Empathy

We all do it. We take sides and the side we typically take is that of the victim. I recently posted a blog titled “Angry Man.” As I watched the interaction unfold, my mind wanted to support the poor theater manager being subjected to the tirade.

I watched the manager try to protect the rest of us patrons from the foul language, the angry words and the loudness of his complaint. Empathy for the victim drives many of us to this state of empathy, one so powerful that we turn to hating the antagonist.

Yale Professor of psychology Paul Bloom makes this point well in an article in the Atlantic Monthly titled “The Dark Side of Empathy.”  We seem to favor the perceived victim, and that stops us from trying to understand the full story, and be, as Bloom states, “…more receptive to a balanced discussion of different options.”

We especially see this happen in politics. George H.W. Bush used empathy when he accused his presidential opponent, Michael Dukakis, of unleashing Willie Horton on the populace of Massachusetts for a weekend furlough. Horton raped and murdered a woman while on that furlough. Empathy with the victim precluded any reasonable discussion about the merits of the rehabilitation theory behind the furlough program.

I like to read articles from smart people. They often introduce me to new concepts I haven’t thought of. I then think about how they might apply to problems I am currently thinking about. In this case, Bloom wrote about the existence of this line of thinking through the writings of Adam Smith, he of the “Invisible Hand” theory articulated in “The Wealth of Nations.” 

“When we see one man oppressed or injured by another, the sympathy which we feel with the distress of the sufferer seems to serve only to animate our fellow-feeling with his resentment against the offender. We are rejoiced to see him attack his adversary in his turn, and are eager and ready to assist him whenever he exerts himself for defence, or even for vengeance within a certain degree.” [LINK HERE] 

We are hearing a lot of “empathy recruitment” in the current presidential campaign, and I view the examples as effective. In the Benghazi incident, the four victims are painted as the tragic figures with whom we empathize. Islamic terrorists, and now President Obama and Secretary Clinton, are painted as the offenders. We have heard of Mexican rapists and murderers or criminals as justification for retaliation and construction of a wall between Mexico and the United States.

One argument I frequently try to interject into debate is that the percentage of events we vilify are actually quite small, and are not likely to affect us personally. I come across a lot of travelers who stress out about flying. They aren’t willing to discuss the odds of flying because they listen to the press look for scapegoats, instead of solutions. When I ask them how they get to the airport, and they say by car, I point out that their risk in driving to the airports is greater than the risk of an airplane crash. Doesn’t matter -- their mind has already empathized with the passengers who died in the crashes they see on the news.

As we consider the damage done by adverse childhood experiences, a major hurdle we have to overcome is the denial that we would do anything to harm our children. And when we read about adults who hurt their children, we vilify them with our empathy and support incredible penalties for what might be, in the order of things, common occurrences. But when someone happens to get caught, and the press finds out about it, the brown stuff hits the fan for that person. Think of it this way. Roger Ailes used his company, position and wealth to sexually harass female employees. For many of us, there is a huge empathy factor and we want Ailes to suffer for it. But there are others who go on the offense and accuse the victims of inviting the acts. A clear double standard exists and may well be based on gender discrimination. 

For me, as a former practicing attorney, I understand that a small percentage of perpetrators get caught, arrested or prosecuted. When one is caught, our wrath emerges. But the fact remains that a huge percentage of perpetrators are never caught. I try to dismiss my empathetic thoughts for the few and think about what appropriate solutions might be for the many. I am not always successful, but with practice, I hope to be.

If we accept that bad things happen, then our goal should be to seek ways to make bad things happen less frequently. I refer to this as seeking out the root cause for the bad things that happen. If a parent is an alcoholic and perpetrating trauma on children, then why is that parent an alcoholic and how can we rehabilitate them, and prevent it happening for future parents?

Dismissing our empathy is probably tougher for those of us with a substantial number of ACEs. We actually know what some victims got through because we did too. But can we blame our parents if they were also victims, and no one tried to help them? And when you think about the harsh treatment perpetrators can be subjected to, then we can expect denial and even more difficulty in stopping the cycle of harm. 

Having rational, balanced discussions, freed from harsh thoughts and empathetic feelings, is a tough recommendation to make. But it may be the only way we can find solutions. 

One last point. I have listened to the public testimony by many advocates within the Native American community for more funding for services and new programs. And I have seen more funding delivered. Usually the story teller will talk about tragedies that occurred in their community. Some one commits suicide. Another is killed by drunk perpetrator. Women and children are beaten by a loved one. The stories are all compelling. But despite almost 40 years of participation in my community, many of those years seeking funding and providing programs by sharing similar stories, we have not made much of a difference. We say we do, but we aren’t. We balance stories of need with stories of success. And the success are individual anecdotes, just as the failures are. Facts, data and honest assessment are the victims in this world of political solution seeking.

So I hope you will think about empathy and how we might be able to advance our discussion about solutions if we take our thinking away from individual anecdotes of failures and successs, and look at ideas that have a chance of working.