
Happy?


I recently got a note from somebody telling me he wasn’t interested in taking sides, or even forming an opinion, but in learning the truth about a conflict we are mutually interested in. The comment reminded me of an essential thing about truth. It looks different depending on our point of view, how much information we have, our tolerance for cognitive discomfort, our level of self-awareness and honesty, while at the same time, things are objectively more or less true when viewed in light of the facts, and in the context of the situation. Truth can get famously foggy during a moral battle.
There is an eternal debate, among eggheads (old term for intellectuals) about the nature of truth and morality, the nature of reality. These brainy types like the structure and rigor of science, even when talking about matters of the spirit and the soul. Two prominent schools of thought are moral relativism and moral absolutism, both terms also used as pejoratives. Most people simply believe in the truth that confirms their view of things and call it a day. Academics write books, teach courses and defend their school of thought in the debate over the true nature of cherished, elusive truth. Some views are closer to the truth than others, alternative facts are not the same as actual facts. The academic stand-off goes something like this:
Moral relativists believe that truth, and its close cousin morality, are not absolute but change according to culture, social condition and historical epoch. An example of this lack of universal morality/truth would be leaving a new born baby on a hill top to die. Many, perhaps most, would recoil from this practice, condemn it as immoral. But what if the baby’s mother, and the entire community, were starving to death during a drought? People living in this harsh environment would not judge a mother for exposing her child for a quick death rather than struggling to keep the doomed baby alive, using valuable resources that others with a real chance of survival need. In fact, in that case, she’s doing the right thing. Sadly, this rare example, though hard to refute, muddies the discussion of universal right and wrong. If all morality is relative, who’s to say who is moral and who is acting immorally — how do any of us know the best way to act?
Moral absolutists believe there is a universal morality, an immutable set of truths that apply across all cultures, times and places. Murder, for example, the willful taking of an innocent life in a malicious or depraved manner — universally evil. If there are universal truths, and it’s hard to imagine that something like refraining from murder is not a universally valued trait (but, see example above) then laws can be made based on these principles, to combat evil impulses. Sadly, moral absolutists are often religious hardliners with no tolerance for the viewpoints of those who don’t embrace their religious views. Their moral absolutism allows them to believe morally problematic things, like the abortion doctor who was killed outside the clinic is burning in Hell, while the one who shot him gets a wink from Jesus Christ.
Truth can be elusive, though only in academia (and politics) are there only two ways to see it. Truth is compatible with both of the warring views above, it is not always one thing or the other.
Facts exist — I punched you in the nose, your nose bled, you called the cops, the cops arrived and told us both to sober up and fuck off. The truth is that we had a conflict that turned violent, you were threatened enough to call the cops. We will tell different stories about the facts.
You will insist the punch was completely unprovoked, that I blindsided you, fooled you into relaxing just before bashing you. That will be your “truth” and those sympathetic to you will accept it. My story will have a detailed set-up, the context that came before the blow, the reason you needed to be hit right at that moment, and those who relate to my telling will be certain I was well provoked before I busted you in the head.
The reflex of many people is to believe that the real truth exists somewhere between those two stories. Somebody standing close by while the conflict escalated will be better situated to evaluate the stories, we’d think, but they have biases too. Plus they won’t necessarily know the history, the smug look, repetition of the most hated phrases, and how they predictably ratcheted up the tension. Context is important, though not always easily discernible.
You have the classic “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” In the case of the more than a thousand angry people who stormed the Capitol after sending 140 cops to the hospital, we can call them insurrectionists, waving a Confederate flag as their belligerently rebellious forebears would have, after sacking the Capitol. Others call them “patriots” who were engaged in “legitimate political discourse” and are now being held, totally unfairly, as “political prisoners” and martyrs. Those who blow themselves up for their beliefs are called martyrs, or insane, murderous assholes, depending.
So too in personal life. Your deepest needs will dictate the truths you believe. Truth can’t be divorced from opinion, since what we believe to be true forms the basis of our opinions. An opinion based on truth is more legitimate than one based on spin, color, a persuasive, selective retelling of events that leaves out important facts. Events and the sequence of how things unfolded, the cause and effect, how one thing led to another, are the building blocks of truth. Not everyone is prepared to deal with a truth that is upsetting and potentially destabilizing, like: the peacemaker on his moral high horse has also deployed irritating gas, which had nothing to do with his mission to make peace, in the name of making peace.
