I write these words as I finish the entry. I didn’t expect it to be this difficult to write my thoughts on the pash from hate to cynicism. Most of the thoughts were already fleshed out prior to putting down a word. But as soon as I tried putting things to paper, everything stopped. I realized I was attempting to paint to narrow a path. The route from hatred to cynicism is not something narrow or confined. It is a field with endless ways of reaching your destination. So, not only did I pause before I proceeded, I paused continually as I wrote, and again as I finished.
We are cynical. Perhaps naturally, perhaps it is taught. Before you can even begin to choose one of the two options, you need to understand what cynicism is. So, what is cynicism? Is it that bad? How did it come about? Why does something with such a negative connotation show up in some of the most positive people? Sure, those people love to disguise it as being “realistic”, but we all know what it really is. We can explore all of these questions and in the end come to no definite conclusion. Despite this potential futility, it is important to explore these questions and more.
Cynicism is more than just being snide or doubtful. It is a sense of righteousness (because you know), a stubborn feeling of superiority (giving you the right to criticize), a laziness of effort (because you have no need to second guess your thoughts), and a lack of faith in the ability to grow or change (because nothing you or anyone else does will change things). Sure, there are exceptions, but I doubt that specific examples one could come up with would set aside the general underlaying foundation of what I claim the cynicism that descends from hate to be and the consequences that stem from it.
Being as cynical as I am, I struggle to distance myself from that which, in all honesty, holds me back. To be a cynic is easy. Offering ridicule and criticism and opinion to the actions, thoughts, or beliefs of others demands nothing but a teaspoon of thought and a pinch of pessimism, sometimes even less. It does not require any degree of depth or complexity or understanding or foresight or concern or temperance or humility or wisdom or even truth. It does not require faith or principles to express cynicism. It does not require uprightness or integrity to voice cynical thoughts. It is the easiest, most base, response to something we do not like or do not agree with. With a single cynical thought, a conversation can essentially end. Any further dialogue is an argument or line dance, depending on the other participant(s). Moving past that cynicism while holding tight to optimism and hope can be nothing short of exhausting and a constant battle.
I do not suggest that the cynicism in the world, including my own, is not justified or well-founded. Not at all. In fact, it is, unfortunately, perfectly rational and well-proportioned in my mind. What we tend to overlook is how this cynicism comes to be. We are numb to it and its growing shadow over us. It creeps upon us without a sound and infiltrates our words without our full and willing ignorance.
It may seem off-base, but I argue that hate is the largest single contributor to our growing cynical nature. Our hate and prejudices lead us to seek control and power; perhaps first in the form of our independence, and soon after in single-minded pursuit of our self-interests and the accumulation of power to preserve and defend it. In the process of this journey, we establish the rules of the game, our teams, and the vision of the world that we think is best. Disagreements come about and grow. As our inability to solve these disagreements are exacerbated, division grows deeper, and the quest for power becomes paramount. You can rest assured that with power, hate is never far behind.
Hate has consequences beyond who or what we feel it for, or even why we feel it. This is especially true when it concerns of the primary realm of my writing: politics, government, and society. If it were otherwise, this writing would be meaningless. Instead, we live in a world where the hate we feel has repercussions far beyond ourselves and our small circles. Therefore, it is not just hate that deserves our attention. The aftershocks of these feelings are equally as important. They lead to skepticism and cynicism, distrust and anger, apathy and hopelessness. But to go further requires us to think deeper. We must understand the sequences of events and consequences of our actions.
When questioning whether the world—meaning society and civilization—has improved, it is difficult, at least for myself, to argue that we are better than previous generations. Some may take issue what that, but looking at things objectively is to admit fault and flaw when it stares you in the face.
Politics and government have always been venues of vitriol. A significant reason for this is because they are based on the accumulation of power and control. They rely on people in search of power to compete for your support. Have these areas improved in our ever-advancing world? Has democracy and government achieved an ever more perfect state? Have our politicians reached a new level of honor, esteem, and intellect? Have things become more respectful? Or are they just as toxic as in the past? Have they taken on a new level of disregard and disrespect? Have we bastardized anything and everything honorable which we could be proud of? To me the answers to these questions is plain as day. I see no civility. I see no concern for others who may differ. I see no improvement. I see only power-seekers lowering the bar for others to slither under. I see a crumbling empire using its might to hold on.
