting off them, but it’s possible. I won’t do an SSRI again unless it’s a life-threatening situation.
July 22nd, 2006 at 11:02 pm
I am usually always an up beat and to some extent off beat person. But I feel such a heart ache over bloodshed Iraq, anarchy in Afghanistan, genocide in Africa, and crazy violence in Lebanon.
It is obvious the world is so full of hate and anger because of ego identifications and because of states seeking control and domination. So I personally stopped identifying with groups (that I was conditioned to support)and threw away the rag some call the flag.
It is abject looking at some of the right-wing blogs and the utter lack of empathy for the innocent children being murdered by big bombs. I am like what the f*ck! Don’t you have a soul?
It would be great if people could just wake up one day and no longer feel any need to identify with their labels and instead chose to see themselves as human beings. No need to identify with anything except with pure consciousness. But the human brain is a cesspool for some and a meditation center for others, there is no evolution just simultaneous forces of hate and love occuring in people.
As for the current crisis in the middle east I am not taking sides. I feel so bad for the innocent people who are killed by unsanctioned terrorism and sanctioned state terrorism. Ultimately, it is compassion and not apathy which refuses to take sides.
July 22nd, 2006 at 11:02 pm
I tried St. John’s Wort for about three weeks a couple months ago when I was going through some especially hard times. I’ve heard it said that it takes a month or two to really kick in, but for me it just made me feel worse I think.
July 22nd, 2006 at 11:02 pm
wow, look at that we both posted simultaneously at 11:02! sorry
July 23rd, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Regarding political affiliations, I wrote a while back: I used to be heavily into politics until I realised that politics are more accurately a reflection of personality types and insecurities under the guise of some (useless) moral crusade to make the world a better place… Through it all I learnt that people would rather talk about the world on abstract discussion levels than ever change one real part of themselves.
I still believe this. I think it’s really obvious why certain people group together to make parties n stuff, and that’s because they associate with eachother, simple as that. That can be good or very bad, depending on what they wanna do, and whether they’re associating to numb themselves from some horror that they’re collectively fearing.
One of the main themes of my book is going to be the primacy of empathy and how civilisation distorts empathy through isolation, alienation and strange hierarchical structures. I’ll be going on lots about a foundation that every human needs, and that that it is based in empathy more than anything. Empathy protects, and when it’s distorted or ignored, bad things happen.
Whilst spidering a chapter for my book on empathy I wrote this: “Empathy is the built-in knowledge that each exists in their own subjective reality, but that there are certain underlying needs that are vital in nourishing all humans and protecting them from suffering. Empathy is to “feel with” not “for”.
For more on politics and personality associations, check out what Ran just wrote about the Israel mess, and also what I wrote on it.
July 23rd, 2006 at 1:03 pm
I was curious about the book Prieur referenced, so I had a little look around. It appears that Grof’s is a system of perinatal psychology that emerged based on LSD experiences. Here is a rundown of Grof’s Basic Perinatal Matrices (BPM I–IV, an excerpt from another of his books); I think you’ll find it quite interesting. Here is something called “Restaging Fetal Traumas in War and Social Violence” by Lloyd deMause, an etext I haven’t yet read, but it looks to be related.
Regarding empathy: Several years ago, I went through a mind-altering state known as “pregnancy,” and at one point (for perhaps fifteen minutes) I identified with the entire planet. Who needs LSD when you’ve got a potent hormonal stew inside you?
And as an antidote for the sense that “the End is Near,” try viewing this Flash animation of the End of the World. (Warning: swearing and general hilarity.)
July 23rd, 2006 at 1:48 pm
People need to be involved in politics, not to feel good about themselves but to acknowledge that if they do not get involved corrupt institutions will dominate.
And although I am left wing I also read enough Krishnamurti to constantly remind myself not to identify with political labels.
‘Public Good & Common Good before individual greed.’
