“I’m sure you’ll understand,” he said.
Well, no, I didn’t understand. And I really didn’t understand why I didn’t say so. Why couldn’t I just say, flat out, that I didn’t understand, and demand an explanation?
It’s a strange weakness, this desire to get along. Even when you’re being screwed, be polite and submissive about it. We don’t want to make waves. And we certainly do not want to be ostracized for not accepting the wisdom of the crowd. Heaven forbid!
Conformity is king. Besides, maybe it’s me. Maybe there’s something wrong with me, that I don’t see things the same as all the rest of them. They can’t all be wrong, can they? Hey, what does that even mean? Wrong, right? Are they absolutes, eternal and for all time? Or is right and wrong ephemeral; now you see them, now you don’t. Do we put right and wrong, good and bad up for a vote? Majority rule?
“I’m sure you’ll understand.” Well, no I don’t understand. Nobody asked my opinion. Nobody wanted to hear from me and get my point of view. We are told how it’s supposed to be, and those who accept it get a pat on the head and a straight ‘A’. Those who question get derided and a failing grade. No, I don’t understand. I don’t lie. I don’t steal. I want nothing from anyone that I can’t derive by means of honest negotiation and by agreement of all parties involved. I want nothing from anyone who isn’t willing to provide it and, even then, I want to earn it, work for it.
“I’m sure you’ll understand.” No, I don’t understand. How can it be my fault, when I have done nothing? How can I be responsible to others, when they have shown no responsibility to me? Right and wrong have been decided. I am expected to comply. If I do not, it is on me. I am a bad person. Many, I think, would rather comply than question or object. Their need to belong, their desire to suffer as little stress as possible, causes them to comply, with little or no thought, with nearly no consideration of all points of view, of right and wrong, fair or unfair. They comply for the sake of comfort and convenience. For the sake of security. To have friends and to be accepted. On the face of it, that all seems reasonable; but with the slightest examination, it is seen for what is, cultural totalitarianism.
“I’m sure you’ll understand,” he said.
Yes, I do understand. And that is why I will fight him with everything I’ve got, until the day I die.
Comments?
I understand, also, Rad. Well said.
Max Stirner talks a lot about this in his wonderful book The Ego and its Own published 1840
Its still considered a scandalous book
It’s about why egoists are shunned by society but you can be one anyway for the sake of true freedom
Am paraphrasing here as he does have cynicism about freedom itself
So he calls it “ownness”
Having your ownness
Having your ownness