You can find yourself in a perplexing emotional cul-de-sac, very, very hard to see any way out. You can ruminate, follow theories, compare your situation to others, but the limitation in your point of view is partly that it is only your point of view, uninformed by the views of others.
As soon as you share a perplexing riddle with somebody you trust, you open the door to an insight that might seem obvious once it is expressed out loud but would never otherwise occur to you.
For example, I had an embattled friend who lived in a war zone, who could not help provoking me whenever we got into a conversation. No matter how angry I became, I always restrained myself from bashing this annoying guy in the face, because he was my childhood friend, because I try to conduct myself peacefully, because I don’t bash people in the face. This aggravating cycle continued for several years, until, unable to get him to even acknowledge that he was provoking the shit out of me regularly, I had to walk away from our long friendship.
Recently, I entered a vexatious revolving door dispute with my closest friend. No matter what progress we seemed to make in our peace talks, he regularly became indignant and angry. Each time I exerted myself to reassure him of my friendship and calmed him down. This happened more times than I can recall. He recalls this pattern too.
Talking to an old friend who also knew this guy very well, and has lost contact with him, I described the maddening dynamic. My friend becoming instantly angry, me calming him down. As I described this my friend emitted a knowing chuckle.
“Every every time he got mad and you reacted not with anger but with compassion, you were giving him exactly what he’s been looking for, and never received, for his entire life. And you wonder why he couldn’t stop doing it?!”
And it is kind of funny, how easy it is to see, when somebody else points it out. In both of the cases described above, these are people locked in war who lack good impulse control and basic conflict resolution skills. They are both required to hold in enormous amounts of frustration. In each case, when they vent their anger, which they are not generally allowed to do without severe consequences, they were met, in my case, with the mildness of friendship and understanding. Why would either one of them stop doing it? They wouldn’t, they can’t. Until they succeed in killing the thing that is sustaining their belief that they are worthy of love.
Being so patient in a one-sided arrangement like this is not a long-term strategy for friendship or life. Without mutuality, what’s the point of a relationship?
You can ask this question of people who care about you, and you may be surprised by the obvious insights they may have for you.
You can argue, as authoritarians like Ron DeSantis do, that teaching current events in light of the actual past stigmatizes innocent young white children with the sins of their grandfathers, but that is only a transactional argument in the service of increasing your side’s power.
It is harder to argue persuasively about a simple fact like this:

Which is why wealthy fascists will always focus on the terrible burden to the “job creators” a living wage for unskilled workers would impose on the wealthy. They focus on why we must pity the poor super wealthy, who grace us all with their generosity and create a beautiful and just society for us all.
Believe that, you know, the myth of the generous, selfless billionaire philanthropist — or stay focused on the so-called grotesque injustice of one person having more than 10 million others, while children starve in the wealthiest country in human history.
And, of course, people like me completely ignore the fact that people who inherit a mountain of money deserve every penny of it, free of DEATH TAX, while poor people, even if willing to work very hard, only deserve a minimum beyond the bare legal minimum. Period.
Whenever I complained about anything being unfair, my parents’ actions or anything else, my father had a stock answer.
“President Kennedy said ‘life’s unfair’,” my father would say.
I have no doubt that John Kennedy said that, just as I have no doubt he was shot in the head one morning in Dallas, proving his point.
Life is unfair, it is also immensely complicated. Sometimes it’s hard to navigate. I react badly, unfairly, and I hurt you. You react with hurt. I think you are reacting with way too much hurt. Fuck, I didn’t hurt you that badly! Now who’s the victim of unfairness?
“Wait, you just admitted you hurt me. Isn’t it unfair to tell me exactly how much I’m entitled to be hurt? Do you know what I’m going through at this moment, what makes me more vulnerable than usual to suffering from unfair treatment by someone I trust? Did I ever treat you that way?”
Now the back goes up, which happens automatically as the body is poised for fight or flight.
“You want fair, asshole?” and the game is on.
If you are philosophical it may seem possible to arrive at a reasonable understanding of virtually anything. Once you have some data and a framework to understand something you have the way to make otherwise incomprehensible things comprehensible to yourself. Of course, life being unfair, having a coherent framework to talk about something does not always lead to a mutually helpful conversation.
