This is dense with information ... but well worth reading several times.
I subscribe to both Joshua Slocum and the Ponerology Substack, but am too overwhelmed with other notifications to keep up with them. But this post connects a lot of the dots relevant to my own experiences of virtue signaling and weaponizing empathy here in Japan.
As a tenured professor, I was obliged by the Ministry of Education to act as a bridge between students and society through community outreach activities, and also felt a personal moral obligation and gratitude for the opportunity.
But I observed that some Japanese, including colleagues, were uncomfortable with the thought of a foreigner helping out with social problems they would rather keep from foreign eyes.
This is a whole other ball of wax in identity politics and cultural norms, but one term I read here coined a distasteful memory of a local man who was unfortunate in being born severely handicapped, but taking full advantage of that as a 'sacred victim'. Despite his physical handicap, he was a twisted little narcissist.
'The limits of my language mean the limits of my world. — Ludwig Wittgenstein
I'm glad you hung in there and got through it Steve. I also get the cultural shame aspect and the need to conceal it from foreigners despite having been immersed in Japanese culture and life for possibly most of your life (I'm guessing).
Your story of the sacred victim reminded me of my daughter's ex friend. She has cerebral palsy and is an angel and good student so all the adults love her (mostly female) but is a complete nightmare to her friends, including my daughter to the point that my daughter switched schools to get away from her and the enabling bully group. My daughter tried to be understanding and supportive but discovered that nothing was enough for this girl and that she wouldn't hesitate to start rumours or fabricate lies about her to others to assert control. It's unfortunate that her family treats like the poor victim and compensated by giving her everything possible and pander to her whims, so she learned how to use her frailty to manipulate adults and everyone else into getting her way. When anyone tries to alert an adult authority about her covert narcissistic behaviour, they deny it or tell the person to try to get along with her anyway. This is how adults enable sacred victimhood of someone who is developing into a menace to other adults.
I dislike the term "virtue signaling" because it's politically loaded, but I use the term "spotlighting" for the same thing. It's nasty behavior, and a little painful to receive.
To me, hearing a tenured professor with global community call a disabled man a "twisted little narcissist" brings up some... Questions. Used properly, empathy should empower you to metabolize your own resentment. It should be hard to weaponize. You're not supposed to forsake empathy for yourself. You can say no to helping someone when you lack the capacity, without martyring yourself to their response under duress.
A disability can make a person into an insecure tyrant. Disability is an extremely unpleasant and humiliating experience, and that leaks. There are traumas that stunt people's development, so there are wounded children in adult bodies, throwing tantrums. It's an ugly thing. Life gets ugly sometimes. You are equipped to thrive anyway. You have the power to grieve the situation. A parent can say no to a child and endure the cries without taking them so personally as to say "twisted little narcissist". Compassionately, what on earth is wrong with you?
Perhaps you weren't trusted to weigh in on another culture's domestic affairs because you have not shown a strength of character that matches your social stature. You dope yourself on intellectualized moralism, but your skin is thin and your judgments... A little harsh. I wouldn't trust you either, personally. Get some cardio, and some perspective.
Yeah, people get pretty vicious. It's a big mess out here.
I had to put that in Google translate. But why did you choose to write in Japanese? To flex? Yeah, I put you on the defensive. My comment was pretty harsh and presumptuous. I don't know if I'm sorry about it yet. I'll reflect.
I have some pretty painful stories, with a death toll as well, around similar cultural dysfunction in New Orleans, LA over the past ten years. Yeah, you have more specific experience with Japanese culture than me. I think I see a common thread through it all. But we can talk about that another time, if you're up for it.
I see, and share, your grief. I wish you well. Please take the time to digest the real content of what I said. Despite my aggressive posture, it was an act of respect. I chose to trust your mind and heart, or I would have said nothing. I wasn't taunting you when I said you had the power to grieve. I'm not playing petty dominance games, I'm not trolling. I'm not trying to prove I'm smarter than you. I am being a bit of a jerk. I guess it was a sloppy gambit for your attention to a point I feel very strongly about, and I think it's urgent for our moment in history.
