Why should I have to opt out of violence? brutality and bloodshed shouldn't be weaved into the very structures of society I hate proclaiming "I'm vegan" like it's something special and exotic othering myself in the eyes of those around me Why am I the odd man out for not killing animals? it feels like I'm living life upside down having to justify myself to those with viscera and flesh stuck between their teeth receiving weird looks for eating a plum rather than slitting the throat of another being Why is it my responsibility to explain choosing peace? compassion and kindness were supposed to be the default but in reality they are so far from the norm that I am a sensation, a social pariah for caring for others for simply trying to exist without victimizing those not even worthy enough to be considered victims Why is it my job to not ruffle any feathers? years spent learning how to make myself small enough not to offend the inhumane actions of the masses choking off my own inner sense of justice and morality just to share a meal with those I love as they grin between bites of slaughtered babies and mock me for not partaking in the carnage Why am I the one left to make sense of this madness? the surreal sensation of a sinking stone inside my stomach as I snuff out the ever swelling righteous rage before it spills out of my tight lips and separates me from all the "normal" people that I desperately want to share my life with despite their conditioned participation in egregious daily cruelty Why is it weird and sentimental for me to cry when the realities of this world come crashing down on me? when I can't help but remember the shuddering suffering of billions and billions of precious innocent beings being exploited and mercilessly tortured and confined on behalf of my own friends and family Why do I have to opt out of violence? why am I part of a pathetically small minority of people who live by the values we all pretend to have I'll never understand why it's even up for debate whether we should subjugate and slaughter or take the life of another for a fucking flavor
I’ve always loved taking personality tests and reading my horoscope. I’ve never really believed that they were scientific or fully accurate, but like tarot cards, I still think they have value because they reveal to you the way in which you view yourself. This is reflected back to us by what parts we agree with or identify with and which parts we don’t. Besides, everyone likes to learn more about themselves right?
After hearing about the enneagram test on a podcast, I decided to take a free one and see what it had to say and what I may be able to learn about myself from it. This test groups everyone into 9 different personality types. I actually ended up getting identical scores for both types 5 and 1 on one test, with five coming out slightly ahead of 1 on another site’s test. After reading the breakdown of these types, I definitely identify most with the type five description. Now, whether you believe in these types of tests or not, I want to break down my results to explain how regardless of if it’s true, it has allowed me to learn more about myself.
The gist of type 5s are that they love to obtain more and more knowledge. They have a tendency to obsess and isolate because of this. They really prefer to have a large knowledge base before publicly commenting on any topic. Their quest for knowledge stems from a sense that they are lacking something and not as capable as those around them. Their hope is that if they learn enough, they will someday find that missing piece keeping them from integrating with the rest of the world. Their biggest challenge is balancing their personal pursuits and interests with maintaining relationships with other people.
This description fits me pretty perfectly. I believe even in an old post where I listed my values, knowledge was near the top. My intelligence and collection of facts and information is one of the few aspects of myself that I truly take pride in. One of my coworkers has been making a lot of jokes and comments about how smart I am lately and he has no idea how much that really means to me. Despite valuing my intelligence and diligently working to always expand it, I still fear that I am not as smart as I hope I am. Receiving that validation from others is very comforting to me. It is also true that I have a hard time not always putting my private goals and pursuits ahead of spending time with other people and building meaningful relationships.
Reading the description of type 1s actually made me really sad. Basically it says that type 1s are perfectionists. They are unreasonable and often unrealistic standards for everyone in their lives, especially themselves. They have a very strong sense of right and wrong, with little room for any grey areas. They are often irritated, annoyed, and unhappy when the world is not able to live up to their standards of the way things should be. They can be important contributors to change in the world as they are willing to make huge personal sacrifices in the service of what they believe is morally right. While they feel very deeply and are passionate people, they do not express this side of themselves to the world. For this reason, others can perceive them to be cold and unfeeling.