I can try to look at the conflict through the lens of your pain, understanding, for example, why it is so hard for you to compromise or make amends, but that view may cut a little too close to your nerve endings for your comfort. You’ll feel judged, moreso if the view comes close to a painful truth. Much easier to continue fighting over who has the right to feel more hurt by the other. On a bad day you will hear things like “you have to understand that I’m too upset by what you did to listen to why you’re upset.”
Life’s unfair, and part of its unfairness is rooted in its often incoherent nature. In spite of all the theories, and of science, and the role of the marvelous human mind in fathoming things that are difficult, a good part of life simply defies sense, logic, discussion. Unfair, if you ask me.
His campaign Twitter account had this to say last Thursday: “From interviewing clowns, to creating fake ‘posts’ the media continues to down spiral as their attempt to smear me fails. I am getting the job I signed up for done, while you all spiral out of control.”
Here is the same sentiment coming out of the horse’s mouth, if that is his mouth.
It is tempting to live in an anodyne world, where everything is seen in the most painless possible light. An angry conflict that continues for months, for years, poisoning the lives of both parties? Two people who actually love each other deeply who just can’t find the way back to love, yet. A cluster of bad events and painful symptoms that feels catastrophic in your life? Not really that bad, when you compare them to a hundred much, much worse catastrophes. You see? There is a better way to think of bad things, a healthier way to feel about them. Anodyne means sparing pain, or killing it.
In an anodyne worldview, warring parties can easily come to the table and work out peace terms, if only their better angels emerge and lead, which they easily can.
True, but a big fucking “if”, if you know what I’m saying. We don’t, of course, live in a world that always spares us the worst, but … what is the alternative?
Real courage, it seems to me, is looking at difficult things and seeing them for what they are. Seeing things clearly is the first step towards progress. As for the painless view, your truly terrible medical situation does not make my ordinary, if challenging, medical situation any better. For one thing, they are two different things. For another, nothing about your awful situation provides any relief of mine. It is hard to look at a scary thing carefully, a nasty thing, an unthinkable thing. There are terrors out there, watching with unblinking eyes. Death is not a ticket to a perfect world, unless I’m sadly mistaken, but it is surely a ticket from this miraculous one.
We can truly wish that all conflicts could be worked out peacefully, that with enough patience, kindness and intelligence we can work loose the stubborn knots that strangle and keep the war raging. We can believe this, faithfully, in the face of seamless opposition. If only I can be more patient, kinder, smarter, if only I can find the words, the metaphor, the story to make clear that I’m not the enemy… except, that when you are the enemy, that’s what you are.
You know what you do with an enemy? You dig your fortifications and fight like hell.
While you are fighting you can think “I am fighting for love, I’m fighting for peace, I’m fighting for my belief in lifelong friendship.” Your enemy is thinking the same thing, and they are convinced that you don’t know jack shit about love, peace or friendship and for that reason your fortifications must be bombarded, stormed and your army vanquished.
Blessed are the peacemakers, as someone in the days of Jesus said. Then they took one, a man of peace said to perform miracles, and, after a quick trial by mob, nailed him to a cross, along with dozens of others that day. For centuries people who worshipped this Lamb killed each other over the proper way to follow in his path of peace and gentleness. Put their fellow believers to the sword, because they had different customs about the best way to show love to the earthly messenger of God’s love. Anodyne that for me, somebody.
My father hated liars. Lying was a line he wouldn’t cross himself (partly because he didn’t need to, as I will explain in a moment) and something he didn’t forgive in others. I saw very early on that if you made up a false, childish story to hide something from him, he’d see through the lie and label you a lying piece of shit forever.
I understand that a lie can make a lasting impression of lack of character, or sometimes no impression (if the lie is minor and doesn’t really affect you). The trouble is, before you lie you never know which way it will go.
The obvious problem with a lie is that the person you are lying to can be holding the proof of your lie in his hand. “Did you ever write a letter denouncing me to Child Protective Services as a ‘vicious monster unfit to raise children’?” my father could ask. If you said it never happened, and he was able to pull out your childishly pencilled letter to Child Protective Services, point to the verbatim quote right there on the lined paper, that would be it, for the rest of your life, the verdict: fucking liar.
I actually did lie to him once, about having taken mescaline as a teenager. “Did you ever take mescaline?” he asked the sixteen year-old version of me pointedly. I denied it, weakly, and he pulled out a letter I’d written to a girlfriend, written in mercurochrome, which might as well have been blood. The bloody looking scrawling, with plenty of ghoulish drips and glops, was a raving love letter to psychedelics and included a vow to take a lot more of it in the coming days.
