My name is Susan Piver and I am a writer and blogger. I have written six books and send out a newsletter twice a week to my list of nearly 10,000 subscribers. My topics include meditation, creativity, and relationships. I'm fortunate to have an active, caring audience and when I upload a post, it may get 10 to 100 comments, depending on the topic. Most of the comments, if I may say, are some expression of gratitude because the reader has found this work useful. Occasionally, of course, someone will really disagree with me. Comments such as, "I can't believe you think something so strange, but to each his own," or "This post is misleading, please be more responsible in the future," are not unheard of. Being called a "self-absorbed navel-gazer" (which is probably true) is considered a vicious insult on my site.
However, a post I wrote on May 2, 2011 (which also ran on this site) went viral and garnered thousands of comments, many of which were filled with vitriol and ridicule. "You are destroying our country, you f**king idiot," "If you spent one day in the real world, you would probably get killed -- good riddance." And my favorite: "If these baboons had gotten their hands on nuclear weapons -- you wouldn't be sitting at your pretty little Mac going on about how conflicted you are." (I am a Mac user -- how did they know?!)
The post in question was called "Compassion for our Enemies." It was published the day Osama bin Laden was killed.
In it, I thought I was being very clear that my argument was not with bin Laden's assassination but with our reaction to it -- that if we treated it as some kind of touchdown boo-yah moment, we were strengthening the conditions that lead to more death and destruction, our own or others'. As we hold our victory with a sense of vengefulness, we create such vengefulness in our enemy. Thus it behooves us to actually care about them. In fact, there is no "them." There is only "us." Apparently, this was an incendiary and absurd position to take.
Now it is election season in the U.S. It is almost impossible to avoid us-and-them thinking. The truth is, I want my candidate to win so badly. Anyone who wants the other candidate frightens me. They feel the same about me.
Half the people in our beloved country are saying about the other half, "How can anyone possibly think that way?" and "Those people are going to be the ruination of us." We are pitted against each other, brother against brother. One side sees the other as socialist, elitist, un-American snobs who are at the very least utterly deluded -- or as ignorant, fundamentalist, uneducated hicks who are at the very least utterly deluded. Each side can come up with charts and graphs to demonstrate its own truths, beyond question.
Many (but not all) of our politicians encourage us to see each other in these ways, and bank on our votes to be based on fear and ridicule rather than belief and devotion to country. They hope to win by causing us to fear, doubt, and dehumanize each other.
We do not have to do this.
When one side wins the election on November 6, the other side will lose. That's just the way it is, and I have no problem with that. We're not always going to agree with each other. But it is our reaction to each other at the point of winning or losing that spells out our future more so than any policies of the winning side.
Right now, we have a chance to take a view that is so much larger than Obama or Romney, Us or Them, My Way or The Highway. Without budging an inch in what we believe and whom we support, we could take a moment, just a millisecond, to imagine that the "other" side feels as much passion, despair, longing, and fear about the election as we do. We could care about each other, American to American.
As winners, we could seek ways to include the losers as we go forward rather than further ostracize them. As losers, we could redouble our efforts to fight for what we believe in from a sense of love for this country rather than hatred for the victors.
In these attitude shifts, even if we can only hold onto them for a moment, everything is possible. We could at least try.
When I touch in with the "truth" of my position, I feel hard and unforgiving. I hate other people. I find that I have enemies. When I touch in with my longing for our country to be a haven for goodness, decency, and tolerance, I feel sad. I see this sadness in everyone. I find that I have fellow travelers.
There is a Native American parable that goes something like this:
A Cherokee chief was teaching a young man about life. "There is a fight going on inside of me," he said. "There are two wolves. One is full of rage, vengefulness, jealousy, and hate. The other is full of kindness, wisdom, and humility." "Which wolf will win?" wondered the young man. "The one I feed," said the old chief.
When we choose to nourish wolf number two, we are not simply choosing what is righteous or morally superior. We are choosing the only path that leads to the kind of world we all want to live in, one where people are kind to each other, help out in times of need, celebrate victories and mourn losses with a sense of humbleness, and maintain a powerful sense of inner balance that enables us to hold these qualities through good times and bad.
You might wonder to yourself, but how can I be this open and generous in a world that is not? Well, somebody has got to go first. I vote for you.
"When two great forces oppose each other,
the victory will go
to the one that knows how to yield."
-- Lao Tzu
For more by Susan Piver, click here.
For more on emotional wellness, click here.