I've said some ugly stuff about my experiences too. That's human. But really, the answer is not less compassion, but more. Starting with ourselves. That's my message. Let it be ugly.
This was such a good riff, but you really, really lost me with that last one. It's not a good example. Israelis sacrificed their safety when they colluded with Britain and the US to commit a century-long campaign of violent settler colonialism and apartheid. The list of heinous crimes against humanity is so nauseatingly huge. To zoom in on the latest frame like that is pretty ghastly.
That's war, dude. Starting a war to establish an ethnostate comes with certain risks. I dunno what to tell you. It's honestly "toxic compassion" to frame Israel in a neutral light here. Nationalism and fundamentalism, cynically wielded by imperialism, is the root cause. Sure, all individuals caught up in it deserve compassion. I would personally include the Holocaust victims repeating a cycle of trauma in that. That's human. I get it. I see you and love you (now knock it off). But Palestinians did not strike first. The massacres began in the early 20th century. I'm not gonna dig up the citations here. Everyone already knows the truth anyway.
Aside from all that, I don't think that you have the right paradigm, overall. You're on the right track with unpacking empathy from all its LinkedIn buzz-variants. Keep pulling that thread: Compassion is a good thing, and martyrdom is an egotistical subversion of it. Just like Bundy and his crutches. That's not "toxic" compassion, it's just a self-indulgent performative spotlight stunt that appropriates the concept. Yeah, that's a problem.
Compassion is hard, behind-the-scenes, humanizing work. It does sometimes involve self-sacrifice, but not total abandonment of personal boundaries or basic hygiene. And the recipients of compassion, with their wounds and traumas, can be nasty and gross and even dangerous. That's why compassion is so much work! But it usually pays, in my personal experience. It is also necessary for a healthy ecology, without which a healthy economy is not possible.
It takes a majority of us to get it right. Let's ditch the spotlight and cooperate on the unglamorous work of interdependent thriving. We've fallen behind on it and it's starting to fester. Toxic, indeed.
Ironically, you've demonstrated toxic compassion perfectly. You bypassed empathy and went straight to moral certainty. You made no attempt to understand my argument before deciding what I believe, assigning motives to me, and defending the group you've designated as the victim. Instead, you went on a long winded rant about history and who you believe deserves compassion while demonstrating none of the empathic process yourself.
You can't claim compassion while bypassing empathy, no matter how you choose to define it.
No, you got defensive and didn't fully read my comment. All parties to the conflict deserve compassion. But it's not a good example. I spent a lot of heart and thought on that, it wasn't a rant. Engage with it.
iatrogenic, & paraphrasing (& mocking is the repeating words which is important that some words used to define relatable behaviors, ideas & whatnot are so commonplace to where meaning is diminished. Thought experiment of argument "Oh, now you're mocking me" — "Oh, I'm mocking YOU?" (type thing).
There's always been tendency to influence people to be positive about risking or even degrading their physical health for a cause of "greater good". The industrial era folk hero, Joe Magarac, is really a tale of self-sacrifice with ambiguous reward that doesn't exist in reality.
When a group of people insist a person put themselves at physical risk to be accepted in the group then that is civil rights infringement, but in some cases there is a implicit trade-off where there is protection from external dangers by being within the group. If the physical risk is expected and no protection in exchange then that is what I think you mean by the term. (That prior bit was explained to me by a late MC who did federal time for drug dealing.)
This is very helpful. The clarification of empathy (and its various forms) and compassion is powerful. Accepting that 'understanding is one thing, and what we do with that understanding is another' is empowering.
Whoa.
This is dense with information ... but well worth reading several times.
I subscribe to both Joshua Slocum and the Ponerology Substack, but am too overwhelmed with other notifications to keep up with them. But this post connects a lot of the dots relevant to my own experiences of virtue signaling and weaponizing empathy here in Japan.
As a tenured professor, I was obliged by the Ministry of Education to act as a bridge between students and society through community outreach activities, and also felt a personal moral obligation and gratitude for the opportunity.
But I observed that some Japanese, including colleagues, were uncomfortable with the thought of a foreigner helping out with social problems they would rather keep from foreign eyes.