While I do agree that this type fits me like a glove as well, I don’t think it bodes well for me in the grand scheme of things. My one disagreement would be about having unreasonable, unrealistic standards for other people. While I suppose I do expect a lot from people at times, I never really think anyone will be able to meet those expectations, and I don’t hold it against them. However, the same cannot be said for my expectations of myself. I do tend to think that no matter how much I do or how much I improve, it is never enough. Yet, it’s hard for me to even admit that a lot of the standards I set for myself are too high. It feels much more natural to believe that I’m simply not good enough, and that’s the real problem. It feels weird to think of myself as a perfectionist, although other people have told me I am. I just imagine a perfectionist to be someone who is pretty close to perfect in most of what they do. To me, I am so far away from where I want to be, it sounds ridiculous to call myself a perfectionist. I do have a strong (mostly black and white) sense of right and wrong, but I don’t really see myself as a particularly “moral” person. I think I do a lot of very awful things in my own self-interest all the time. I just beat myself up for them later more than someone else might.
With the insight from these two different personality descriptions, I am able to integrate key points to form a clearer image of my strengths and weaknesses as a person and how I might improve my life and relationships. At the very least, it helps me get an idea of the way others perceive me. Granted, a lot of these things I already know about myself, but still it can be helpful to see them reiterated from a third party. As a younger person, or someone who hasn’t done a lot of self-reflection though, this information could be a valuable first step towards understanding yourself.
A few of the things I’ve learned from the enneagram test are firstly, that I am doing enough. I am good enough. I know enough. I shouldn’t be deterred by my high standards and expectations. There’s not anything inherently wrong with having them, as long as I remember that I don’t need to meet them to feel worthy or accepted. If I can overcome my fear of failure and insufficiency, I will be capable of making a truly significant impact on the issues that matter to me. I’ve also learned that it’s important for me to practice stepping out of my mind more regularly and being in the present moment instead of lost in my own inner world.
I encourage you to take a free test yourself here. While this website has a free test, it does not allow you access to as much information about you type results. Once you know your type, I suggest you go to this site to read about your type in more detail. (They have a test, but it isn’t free.) If you decide to take the test, let me know what your type is and whether or not you think it’s an accurate description of your personality. What do you think of these tests overall? Are they accurate and reliable? Yes? No? Does it matter? Would love to hear some feedback. Regardless, I hope you have fun and gain at least a little insight into who you are.
Up until I was around 20 years old, maybe even older, I didn’t really know very much about politics. I honestly wish I could go back to those simpler times. It feels like I had a lot less to worry about back then. It’s always easier not to know. My entire family are democrates, so that is about as far as my political awareness went. I was taught vaguely that poor/low-income people were democrates, rich people were republicans. A very simplified explanation of the two parties in America, but I still believe it holds up. At least that’s what you would expect.
As I got older I came to find that there are tons of poor people voting passionately against their own interests. A good portion of the republican base in fact. I was astounded even more when I became a social worker and got to listen to clients who could hardly survive on the small amount of government assistance they received simultaneously complain about “lazy, good-for-nothing” people taking advantage of the system and voting to cut social security benefits. They seemed totally disconnected from the fact that they were the people their beloved Fox News hosts were referring to when they condemn these societal moochers.
I guess they thought it couldn’t have been in reference to them, because they were good people. They hadn’t done anything wrong. They weren’t worthless, scheming, monsters taking advantage of other people. Yet they were still quick to jump on the bandwagon of hate, directing it at some imaginary, caricatures of people that were making it harder for people like them who really do need that help to be taken seriously. It always broke my heart to meet clients that continuously tried to justify their need and convince me that they weren’t just “some drug addict” or something.
What has been reminding me of all of this lately, is the controversy over the unemployment income many Americans have been relying on since this pandemic began over a year ago. Everyone is able to see the absurdity of going out to find work, when you would receive more money by staying on unemployment instead. It is the perception of this absurdity that varies. Conservatives cry: You can’t give everyone so much money or else they’ll never go back to work! While liberals and progressives insist: If these people were paid a living wage to begin with, this wouldn’t be a problem. We must raise the minimum wage so that these people have an incentive to return to work.
