into the unmotivated.
It’s much deeper than that. Despite their essential lack of self-regulation, pathogens are really not capable of producing pathology on their own. There must also be a lack of self-regulation in the host. Remember what Churchill said about how World War II got started?
Because “the malice of the wicked was reinforced by the weakness of the virtuous.”
Exactly. You see, pathogens seem to have a stamina that is hard to muster up in the virtuous. But what I realized is that it’s not really stamina; what keeps them going without let-up is lack of self-control. And the only power that can force a mutation in the invasive organism is the exercise of self-regulation in the invaded organism. The major nutrient of terrorism, after all, whether we are talking about families or the family of nations, is an unreasonable faith in reasonableness. What empathy has given me is a way to deceive people into avoiding responsibility for themselves, while I seem to side with the angels.
This is insidious. You’re almost suggesting that the focus on empathy nourishes evil.
What do you mean “suggesting”? Look how I’ve gotten most Christians to interpret Jesus. His challenging statements far outnumber his comforting ones. Yet, if you go into any church in America beleaguered by pathogenic members and tell the leaders to force the irresponsible members of the community to change or leave, they respond, “empathically” it’s not the Christian thing to do.
But all belief systems are open to interpretation.
It has nothing to do with Christianity. Synagogues also tolerate pathogenic elements because it’s not the “Christian” thing to do. Why, I have got it to the point where people are absolutely tyrannized by the sensitivities of others. As long as I can keep everyone (especially parents) thinking about how they should feel for others rather than how they should prevent others from invading their “host,” no one will take the kind of stands that force the unmotivated to mature.
And I suppose you would also say that such a beneficent stance is ultimately harmful to the organism one is feeling for since it deprives it of the challenging experience of transformation.
It is totally impossible for either leaders or healers to be a transforming presence in an atmosphere that values empathy over responsibility.
Then political correctness also was your idea.
Not exactly, but I immediately saw its potential for inducing a general failure of nerve. Evolution, after all, requires leaders who can stand apart from the general anxiety of the day. In fact, leaders (and parents) function as the immunological systems of their institutions. When they are well-defined, the pathogens are nowhere as quick to multiply, or, in many cases, even to form. But when leaders fail to be present, or function as an anxious presence (which is the parallel to an autoimmune response) the system cannot maintain its integrity.
You know, I think you have been talking out of both sides of your mouth. Which side are you on, anyway?
Are you accusing me of using a forked tongue?
That is a definite possibility.
Fine, don’t take my word for it. But how are you going to explain all the perversity?
You want me to see people as possessed, rather than conflicted.
It’s more scientific. Complexes, syndromes, disorders, they are just models. They have no substantive reality.
You mean compared to demons?
Just because an idea is learned doesn’t prevent it from functioning as a superstition.
Can’t you be serious for a moment?
Okay. Recently the Holy One has changed tactics and I am not sure how to handle it. For one thing, he’s begun to improve the economy by having catastrophes. That’s my game. I mean hurricanes, floods, tornados, massive destruction, and suddenly manna from heaven because the need for reconstruction makes job opportunities pop up everywhere. But that’s not the most perverse thing he’s doing. That’s not what gets me most. There is something else going on, and I can’t figure out how to deal with it, no how.
What’s that?
Well, he’s been using some damn rabbi to try to make Christians more Christian.
Wow, that is really devilish.
Devilish? It’s downright satanic.
Wait till I tell people you said that!
Just remember, though, there’s a theory out there that Jesus was crucified because he spoke in parables, and challenging people can make them very angry. They love answers.
All I can say is, it’s an old rabbinic tradition. I’ll take my chances.
Two
SECRETS AND SYSTEMS
Several years ago a newspaperman doing a piece on the CIA reported his difficulties in coming up with the most elementary information about that super-secret organization. He was unable to obtain from them even the approximate number of employees who worked there, a fact which he felt was very important to his own story. Finally, in desperation, he called the Russian Embassy and promptly got the information.
From whom, then, was the information being kept secret? Actually, as secrecy and counterespionage have become more important and more sophisticated in the relationships between governments, a rather ironic system of triangles has been established. Over and over again nations have not informed their citizenry about certain facts, for fear the enemy would find out, but the enemy has already found out, producing a situation in which the party triangled out is the citizenry. Indeed, some of this is not new at all. For as older international treaties concluded between heads of governments come to light, over and over again it turns out that there were secret provisions. In such cases again, it is the citizenry who have been triangled out and the leadership of foreign nations that have obtained a pseudo-togetherness by creating such relationship systems. Further, while it is never stated baldly, it almost appears that government leaders of different nations are in a conspiracy to help one another obtain more power over the citizens they each respectively govern. For this is how secrets work, and as I shall show, it is the ultimate purpose of secrets in families. It also provides the ultimate justification for their revelation.
I do not wish, however, to convey the impression that families act like governments. As you all know, there has been much analogizing of family process to what goes on in politics. It is rather governments that act like families, for where else did the human race learn to function like that?
This essay is divided into three major sections. Section I will discuss some effects of secrets on the emotional process of a family. Section II will, through specific examples, discuss some effects on families of revealing secrets. And Section III will add some thoughts about the ethics of not being “dependable” about keeping secrets.