“Shit,” I thought, when he disgustedly pulled out the letter “I never mailed that letter to Barbara, must have fallen behind my parents’ bed when I was sleeping in there for the AC when they were out of town…” My lie was a one-off, my father recognized, and no big referendum on my character resulted from it.
Not so for other people we knew who lied to my father, even once. My sister, when she was maybe seven, hatched a caper with her seven year-old accomplice, Jefferey Seigel, to break into my little cash register-shaped piggy bank and use the illicit proceeds to buy candy. The plan went perfectly, until I came home and found the little cash register pried open and empty of its perhaps 80 cents in coins (this would have been 1965 money, probably $5 or $10 in today’s candy buying coin, shit, maybe more — a Milky Way cost maybe a dime in those days, I think) and the list of culprits was quickly narrowed down to my little sister. She rolled on her henchman, after a series of the seven year old’s best attempts at lies was brushed aside by my prosecutor father.
He never let her forget this childish act of piracy on the high seas, made a hundred times worse by the lies about not being a childish brigand. Anytime he got angry at her, the first salvo would be about how she lacked character, stole from her own brother to buy candy, AND LIED ABOUT IT. A little thief, AND a liar.
A lie can be maddening, it’s true, and I’ll never know the roots of my father’s hatred of lying, but the reason people lie is also usually understandable. People don’t often lie without a reason. The reason is most of the time to avoid feeling bad, to avoid having to take responsibility for a mistake, to avoid punishment.
This makes the whole exercise kind of ironic: you lie to avoid telling the truth, to make yourself feel less vulnerable, and this places you in the category of ordinary, very vulnerable, fucking liars. If the lie can be shown to be a lie, you’re a proven liar, and often, in the eyes of many, mostly honest, people, a weak and contemptible person.
My father was an angry brute whenever he felt he needed to be, in the privacy of his own home. He’d never confront people in the street, or at work, but around the dinner table, with just the four of us there, he was fearless and fierce in protecting his turf and asserting his dominance and superiority. In this way he was like many other narcissistic people with terribly painful wounds doing his best to feel like a whole person, in the face of unbearable early life humiliation. I don’t even hold it against him any more. The thing I’m thinking about now is his basic honesty, the way I almost never knew him to lie. As I said, he didn’t need to. Check this out:
If you can control the conversation at every stage, you can change the subject to whatever you want to talk about, before there is any reason to lie. A lie is told when the liar finds himself in a corner, nowhere to go. The truth leads to an electric shock, a lie might get you off without the voltage going through you. The trapped rat chooses option two, sometimes avoids the sting of electricity. My father mastered the art of never finding himself in a corner. No corner trap, no real urgency to lie. He was very good at reframing every argument to quickly turn it back on the person he was trying to cow.
You can say, big man, reframing and gaslighting his own kids!, and sure, when my sister was seven and I was nine, it looked pitiful enough to see this brilliant adult using sophisticated tools to argue his children into submission. He did the same when we were twenty, thirty and forty. I eventually went to law school, in a misguided attempt to do something to please the unpleasable old man, and only after graduating and passing the bar did I fairly easily beat him into silence during our last argument, about two years before he died.
But, check this out, if you lack the adroit mind of my father, and find yourself in a heated no-holds-barred argument with someone in command of the facts, with a clear memory of events, who cuts through your rationales quickly and decisively, you will likely feel cornered. The first line of defense might be just reflexive defensiveness: no, you say I hurt you, but you hurt me, that’s why I did it, because you hurt me, you merciless fuck! A second line, change the subject, to anything. Why are you still talking about this when I’m now talking about that? See, you won’t talk about what I want to talk about, what I need. HOW ABOUT WHAT I need?!!!! You selfish fuck.
If the relentless argument continues, and the attempts at reframing, misdirection, gaslighting and everything else are not working, you find yourself in a corner and there is only one card left: lying. What you said I said I never said and even if I had said it it was only because of what you said, but you are lying, I never said that! In fact, I remember exactly why I said it and I was completely right to say it, even though I never said it!