July 23rd, 2006 at 2:32 pm
That’s the thing about most of this stuff: it’s entirely value-neutral. As John C. Lily said about LSD, what frightened the people in power most about it, from his experience and insight, was that LSD could, when not being abused, but used for entirely neutral purposes. The states it induced could be used to train an ice figure skater to be a much better ice figure skater. Or it could be used to remove utterly a soldier’s remorse. By increasing the “psychoplasticity” one has, one can be molded for better or worse. That’s the thing about Scientology and EST etc., since they’re cults they seek to mold their members for the cult’s good, not the individual’s, hence the deserved bad press. Zac mentioned this and described it as “the transhuman arms race:” sure, you want to use nantotech to disable your reptilian brain at will. The government wants to use it track every chemical in your body. And an angry islamist engineer just had his last goat bombed by the USAF and he’s using it to make a grey goo device. As Ken Wilber points out, the more advanced a system or structure gets, the greater its potential to do good and evil.
I stopped dealing with that a long, long time ago. Firstly, for whatever reason, keeping with the current theme, right-wing types have an engrammatic block against realizing babies are dying; there’s also the implicit racism involved, as well. I never figured it out. But I discovered that many lefties were not so much “empathetic” as they were programmed to a certain response. Alan Bloom got at this, albeit very, very poorly and from some questionable intentions, in The Closing of the American Mind (not worth reading, big waste of time, btw)… I would frequently broach “political” ideas I held and get either a blank look or a response fitting for talk radio. They might be “sympathetic” to the plight of bombed babies, but it’s out of training and automatic response, not intention: it’s very “Brave New World.”
Tim, re: the antidepressants being anti-empathetic, I’ve used them, though never for a full month. One thing about “Zombie” is about right, though I found my zombification came not so much from feeling chemically neutralized but something else: the shit is toxic. I felt fine emotionally: I also felt like I was going to puke all day long, hence, I didn’t really do much of anything. The whole curbed sex drive thing is a huge issue, too.
July 23rd, 2006 at 5:52 pm
the entirety of politics is mind control.the left and right are both delusional neuroses. the further one way or another one goes the more silly one becomes. i tell my clients to turn off the t.v. and put down the newspaper if they want to begin to find peace.
July 23rd, 2006 at 5:54 pm
and the empathy thing is a guilt induction device so ingrained in our cultural psyche that we cannot concieve of debating it`s necessity.
July 23rd, 2006 at 10:07 pm
To all of those who have succumbed to prescription meds, or to any narcotics, my sympathies.
The pain you feel, contrary to what the pushers, I mean, doctors will tell you, is a perfectly normal reaction to things like, oh, I don’t know, a general sense of powerlessness that results from living alienated in a totalitarian society with it’s priorities almost completely divorced from natural human needs. Or perhaps being continuously faced with complex problems like overpopulation, pollution, war, poverty, and crime while feeling disempowered to act to mitigate those problems.
These things are the stimulus, the response is the bad feelings, which manifest as a chemical reaction. The drug is the “solution” to the chemical reaction, and thus the bad feelings, but NOT a solution to the stimulus. To paraphrase Philip K. Dick, reality is what does not go away when you are blissed or benumbed out of your mind.
For example, right after 9/11, did anyone notice an increased prevalence of antidepressant and antianxiety medication advertisements on the telly? Does anyone really think that the increase in prescriptions and windfall to Big Pharma et al. was caused by a sudden increase in real insanity, as opposed to a normal reaction to a traumatic event?
Are meds the only way to cope with traumatic events? No, but they are one of the profitable ways. If that John Forbes Nash could cure his insanity, I think the vast majority of people could learn to cope with theirs. The tools are out there for those who are looking for them.
July 23rd, 2006 at 11:06 pm
There might be something to it all…when I was younger, I was depressed, and I knew a lot of depressed people..and we were all politically radical, too. I remember my best friend and I would watch the news and rail and cry about the horrors of the world. Too much empathy can kill you, I think, because you’re psychically open, you feel everyone’s pain and it’s all very personal. What I don’t know is if it’s the pain that makes you empathetic, or vice versa…
July 24th, 2006 at 6:25 am
[…] [From: “Empathy In Politics (Pop Occulture Blog; July 22nd, 2006)” | Source:…2006/07/22/empathy-in-politics] […]
July 24th, 2006 at 9:44 am
Hey Tim,
You ask lots of good questions there. I don’t know anything about the pharmas so I’ll let that be.
