The simplest definition of ethics is that it is about choices, not just choices but choiceless choices which are choices that we must make but wish we didn’t have to make. The wars in Ukraine and in the Middle East are examples of a choiceless choice. I am concerned with Trump being part of this process in global peacemaking given his history of poor choices such as taking the side of Putin and not the side of his own intelligence agency or words from other world leaders. Trump is creating choiceless choices for Zelensky and the Palestinians.
Trump will only bring about division. Why? Because he doesn’t express anger as much as he expresses contempt, a word that comes from the Latin meaning scorn and disdain. He uses contempt all the time with his perceived enemies. It is the only response he understands as seen during his revenge tour. He doesn’t express your garden variety anger which is quite different from disdain.
Speaking of gardens, I don’t know much about growing things, but I have a family whose knowledge yields plant growth with their green thumbs. But I do know that you must have the right ingredients in the soil and nourish it before you will get something to grow. Trump leaves the soil alone in brokering a deal in the Middle East and Ukraine. So, here we have entities being scornful of one another being led in deal making by a person who only knows scorn.
There is an interesting study that will support my concern. John and Julie Gottman who founded the Gottman Institute to study relationship issues did research to determine why some marriages will lead to a divorce even after counseling. Keep in mind that contempt is defined as scorn, and the fact that the other person is worthless. They discovered that they could predict who would divorce in three years with 94% accuracy when observing the difference between anger that a couple has for one another versus scorn for each other. Anger declares, “I care about this!” Contempt says, “You disgust me.” I have been a counselor in the middle of bad and good divorces, so I agree with the Gottsmans’ research findings.
In marriage and family counseling the first step is critical. From the moment we begin I communicate by everything I do or say, that I am on both partners’ sides. I often soften the language that is loaded with scorn by switching it quickly to anger. This is done by rephrasing what the person has stated. For example, I will indicate that one or the other is using scornful language and will reflect anger language with, “What I hear you saying is you are angry about the other’s….” If it doesn’t remove the scorn, I will remove it quickly by suggesting other language. The couple is almost relieved when they leave the land of scorn to have anger be affirmed instead. It isn’t easy to transfer scorn to anger, but it can be done.
But here is the problem. Trump doesn’t have the skill set to rid the deliberations of scorn for he himself uses that frequently. He refers to Canadians as “nasty” another way of expressing scorn. He has also started both peace keeping deals with messages to Putin and then to Ukraine (keep in mind that it was his issues with Ukraine that led to his first impeachment) and has communicated in various ways that he supports Netanyahu and the right wing of his party and has not spent the same time in support of the Palestinians Not Hamas).
Beyond that you don’t deal with Russia’s unlawful invasion with language that asks the victim to give up something to reach a peace deal. It would be like having a man rape a woman and then in court she must give something to the rapist as well. That would be a choiceless choice.
Commentaires