In defense of empathy

We could live in paradise, but we don’t. Why is that?

Humanity faces a plethora of existential problems (as in, they can destroy either our species or society). A few are deemed natural disasters, but most are created by our own ingenuity. What is true for almost all of them (save for something like a nearby star going nova) is that they are solvable by humans. Fairly easily too. So what is the problem? What is stopping us from taking appropriate action? Sociopathic thinking is the problem. It is the foundation behind all the existential issues we face.

Sociopathic thinking has always been with us and that will probably never change. To be human is to be a bastard, at least some of the time. However in 1602, they found a way to codify sociopathy, to start the journey of making sociopathic thinking the default option. Limited Liability just means you can profit off other people’s misfortune, without suffering the emotional qualms.

Corporations, colonization, capitalism are all just codified sociopathy. As is: Individualism, manifest destiny, religious doctrine, enlightened self-interest, consumer culture, nationalism, bigotry, evasion of responsibility etc.

There’s no conspiracy here. No one planned this, it is just a result of their nature. They found a kink in the defense of our minds, our humanity. Pouring in the poisonous idea that there’s no such thing as society. One of the worst things it has done is to encourage us to see our fellow humans as “others” or objects. To regard them as not human, not like us, thereby making it easier to treat them inhumanely. There’s no intelligence here. They are not masters of the Universe or superior geniuses. They have just created a system where their kind thrives.

They reckon that about 1-5% of the population are sociopaths. A small minority and throughout our history, societies have found ways of dealing with them, but societies fall. I would argue that, in most cases, it’s because the societal defenses against sociopathic thinking falls.

Sociopaths are empty people. Since they can’t share in humanity, they try to fill the void with power, greed, id. It would be sad, if not for the fact that they don’t want to be cured. Saw a documentary about psychopathy, where one man said he’d rather die than be cured. He knew the pain he’d inflicted & how bad it would feel, if he suddenly could experience that pain.

It’s still sad. Maybe they’ll find a cure one day. Wouldn’t count on it, but maybe.

Sociopaths can be defined & identified by many traits, but one seems always to be present: Their complete belief that everyone should think like them, that they are right in everything they say or do. That we all should live like them, enlightened self interest and all that.

As I said, it’s sad.

But it’s also very bad, since it means they constantly try to undermine any system, to bend it to a form they can better control. Machiavelli was a mofo, no doubt, but his adherents are so much worse.

Sociopathic thinking is short-term thinking. Why worry about the consequences of an action, when all that matters is your own happiness or pursuit of power. It discourages caring about others, since they are just objects to be manipulated for your own pleasure.

It is also:

* Growth at all costs. Just like cancer. They gotta fill that emptiness with something.

* Believing only in yourself. Since no one else matter, they must be right in all regards.

* Conspiracy thinking. After all, it is what they would do if they had power.

* Only caring for power & pleasure. There is nothing else to care for.

* Choosing style over substance. When the center is empty, disguise it.

* Not wanting to sacrifice anything for the common good. What common good?

* To remove all friction in life. Friction reminds them of death.

* Always choosing the easy way out. It is the easy way, after all.

* Having a pathological fear of death. Since the world ends when they do.

* Having nothing but disdain for kindness & charity. Why care about others?

* Winning at all cost. You don’t win silver, you lose gold.

* Being authoritarian. You can’t climb the power-structure if it is not there.

* Traitorous. Cooperation should only serve you.

* Believing might make right. The goal justifies the means.

* Capitalistic. The easiest way to control others. A way to keep score as well.

* Paternalistic. It is so much easier to retain power if the power structure leans in your favour.

* Consumerist. Taking the place of any kind of genuine belief.

* Individualism. Other people are dangerous, they are not you. You are all you need.

I am very focused on existential threats and one push back I get, over & over again, is this: Humanity has always thought the world was on the brink, that these are the worst & most dangerous of times. This is true, as soon as we learned to write, we have written about the end of humanity. However, the sages of old were wrong. Until we discovered the fearsome power of the atom bomb, nothing had the power to end all of humanity, just local civilizations. Since then, the existential threats have multiplied, to the point where nuclear annihilation almost seem quaint. They might not all be able to end the human race, but they all carry the risk of ending advanced human society and it does not seem clear that we could claw our way back to a bright future, one more time. If we fall now, it seems doubtful that we can make it back up. Who knows, the cockroaches might make for better stewards of this planet, but is that what we want? Maybe, by being aware of the underlying problem, we could do better?

Another common push back is this: Why are you so obsessed with sociopathic thinking? We face so many challenges, why is this what you are so focused on and why do you feel we should care as well? The term sociopath or psychopath gets thrown around a lot. It seems to be in vogue to deem anyone you disagree with, a sociopath. This is not only dangerous, but it also muddies the waters. It takes away from what is at stake and it waters down the significance of the term.

Sociopathic thinking needs to be front and center, because it is what drags us down, both individually and as a society. There are people, who think we can co-exist with these people and these ideas. That people like Musk, Bibi, Thiel & Trump can be reasoned with. That they can change and become good people. They cannot. They might profess to have a change of heart, but in the end, they will always betray humanity. The greatest danger are those that are seemingly aligned with humanity, people like Taibbi or Brand. They start out saying all the right things, but in time it becomes clear what monsters they are. We need to be aware of this and deny people like this a role in our movement. If you accept small evils, you open the door for great evils. As TMBG wrote so elegantly: You can’t shake the Devil’s hand & say you’re only kidding. By focusing on sociopathic thinking and behaviors, you can also avoid the dangers of purity-culture. You might not agree with everything a potential collaborator believes, but as long as they adhere to humanistic ideas, they can be a potential partner. It is a way to avoid the infighting that so often cause the downfall of anti-authoritarian popular fronts.