Empathy, or the lack of it
Drug addicts, lazy people, scroungers, spongers, parasites. It's how we're meant to think of things. People are on incapacity benefit for reasons of incapacity, and we're being gently nudged in the direction of a lack of sympathy - or maybe a lack of empathy. Fatties, too, are prominently mentioned by the government and the papers C&Ving the government's rhetoric - though if you look at the stats there's only a very small percentage of people on incapacity benefits for reasons of obesity - which, you might wonder, could possibly be linked to some kind of medical condition rather than a fondness for the odd pork pie, but who knows? We're not meant to question, or suspect, or think, or guess; we're meant to judge, and if we're those people in the 'safety net' which has become a 'spiral of welfare dependency', we're meant to be judged.
For me, I think, it comes down to empathy, or a lack of it. If you, as a person who isn't addicted to things, can look at a person who is addicted to things and think that it simply was their free choice made from free will, and that's all there is to it, it's easier to judge them, and think negatively of them. If you can look at someone who's an addict, and think, well I didn't end up as an addict, so they shouldn't have either, then it's easier to judge, too. I look at people who are addicted and think it's probably a combination of factors, perhaps a predisposition to addictive behaviour, combined with choices people have made; perhaps it isn't as simple as thinking that alkies, or fatties, or druggies, have just made their own beds and will have to lie in them. But then that's just being a bleeding heart, isn't it; a mawkishly sentimental fool whose kindness is milked by the parasites who are stealing our money, etcetera; and I don't have any argument against that. Except to say, I don't look at addicts and look down on them, not most of the time anyway.
Some people make massive errors, and fuckups in their lives, and end up doing dumb, stupid, antisocial and criminal things. They're responsible for everything they have done. But at the same time, they may not be starting from exactly the same place as the rest of us, which doesn't excuse it, but it does go some way to providing an explanation. And if you can think of other people as being like you, but possibly unlike you, possibly with different proclivities, and different needs, and different impulse controls, then that, to me, is a kind of humanity, and a good way to look at the world.
And I am sure the Government is careful not to say that addicts or fatties should be taken off benefits; they'll be careful not to say that kind of thing, but then they won't have to. They know what their friends in the press will do with the information, and how it will be presented, and the anger it will create. Because we aren't encouraged to think about other people as complex, heterodox creations of blood and bone; we're encouraged to be angry first, to react first, and think, if at all, some way down the line, once our knees have jerked.
No related posts.
Buy my book, it’s great
Switch site
Donate
Recent Posts
Most Commented On
Recent Comments
- Eddie on A day with the Daily Mail
- Eddie on A day with the Daily Mail
- Eddie on Peter Hitchens depresses me. But I won’t kill him.
- Emily on Update
- Angela Webb on This isn’t a flounce
About Me
Hello. I'm a Bristol-based writer and soon-to-be-redundant journalist. You can read more about me and the Enemies site here, or follow me on Twitter. Email me if you like - antonvowl at live dot co dot uk
If you're struggling to read the site please use the drop down box below to increase the text size.
April 21st, 2011 - 12:38
Reading this has reminded me of learning about attribution errors in social psych. This one particularly springs to mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error
I feel like empathy/compassion/humanity should be just as high on the school curriculum as math and English since there are so many people apparently lacking any.
April 21st, 2011 - 12:39
Ahh, see, I even did it myself then! Maybe there are external situational reasons for the people showing no compassion…
April 21st, 2011 - 14:05
Looking at the coverage on the Beeb I’m sure Call Me Dave has achieved his goal. I’ve found myself looking out of the office window today looking out for fat alcoholic junkies.
There is a way to get these people off benefits. Give them treatment/support/surgery/counselling. The costs would soon be outweighed by the savings.
April 21st, 2011 - 17:06
THANK YOU!
When I saw the headline in the paper about this, my reaction was a puzzled ‘am I supposed to be angry or something?’ Because addition is a type of incapacity – you literally can’t function as a normal person. I thought I was probably alone on that one, as I find people just aren’t sympathetic when it comes to drink and drug addiction.
April 21st, 2011 - 18:03
First they came for the drug addicts, and I did not speak up, because I was not a drug addict.
Then they came for the alcoholics, and I did not speak up, because I was not an alcoholic.
Then they came for the obese, and I did not speak up, because I was not obese.
Then they came for the disabled, and there was no one left to speak for me.