This is a whole other ball of wax in identity politics and cultural norms, but one term I read here coined a distasteful memory of a local man who was unfortunate in being born severely handicapped, but taking full advantage of that as a 'sacred victim'. Despite his physical handicap, he was a twisted little narcissist.
'The limits of my language mean the limits of my world. — Ludwig Wittgenstein
Thank you for extending my world.
I'm glad you hung in there and got through it Steve. I also get the cultural shame aspect and the need to conceal it from foreigners despite having been immersed in Japanese culture and life for possibly most of your life (I'm guessing).
Your story of the sacred victim reminded me of my daughter's ex friend. She has cerebral palsy and is an angel and good student so all the adults love her (mostly female) but is a complete nightmare to her friends, including my daughter to the point that my daughter switched schools to get away from her and the enabling bully group. My daughter tried to be understanding and supportive but discovered that nothing was enough for this girl and that she wouldn't hesitate to start rumours or fabricate lies about her to others to assert control. It's unfortunate that her family treats like the poor victim and compensated by giving her everything possible and pander to her whims, so she learned how to use her frailty to manipulate adults and everyone else into getting her way. When anyone tries to alert an adult authority about her covert narcissistic behaviour, they deny it or tell the person to try to get along with her anyway. This is how adults enable sacred victimhood of someone who is developing into a menace to other adults.
I can only imagine what you saw too.
I dislike the term "virtue signaling" because it's politically loaded, but I use the term "spotlighting" for the same thing. It's nasty behavior, and a little painful to receive.
To me, hearing a tenured professor with global community call a disabled man a "twisted little narcissist" brings up some... Questions. Used properly, empathy should empower you to metabolize your own resentment. It should be hard to weaponize. You're not supposed to forsake empathy for yourself. You can say no to helping someone when you lack the capacity, without martyring yourself to their response under duress.
A disability can make a person into an insecure tyrant. Disability is an extremely unpleasant and humiliating experience, and that leaks. There are traumas that stunt people's development, so there are wounded children in adult bodies, throwing tantrums. It's an ugly thing. Life gets ugly sometimes. You are equipped to thrive anyway. You have the power to grieve the situation. A parent can say no to a child and endure the cries without taking them so personally as to say "twisted little narcissist". Compassionately, what on earth is wrong with you?
Perhaps you weren't trusted to weigh in on another culture's domestic affairs because you have not shown a strength of character that matches your social stature. You dope yourself on intellectualized moralism, but your skin is thin and your judgments... A little harsh. I wouldn't trust you either, personally. Get some cardio, and some perspective.
この地で教育者および地域活動家として過ごした45年近くの歳月の中で、彼――そしてさらに不気味なことに――彼の信奉者たち（つまり「神聖な犠牲者」）は、私が人間性に対する見解に決して完全に組み込むことができなかった例外的な存在だった。今振り返ってみると、その個人的な経験のおかげで、現在のアメリカの国家政治における社会的力学について、少しばかり洞察が深まった気がする。とはいえ、ほんの少しに過ぎない。
しかし、その一方で、あなたには畏敬の念を抱いている。
日本の集団力学や文化的背景に対するあなたの理解……個人的な記憶の、短くも極めて独特な一例から、ある人物を的確に要約するあなたの能力……そして、研究やあなた自身の個人的な経験に言及することなく、心理学の用語を用いてこれを成し遂げるあなたの能力！ しかもミュージシャンでもあるのか？ プログラマーでもあるのか？
賢い男だ。
チャド。
ああ、ちなみに私はただの「元」教授です。主に職場環境のせいで、若い日本人女性同僚が自殺した際、抗議の意を込めて辞職しました。
でも、あなたなら、これについても似たような文章を数段落書いて説明できるかもしれませんね。
Yeah, people get pretty vicious. It's a big mess out here.
I had to put that in Google translate. But why did you choose to write in Japanese? To flex? Yeah, I put you on the defensive. My comment was pretty harsh and presumptuous. I don't know if I'm sorry about it yet. I'll reflect.
I have some pretty painful stories, with a death toll as well, around similar cultural dysfunction in New Orleans, LA over the past ten years. Yeah, you have more specific experience with Japanese culture than me. I think I see a common thread through it all. But we can talk about that another time, if you're up for it.