Obviously I agree with the latter. The government didn’t just arbitrarily decide on an amount to pay, they based it roughly on how much these people would need to survive. If working full-time isn’t allowing you to earn that measly amount, clearly THAT is the problem. Not that the government is giving you enough to live on. This seems so simple to me, but I know that nearly half of the country would disagree. These types of disheartening conflicts are the reason that after passionately throwing myself into politics for a few years, I’ve begun trying to ignore it all together again. It is just to painful. It seems so hopeless. I’m tired of fighting.
One of the main things I don’t understand though, is what other people think the government’s purpose is. I’m starting to think my idea of it has been misguided and idealistic. It seems like throughout school I was taught that the government, at least in America, was established “for the people, by the people.” I was under the impression that it’s only purpose was to organize our collective resources as a nation so that we could best serve the entire population. In my mind, government was just a way to work together as a society so that we could accomplish things we wouldn’t be able to as individual citizens. Not only that, I thought it’s purpose was to provide a safety net for the most vulnerable among us, to help people. Not only for moral reasons, but to the ultimate benefit of the whole. Having a system to take care of the less fortunate gives those people the opportunity to some day give back to society again. At the very least it would deter them from criminal activity, because they wouldn’t need to engage in that to survive.
I hear all the time that “it’s not the government’s job to support you.” But isn’t it though? Isn’t that why we have a government in the first place? To take care of our citizens? I’m often tempted to ask these people what they think the government’s job is, if not to protect us and support us. I’m trying to stay curious and not let the unsettling mindsets of so many people get to me too much. It’s just not worth the grief it causes me. And I’ve accepted that fighting about it won’t make a difference. All I can do is watch is stunned silence, or turn away.
I have been reading Les Miserables for the last few days. I am incredibly shocked that I never knew it was a book as well as a play until now. I was really missing out. Anyway, I have just finished the chapters detailing Jean Valjean’s (Monsieur Madeleine’s) inner turmoil regarding the right thing to do in the case of his mistaken identity. It is truly a very interesting philosophical question. On the one hand, it seems clearly “right” to clear up the misunderstanding and spare this stranger a fate he does not deserve on your account. However, should Monsieur Madeleine give himself up as Jean Valjean, would not even more people be made to suffer as a result? After all he has practically created his own society. All within that society benefit from his presence and guidance. Not least of which, Fantine, who should surely die without ever seeing her child again if he goes to Arras and interfere with the trial.
This section of Les Miserables really highlights the complexities of morality. The “right” thing to do in life is quite often unclear. I can see why Monsieur Madeleine wrestled with this problem as he did. I still don’t really know what I believe the truly moral decision would be. If it were me (myself being nowhere as upright and honorable as Monsieur Madeleine) I would have allowed the trail to go on. I would have felt terribly guilty, but I would have also felt guilty if I would have decided to leave my community and poor Fantine in order to save a stranger whom by a terrible twist of fate was mistaken for me. In some ways, both decisions are moral. And in other ways both are selfish and unfair.
I am very interested to see how Monsieur’s decision to go to Arras works out in the end. Will his conscious be pacified? Or will he suffer with the consequences wrought on M- sur M- and Fantine? This painful reflection of life’s more difficult moral questions is undoubtably one of the reasons Les Miserables has earned it’s place among the great works of history.
One would hope that merely the resolve to be “good” would be enough. Yet we see that even that does not nullify all of problems laid before us. Sometimes there is no “right” answer. Sometimes no matter what decision you make, someone will be made to suffer because of it. Even the decision not to act can result in grave consequences as in this case.
What a complex, confusing, and often cruel world we live in. There is something truly incredible about seeing that so perfectly reflected in a novel. To be able to hold these heavy problems in your hands. To see the inner struggles of another and know that we are not alone in our own. To have such strong concern and sympathy produced for a fictional character. The written word is an awe-inspiring thing.