Yes, that is sarcasm mixed with cynicism. Rightfully so, since that is the thread that weaves through this writing. I write about the world I see as I see it. While I also incrementally paint the picture of the world I want to see, I do not confuse the two as I write. I fight my cynicism as one who fights an addiction or compulsion. I know it is bad. I don’t want to do it, but sometimes the urge is just too strong. I am fully aware that not a few paragraphs prior I talked about maintaining a hold on hope and optimism; but it would be foolish for me to not stand watch for unwelcome intruders. So, while I fight my cynicism and prod my optimism and hope to grow, I do not open the door for ignorance to take refuge. It would be negligent to act as if everything I feel is wrong, or to condemn all my feelings of cynicism as misguided solely because I work to extinguish that cynicism. And so, I toil away on transferring my cynicism into something more productive, not dismissing it as false or unimportant.
I’m fully aware that I do nothing by using such language to describe some who stand for so much to others, who hold positions of distinction, regard, and power. Yet, these reasons play a large factor in choosing to knock them down to a degrading position. I expect those people to be more. I do not look at politicians to be the weaselly character nowadays expected of them. I look at them to be the honorable, honest, and distinct people that their positions should demand. These are people who play with, influence, and direct the lives of the multitudes. There is a degree of trust and humility that should go with these roles. Should they not? Yet, that is not what we see. Quite the contrary.
A prominent reason for this discrepancy is how these positions are acquired (I almost said earned). In essence, they are positions of power and authority. They wield influence, control, and strength. It is hard to put restraints on positions that have these characteristics as part of their makeup, as much as we should.
The catch-22 should be obvious. Those who seek power are best suited to attain these positions; therefore, those who hold the positions tend to maintain them. The names of the people and parties change, but the people themselves tend to remain the same. Even when individuals with the best of intentions seek these positions—and I have no doubt that there are many—most are forced to participate in the game as it is, not as they would like it to be. When they realize that they must lower their standards and compromise their principles to achieve such a pursuit, they face a difficult decision. If they choose to do so for such a goal, can it really be said that they have standards or principles in the first place? Most of the good ones don’t make it this far. They either exit or attempt to ride it out “their way” only to flounder in the jungle.
I hear people objecting that you must play the game to change it. Thinking that the Trojan horse approach to institutional change is effective is unproven and borderline naive. I’ve heard this sentiment from many people and am always blown away by their belief in it. To me, it is merely a justification to support their player in the game because of hate for the other one. It is naïve to think that your candidate is different, the opponent is evil, and that things will improve once your horse wins. Perhaps if there was some precedent they could reference to show that this approach would or could work, or had worked in the past, I would change my tune. But there is none. And one example would hardly disprove the long history of the politics and politicians we know. When you compromise yourself to gain entrance, you open yourself up for compromise the next time convenience presents itself. There is no reason to think otherwise other than misguided altruism. While I am all for altruism and want nothing more than to see improvement in this world, I have a responsibility not to let my optimism and desires cloud the reality around me.
How do we treat each other? How do we treat those we disagree with? We have the most advanced brain, in terms of intellect, on Earth and yet we struggle with some of the most basic elements of compassion and humanity. The hatred that circulates in certain circles and through social media, news outlets, and many other avenues competes with any historical example I can think of. Again, this may seem cynical. That is because it probably is. But it is also a genuine and legitimate line of thought and rationale.
So, how much have we improved as a species? Yes, we have changed many of our norms. Yes, we have accepted much of that change. Does that acceptance mean it was willfully embraced? Hardly. It could just as easily be argued that something is stubbornly or resistantly embraced. It could be begrudgingly embraced. It could be embraced because the futility in fighting is too obvious to ignore. We accept it out of fatigue, surrender, and apathy. Is acceptance in any of these cases an example of growth or improvement? Perhaps for the whole if we were being generous, but not necessarily for the individuals involved. While the state of the whole is extremely important, it is dangerous to ignore or minimize the importance of the individual within that whole.
Looking at the above statements, it is easy to see why people feel hate when it comes to politicians, government, the state, and the condition of society. It is even easier to see and begin to understand how cynicism can take hold of even the most altruistic and optimistic of us. You need to have faith in something to believe in it. Where do you find faith in the politicians begging for our votes? They focus more on raising money than they do on understanding the varying people they seek to represent. Why? Because that is the way the game is played! How do you have faith in the system that promotes these questionable methods of lifting motivated individuals to such high levels of power when there is talk of corruption at every turn, blatant influence peddling at every high dollar dinner, and an ever-increasing void between them and us? How do you fight off the cynicism that grips these facts?