I see, and share, your grief. I wish you well. Please take the time to digest the real content of what I said. Despite my aggressive posture, it was an act of respect. I chose to trust your mind and heart, or I would have said nothing. I wasn't taunting you when I said you had the power to grieve. I'm not playing petty dominance games, I'm not trolling. I'm not trying to prove I'm smarter than you. I am being a bit of a jerk. I guess it was a sloppy gambit for your attention to a point I feel very strongly about, and I think it's urgent for our moment in history.
I've said some ugly stuff about my experiences too. That's human. But really, the answer is not less compassion, but more. Starting with ourselves. That's my message. Let it be ugly.
This was such a good riff, but you really, really lost me with that last one. It's not a good example. Israelis sacrificed their safety when they colluded with Britain and the US to commit a century-long campaign of violent settler colonialism and apartheid. The list of heinous crimes against humanity is so nauseatingly huge. To zoom in on the latest frame like that is pretty ghastly.
That's war, dude. Starting a war to establish an ethnostate comes with certain risks. I dunno what to tell you. It's honestly "toxic compassion" to frame Israel in a neutral light here. Nationalism and fundamentalism, cynically wielded by imperialism, is the root cause. Sure, all individuals caught up in it deserve compassion. I would personally include the Holocaust victims repeating a cycle of trauma in that. That's human. I get it. I see you and love you (now knock it off). But Palestinians did not strike first. The massacres began in the early 20th century. I'm not gonna dig up the citations here. Everyone already knows the truth anyway.
Aside from all that, I don't think that you have the right paradigm, overall. You're on the right track with unpacking empathy from all its LinkedIn buzz-variants. Keep pulling that thread: Compassion is a good thing, and martyrdom is an egotistical subversion of it. Just like Bundy and his crutches. That's not "toxic" compassion, it's just a self-indulgent performative spotlight stunt that appropriates the concept. Yeah, that's a problem.
Compassion is hard, behind-the-scenes, humanizing work. It does sometimes involve self-sacrifice, but not total abandonment of personal boundaries or basic hygiene. And the recipients of compassion, with their wounds and traumas, can be nasty and gross and even dangerous. That's why compassion is so much work! But it usually pays, in my personal experience. It is also necessary for a healthy ecology, without which a healthy economy is not possible.
It takes a majority of us to get it right. Let's ditch the spotlight and cooperate on the unglamorous work of interdependent thriving. We've fallen behind on it and it's starting to fester. Toxic, indeed.
Ironically, you've demonstrated toxic compassion perfectly. You bypassed empathy and went straight to moral certainty. You made no attempt to understand my argument before deciding what I believe, assigning motives to me, and defending the group you've designated as the victim. Instead, you went on a long winded rant about history and who you believe deserves compassion while demonstrating none of the empathic process yourself.
You can't claim compassion while bypassing empathy, no matter how you choose to define it.
No, you got defensive and didn't fully read my comment. All parties to the conflict deserve compassion. But it's not a good example. I spent a lot of heart and thought on that, it wasn't a rant. Engage with it.
iatrogenic, & paraphrasing (& mocking is the repeating words which is important that some words used to define relatable behaviors, ideas & whatnot are so commonplace to where meaning is diminished. Thought experiment of argument "Oh, now you're mocking me" — "Oh, I'm mocking YOU?" (type thing).
There's always been tendency to influence people to be positive about risking or even degrading their physical health for a cause of "greater good". The industrial era folk hero, Joe Magarac, is really a tale of self-sacrifice with ambiguous reward that doesn't exist in reality.
When a group of people insist a person put themselves at physical risk to be accepted in the group then that is civil rights infringement, but in some cases there is a implicit trade-off where there is protection from external dangers by being within the group. If the physical risk is expected and no protection in exchange then that is what I think you mean by the term. (That prior bit was explained to me by a late MC who did federal time for drug dealing.)
It really seems as if narcissistic traits are at the root of people hijacking empathy and compassion.
You said it!
This is very helpful. The clarification of empathy (and its various forms) and compassion is powerful. Accepting that 'understanding is one thing, and what we do with that understanding is another' is empowering.