Why America Needs More Empathy
I thought about this for a while and believe a lot of what is currently dividing us has to do directly with a lack of empathy. As luck would have it, Buzzfeed put up an excerpt from Dan Rather's upcoming new book called What Unites Us: Reflections on Patriotism. The excerpt deals specifically with empathy, and I thought it was compelling, and worthy of discussion, so here's a new thread! We have a leader currently who seems to be devoid of empathy and we can see where that takes him in terms of policy and rhetoric. Anyway, the excerpt is really worth a read. Perhaps my confirmation bias is at play, but I think Dan Rather hits the nail on the head. And I've added an excerpt from the excerpt for those who have no interest in going to the article (but I really think the whole thing is worth reading).Go Beavers said:Having empathy isn't saying something's okay. We don't progress as people without empathy.
Dan Rather On Why America Needs More Empathy
Empathy is not only a personal feeling; it can be a potent force for political and social change. And thus the suppression or denial of empathy is a deliberate part of a cynical political calculus. Dividing people and stoking animosity can pave a path to power (and in this most recent election, it has). This has been well known since the time of the ancients. But these divisions inevitably come at the expense of the long-term health and welfare of the nation as a whole. We have seen many examples from our history where the economic and social needs of one group have been pitted against another’s — on immigration, labor rights, environmental protections, racial justice, and so many more. Such clashes usually do not end very well. In contrast, there have been moments where we reached out to each other as a nation, channeling what unites us rather than what separates us. It might be hard to imagine today, but there were times when the common purpose of the United States seemed to rise above pettiness and narrow self-interest.One often finds the greatest lack of empathy in those who were born lucky. They tend to misidentify that luck as the superiority of their character. There are some notable exceptions: the incredibly successful investor Warren Buffett once speculated about what would happen if, before birth, a genie gave us the opportunity to choose the political, economic, and social system into which we would be born. “What’s the catch?” he said. “One catch — just before you emerge [from the womb] you have to go through a huge bucket with seven billion slips, one for each human. Dip your hand in and that is what you get — you could be born intelligent or not intelligent, born healthy or disabled, born black or white, born in the U. S. or in Bangladesh, etc. You have no idea which slip you will get. Not knowing which slip you are going to get, how would you design the world?”
It is a wonderful thought experiment that lays out a provocative case for empathy. Mr. Buffett calls his construct “the ovarian lottery.” Now, take a moment to imagine the most sanctimonious of our current national voices. Imagine those who lecture most loudly about morality and personal responsibility from the perch of privilege. Imagine those who blame the victims of discrimination and poverty. How would these men and women fare in such a lottery as Mr. Buffett outlines? What would their message be if they themselves had been born under far different circumstances? These people are in dire need of humility, a humility bathed in the refreshing waters of empathy. We can all afford to drink more from that spring as well.
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Those that can be trusted can change their mind.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"