As the state grows and this power moves further and further from the average citizen, the belief that their decisions have any impact on things diminishes. This is when we see the burgeoning of cynicism. The roots take hold. The branches envelope. As improvement eludes us, cynicism and skepticism spread like wildfire. There is no stopping them, especially with the same tactics used to create them. Yet, that is what pervades our world. Hate blinds. Cynicism perpetuates. The obvious downside is that our situation is dire and pathetic. The upside is that it is not irreversible; we can change it. Again, before doing that, we need to understand it even better though.
Why do we play the game? (1) If we can’t all have our way, then we must play to win. We have no other choice, right? The alternative is to lose. We play because we all have interests and we do not want those interests stifled by competing interests. As competition grows, our desire to win grows with hate in tow. When the options are to control or be controlled, we will fight to control so no one controls us.
Many of us have hope that things will change. We have hope that this time will be different. We have hope that, despite all the evidence, our hero will come to save the day. I do not begrudge this clinging to hope. I cling to it myself. I admire and embrace it, but I also pity it. I have come to the opinion, though, that resting on that form of hope is like waiting for fish to jump in your boat instead of casting out your line. I cannot and do not believe in the passive hope that we have practiced for years and generations now. To have even the smallest chance of achieving some of these hopes and desires will require us to act on our beliefs, not solely to place our belief in some random hero claiming they are there out of a sense of duty. That will not get us to where we can go.
And (2) we play the game because we do not know of an alternative. What else is there for us to do? We are participants in this whether we like it or not. We can choose to be active or passive. Our only alternative is to leave our designated home for another prefabricated one, but this option is unrealistic, as well as difficult and problematic for many reasons. So, we are stuck in the venue we find ourselves in. If we do not play, then we are passive participants who must accept the results without our input; hardly any different than accepting the results with our input. I wish I could be more optimistic on this evaluation, but I would be leaving that realm of realism I spoke of earlier. Thus, we become disenfranchised, disenchanted, and disengaged. Apathy sets in because even the most optimistic person must face the somber music of reality at some point.
This element, or consequence, of democracy in an evolving and growing world is far from satisfactory. It becomes less so as the population and diversity increase, the strength of the individuals’ interests and beliefs grow, the legislation becomes so infinitely convoluted, and the bureaucracy is no longer within reach or sight of the common person. For many of us there was, or is, or will be a time when we are active because we feel we are free to choose. But we are all still captives in a sense because we are only free to choose from the options provided to us. At the moment, we know no better. No, this is not in and of itself horrible; nor is it laudable. The question that should come to mind is, why would we settle for something and stop striving to improve because it doesn’t meet the criteria of bad or horrible? The “lesser of two evils” is hardly the product of something great.
We can do better. We should do better.
We play the game, but I do not believe most of us believe in the system any longer. We are zombie participants, mindlessly following the path made for us. Even the ones still engaging may be doing so out of anger, prejudice, and hate; not because they believe things will improve. The primary concern in this scenario is that the other team or candidate doesn’t win. But you cannot have a winner without at least one loser. In in politics and our current government, we have no shortage of losers standing by. How do we accept that? If we are a country, a group of united states, communities of all sizes, then how do we accept the fact that we root for so many to lose? Looking back at the painful evolution of humans, government, and society should inspire us to think deeply, and not rely on what has been accomplished as a measure of how good we are today. It should make us question our current approach; not retire with the belief that the work is complete. There is no resting on our laurels when it comes to our evolution. To quote Thoreau,
“It is never too late to give up our prejudices. No way of thinking or doing, however ancient, can be trusted without proof.”[1]
I see no proof anywhere! We have been taught to believe that our approaches—concerning governing, politics, economics, and so much more—are the best and (sometimes only) correct approaches to take. That is why they are pushed so hard around the world. But our prejudices prevent us from continuing to learn, to improve. Our prejudices increase our hate for others we do not agree with or understand. This hate and prejudice only quicken the debasement of our system and our society, which only leads to mistrust, skepticism, and cynicism. It is here that our cynicism prevents us from believing we can do anything to change the system we were born into. When cynicism has done its work, apathy completely removes us from the implications of our actions and inactions. It is a vicious downward spiral with nothing to stop us but Herculean efforts. Those efforts do not and will not come about by one person. If you are waiting for the hero to save the day, you will be waiting a very long time.
[1] Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. p. 11