April 21st, 2011 - 19:42
The welfare state along with the public sector, immigrants, ethnic minorities, ‘bloody mooslimms’ and anything even remotely ‘foreign’ have always been used as a convenient scape-goat for the centre, right-wing political establishment in this country- with no shortage of support from the embedded, corporate media- for as far back as i can remember.
They do it because populist, right-wing rhetoric unfortunately (from our point of view) seems to work. The irony is the vast majority of people i know who buy into this shit and go off on one; “bloody scroungers, junkies, druggies” etc, have themselves either claimed at least one form of welfare benefit in the past, are claiming it now, or will be in the very near future considering the economic climate.
The ‘pull the ladder up, i’m o.k’ element in this country are nothing but a bunch of self-obsessed, cold-hearted, vindictive little twats who probably think ‘empathy’ is a new girl group act on Britains Got Talent.
April 21st, 2011 - 23:35
Hear hear.
Also, thank you for introducing me to the word “heterodox” – that’s a lovely word, that is.
April 22nd, 2011 - 07:10
Surely society has a right, or even a duty, to deem certain behaviours irresponsible and take action against people. Stopping people’s benefit isn’t the answer, but putting them on a personal, individual programme of treatment, support, education/training and sanctions is…it will be terribly expensive though.
April 22nd, 2011 - 13:37
What ‘society’ is that then?
April 22nd, 2011 - 18:38
Drug addicts and alcies are scum…..
until of course the middle classes find themselves hooked on crack and expensive plonk and then they are victims driven to addiction by those ‘orrible middle class hating socialists!
April 23rd, 2011 - 08:36
Ahh yes…. not so many years ago we had a Tory government and I found myself suddenly a single parent with a baby. All the woes of the world were placed at my door. The Tory press said my child would be a hooligan, a thief, leave school with no education, never get a job, to remain forever the scrounging scum that they knew single parent families to be.
The vitriol was enough to turn anyone to drink.
The targets change. The arrogance remains.
Surveys of American students indicate a reduction in empathy levels over the decades so hold on to your seats, it may well get worse.
And a wierd one for a humanist, but
‘there but for the grace of God go I’ goes a long way.
April 24th, 2011 - 22:02
Well said. Divide and rule is an old principle, and while politicians may witter about social cohesion, it’s often in their narrow, party interest to promote the opposite.
April 25th, 2011 - 05:22
I do feel, as one of those evil, money sucking benefit scroungers, yes, I’m on incapacity, thru depression, and sometimes I can be seen out of my house, walking around on my fully working legs, that we’re a pretty easy bunch to blame things on.
Sure there’s fraudulent claimants, and we should be tested to make sure we’re not just ‘playing the system’, but I can guarantee you all I’m not swimming in free cash or living the high life. (Not that people who’d read this are the kind of people who’d be blaming me for everything wrong with the world in the first place).
Surely, while they’re closing things left right and centre and putting more and more people out of work, wouldn’t it make more sense to concentrate on getting those able to work back into work?
I did work for 15 years, but none of that’s relevant, now I’m just a scrounger and the cause of all society’s ills. Really helps the morale to know that. Makes me just want to ignore my illness and go take a McJob and start paying some tax out of my minimum wage.
In reply to Lee, above, about 5 years ago, I was about to be enrolled on a full time, live in course for those with mental problems, to get them trained up for a skilled job, and then after 9 months training, a 3 month job placement, after which I’d be earning about 25-30k a year, and be plowing far more back into the economy than I’d taken out.
Sure it’s an expensive investment, but how long at tax on 30k is it going to take before it’s worth doing, rather than leaving people to deteriorate on dead end benefits? (I’m agreeing with Lee, btw, investment makes so much more sense than cuts, but then ‘We’re throwing more money at scroungers!!!’ on the front pages the next day.)
Then it was cut and I was told there would be no alternatives. On top of all that I’m overweight too, which I believe now puts me about one rank above ‘immigrant terrorist paedophile’ in the public’s eyes.
I still find it amazing that the Government is anti euthanasia,when free ‘futurama style’ suicide booths would cut the nations pension and benefit budget in a matter of weeks. Just keep making the poor more and more miserable until they decide to hop in a booth and no more welfare payments.
April 26th, 2011 - 10:12
A short primer on behavioural psychology should do the trick. “Free will”, as the term is commonly used, is an utter absurdity. There have been solid philosophical arguments against such a chimera since antiquity, but Skinner really nailed that fucker’s coffin down good and tight. Of course, it doesn’t stop people, because the invocation of “free will” is simply a psychologically rewarding learned behaviour which is impervious to both facts and reason.