Tag: provocation

  • The Ebb and Flow of Harmony

    In every situation there is a provocateur and the provoked. I always fancied myself as the provocateur because more often than not, others lack the courage to disrupt because of the overwhelming need to be liked or celebrated. Popularity drives more actions than purpose ever will. Anyway, I’m sure most can relate to the setting where two strong characters clash because each is attempting to establish their view as being the dominant one. Sometimes this is understandable where both may have valid points around a contentious issue, but most often one is more right than the other, but ego prevents the other from backing down and accepting defeat. Perhaps defeat is too strong a term, because the reality is closer to accepting having learnt something new from someone we hoped would not be in a position to teach us something new because it implies that they knew more than us. Hence the ego kicking in.

    The same plays out constantly in relationships with significant others. I recently became aware of an awkward truth, or perhaps just an awkwardness that defines a large part of my life, and probably yours. Given that I am regularly drawn into contentious situations for reasons that are unimportant at this point, it was always easy for me to assume that it was someone else’s drama that I was compelled to resolve, or at least needed to resolve. While some of that may be true, I’m quite certain that it’s not always true despite what my ego may prompt me to believe. As I took a closer look I grew more aware of this phenomenon, and I’m convinced that in every relationship, and more accurately, in every scenario in every relationship there is one that sets the tone, and the other that harmonises that tone. As an example, if I arrive home in a flustered state after a long slog at the office and just want to be left alone, my wife could either insist that I give my family their dues and pay attention to their needs regardless of my preferences at that point, or she could create a space that doesn’t place those immediate demands on me, while also allowing for a distraction that defuses the tone that I set. In that case, I set the tone, and she harmonises it.

    The important thing I noticed around this is that both parties set the tone at different points, even though in some relationships one person assumes the dominant role more often, while the other is comfortable to constantly follow their lead and harmonise their lives around that tone that was set. The problem sets in when both want to set the tone, or both want to harmonise. That’s when egos are triggered, and demands for significance play out in cryptic ways that do everything but make plain the real issue at hand.

    The impact of both wanting to set the tone is fairly obvious, but not so for the situation where both wish to harmonise. I’ve found this to take place at times when the usually dominant one feels the fatigue of playing the lead role and suddenly steps back hoping to be led for a change. The other that was comfortable to follow and harmonise up to that point suddenly feels uncomfortable being forced into a lead role, thereby causing them to question their competence in that setting in the relationship. It also causes them to question the value of their contribution up to that point, leading to frayed tempers and subsequent upheaval.

    This may be a simplification of the dynamics that play out in relationships, be they personal or professional, but it’s a theme that is common and from what I’ve seen, consistent. If we assume that we only play one or the other, then we firstly undermine the contribution of the other, and secondly we grow oblivious to the true impact of our contribution to the relationship, both positive and negative.

    While it may be true that some are naturally inclined to take a leading role, I would hazard a guess that there is not a human being alive or dead that never had a need to be led, instead of always shouldering the burden of leading others. There is much comfort that can be obtained from learning and being led, but our egos often tend to prevent us from enjoying such benefits when we convince ourselves that we are expected to know everything or lead in everything. Chances are, those expectations are entirely self-imposed, even if others believe it to be true.

    Harmony is experienced when there is a mutual and willing contribution in equitable parts to a common aspirational goal. In the absence of mutuality, and more importantly willing subscription, the pursuit and the ultimate goal will always be lacking in sweetness. Perhaps this is why so many lead busy lives full of responsibility and activity while still feeling hollow and unfulfilled.

  • retromantique:

    Well, it’s a touchy subject. You can’t hope to rally the other progressives on your side if you speak with such words. It’s kind of annoying, I know, but at the same time, you have to keep in mind that a lot of those zealous people are first and foremost: victims. Those religions have been carefully created to enslave human minds, it’s brainwashing since the cradle. That’s why it’s a touchy subject: some progressives only see this, while other people associate all Muslims to be terrorist and such. We have to make the distinction very clearly and in a way that our fellow progressives can get behind, so we are not thrown too easily in the second category.

    Of course, you’ll always have idiots (yes, true idiots) who only care about pushing their own subjective agendas. Even the most reasonable, polite and well-thought critic of an act violating universal human rights, if committed by a non-white-heterosexual-christian-male, will go at best to be dismissed, at worst to be rooted in this stupid concept of “Islamophobia”. 

    So basically, our goal should be first and foremost to rally all progressives back in track of defending universal human rights, no exception. Once they stop standing in the way of progress, we can hope to bring changes in the law and society as a whole in order to protect individuals from the brainwashing and mind destruction of religions. Let’s just hope that happens before WE become the minority, thanks to their irresponsible birth rate.

    This is so pompous and ill-informed, it seriously lacks any humour and barely holds any merit. A bunch of ‘progressives’ patting each other on their backs for taking a stand about everyone else’s belief systems as self-declared protectors of the freedom of religion under the guise of protecting universal human rights for those that were too irresponsible to think before having children. Right?

    Perhaps it would do the author/s good if they actually sought to understand the issues before spewing this drivel. Also, it would also be great if they bothered to look at the deliberate and consistent provocation involved in the incident that they so liberally reference in their posts. One more thing worth noting is that religion has become a cash cow for the cash strapped and creatively challenged media outlets. When sales fall, pick on the Muslims, but ensure you to do it to the point where you’ll provoke an irrational response, cry foul and defend your freedom of speech, and then watch your sales figures go through the roof. The same satirical publication referenced in these posts did exactly that a few years ago, and it seems they’ve realised how profitable it can be.

    Hopefully some day soon the Muslims will realise that they’re being baited, that they’re fighting a losing battle trying to earn dignity for Muslims through secular courts and that in fact their only chance at salvaging their dignity is in true reform, and not assimilation. Reform of their own actions, reform of their inclination to pick and choose what is or is not good to implement in their lives, reform of the practice of Islam independent of the cultural contamination that has served to polarise the Ummah in ways that we have yet to realise.