Thinking about empathy: One big problem is the quality of information available about other people. A very famous example would be Walter Duranty’s coverage of the situation in Russia during the early 1930s for the NY Times. If you had read his reports (which earned him a Pulitzer) at the time, you would have come away feeling that the government was doing a difficult but necessary job by collectivizing the farms, and that the Russian people would be better as a result. And so you may have empathized with the government. You would not, however, have learned that millions of peasants were being starved to death, on purpose, in service of this policy. If you had known that, it might have shifted your empathy.
Certainly, good information is more readily available today, but you have to be willing to look for it, and even then it is not perfect. Without perfect information any “empathy” for another person or group is really just empathy for what you think about those other people or groups based on what you have been told about them.
But even if this problem could be solved, I don’t think common empathies alone would create cohesive political groups, because I think that people would continue to disagree on how to solve problems. Take for example the current Israeli/Hezbollah clash. Though we can all agree that the loss of any life is a tragedy, I’m sure we don’t agree on what course of action would provide the best chance of reducing the number of lives lost there over time. Imagine a group of people who empathize with Israel. Within that group, some would say that Israel should not respond militarily to attacks on its soil because violence begets violence. Others would say that Israel must respond militarily because, if it does not, it is just inviting more attacks, and more bloodshed.
July 24th, 2006 at 10:43 am
in my young childhood,before any major tramma, i used to fantasise about my have barbie size humans under my control, kept them in cages, forced sex,no dismemberment. there was a large cold dank stone table for sacraficing, at the point of sacrafice i became both the sacraficed and the iniciater.but like dreams where you never die the no blood was ever shed. i ve met a couple of people who had simalar fantasies as children with out any extra ordinary provocation. so to be the hunter or the hunted,makes for interesting prose and irretating reality.and if this is the root of what is going to need medicated ,well,you can imagine where lack of empaty will lead us.empathy for the media,remember that song dirty luandry? well i wish it still got played on the radio but noboby wants to hear it but a few. anyways that song greatly influanced my perception of the mediaand there is diffenantly an outside influance to it limmited air play. as for meds, i feel some of our greatest treasures of humanity have been locked in asylums and ,never mind ,thats where my empathy is. so dont take your meds,hide um under your tounge, go crazy. if ya have to rage on, rage on til your emptie and remeber kids.its the kamma of the dumb ass you raggin on too……..freezer burn all else is only icing…soul coughin
July 24th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
Really great point, I think. It cuts to the heart of another question though: where does apathy come from? From the heart or from the head? Is it conditional upon received or perceived knowledge about the other person? Do you really need to know or have accurate knowledge to feel emapthy?
Just to clarify, that wasn’t quite what I was suggesting, but it is an interesting conclusion.
July 24th, 2006 at 7:04 pm
Hey Tim,
Great question. I have been thinking about this since you asked it and have nothing to offer other than the idea that apathy may have more than one parent - for some it could be psychopathic, for others it could be simple lack of time to consider the matter due to other pressing needs. In the latter sense empathy can be seen as a luxury available only to those who are not experiencing any personal crisis requiring all of their attention.
In the former sense it could perhaps be personified by Stalin, whose childhood was by all accounts a horrific experience. I happen to be reading The Court of the Red Tsar right now, and just last night read that his first wife died “in his arms” of tuberculosis, and that at the funeral he remarked:
“This creature softened my heart of stone. She died and with her died my last warm feelings for people.”
If this remark is taken at face value rather than as a cynical justification of himself, maybe apathy can spring from severe personal losses?
Paul
July 24th, 2006 at 7:27 pm
Tim,
I realize I didn’t address your other questions. You ask whether empathy requires knowledge of the other person. I would say of course it does! Without any such knowledge there would be no basis for empathy? Maybe I misunderstood you?
You also ask whether accurate information is required in order to feel empathy. To this I would say of course not! One can feel empathy for fictional characters. Tom Joad for example. But I believe that accurate information IS necessary if one looks to his or her empathy to instruct on how to act. Or at least a healthy suspicion that one may not have all of the facts.
Hope that makes sense.
Paul
July 25th, 2006 at 4:43 am
Just one thing, you cannot empathise with a government! You mean rationally understand their perspective. Empathy is about beings, and their bonds. I have lots to say on this but i find it hard to answer all the points which annoys me. I wrote about empathy, sin, fantasy and lots of other things in Forgotten Fantasies so for anyone who wants a deep read, read away!