The irrelevant hostility

The more one is on a -more or less- permanent offensive stance (whether obviously offensive or not) the more he will need reasons to be that. He will have to feel offended by things that are not meant to offend. He will need to imagine offensive things that don’t exist in present space and time. A mere ‘no’ can feel devastating to him and put him to imagine being attacked and crashed.  Thus, he demands to be loved and agreed with, regardless of how he acts himself. He also doesn’t allow love and agreement between others and he tries to turn one against the other, because he thinks they will unite against him.

As long as you care to not give others more than they can handle, those guys appear to be your chains. But it isn’t you who is in chains, it is their own intolerance against anything that is not in perfect agreement with them. All they can handle is a person that pretends to agree with them and like them. The fact that they exert strength unreasonably and attack and try to reduce whomever doesn’t agree with them, makes things appear the opposite than what they are. It makes the tolerant ones appear weak, and the intolerant ones strong. It also makes the guilty ones become prosecutors, and those who wonder what they might have done wrong feel guilty, ashamed and so on.

The more tolerant one needs to feel guilty, ashamed and otherwise bad for himself, in order for the intolerant one to remain oblivious to what he actually does and to feel ‘right’. And one can be very oblivious and ‘right’, within his imaginary war.

But it is all the opposite.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s