In the end, one party can shake its head sadly, regarding the liar with a shaming expression on its face. “Dude, at least I never fucking lied to you…”
The person who lied, if humiliated enough to lie and then be caught in the lie, and, the ultimate shame, being name-called a liar? They’re not going to be arguing with you ever again. Neither are they going to do you any more favors, or laugh at your jokes, or invite you to dinner or take any chance of a repeat of the horrific shit that just happened, even though you were completely wrong and they never lied, and, even if they did, it was your fault for backing them into that corner of the cage and putting the electrodes on them, and what trapped rat wouldn’t lie under those merciless conditions, you sick fuck?
My father never found himself in this position, never had to bend the truth at all, because he was a master at his craft. He never found himself cornered. To him, lying during a conflict was contemptible, it showed you had no fucking game.
So, during our long, senseless war, I accepted his perverse gentlemen’s agreement: we fight to the death, and that’s the way it has to be, but we will not consciously lie to each other during our fight to the death. I shook on that deal, for better or worse.
It is the hallmark of a certain kind of person to see all conflict as zero sum, win/lose, an existential fight to the death. Most people, who experience conflict as just part of life, know that with sufficient goodwill conlict can almost always be resolved. Unless you see all conflict as a deadly threat to yourself.
If you know somebody who has no skill at resolving conflict, you can avoid tension with them as much as possible by remaining mild, but understand that one day, if conflict arises between you, there will be no solution outside of the end of the relationship.
This limited view of the world, seeing any kind of conflict, no matter how minor, as a deadly threat and compromise as fatal, pathetic, weakness, cannot be overcome by your understanding, your patience, your love, your friendship, your own willingness to compromise. This type sees compromise as surrender, cowardly capitulation, abject submission, humiliation.
When they do apologize to you (to end the conflict immediately, without further discussion) it will be with restrictions, caveats, qualifications and the need to make you understand that they are only apologizing because you are weak, not because they did anything that hurt you, something that would have hurt them .
Once you see an inability to resolve conflict or compromise, know the score. You are dealing with somebody who has no idea how to work out conflicts with others. It may feel like your fault because you can’t fix something that should otherwise be relatively simple to work out, but after you’ve done everything possible to make amends, and the implacability remains, time to walk away.
That walk will be the best thing you can do for yourself, unbearably sad as it also feels when you take those first steps away from someone you have long cared about.
I have been moving toward surgery to replace my ailing left knee joint. It has been a slow lurch, after years of increasing physical limitation, and the next step is to meet with a surgeon and set up the surgery. Meanwhile, I am doing PT and trying to choose a surgeon, basically blind. The two who were highly recommended do not seem to accept Medicare’s discounted payment.
Last night, after a leisurely walk of about a mile, during which I spent most of that time resting on benches along my little circular route, I went out for a last bit of air. Called Sekhnet and one minute into the call found myself suddenly falling, my right knee, the one that has been bearing most of the weight for a long time, suddenly deciding to send me an urgent message. The knee said “fuck you, I’ve been doing most of the fucking heavy lifting and weight bearing here for a long time, and the burden on me gets heavier and heavier as you fret about your ‘bad’ knee and its thousand dollar brace. How’s this for a bad knee, you merciless, heedless fuck?” With that the knee simply folded as I extended it to shift my weight onto it, without so much as a “watch out, fucker!”
I fell so suddenly that my head hit the pavement, just above the left eye, with a bounce on the side of my nose. I saw the stars you see in a cartoon when somebody gets cracked in the skull, bright white stars with exclamation points. Luckily I didn’t break my head, or even my nose. My left hand, the guitar fretting hand, took the brunt of the impact, as did my left knee and several ribs on the left side. Fucking hell. Managed to make it to a nearby stoop where I sat and took stock of my injuries. Luckily, nothing seemed to be broken. The limp back to my place was painful as hell, the right leg weak, wobbly and inflamed with every step, the skinned left knee cap making its distres known. Up two flights of stairs, which took a bit longer than usual, but not awful.
Bag of frozen peas on my barked left knee cap, with my left hand on top, swaddled in ice. Took two extra strength tylenols, sat back in my easy chair. The pain mercifully yielded as I spoke to Sekhnet, reassured her that I was OK, and took a call from an old friend who gave his two cents about concussion protocol. The idea of a seven hour wait Saturday night at my local Emergency Room didn’t appeal to me, I wasn’t dizzy, hadn’t been knocked out, my vision was fine, my speech wasn’t slurred. In yer proverbial abundance of caution Sekhnet came by and picked me up, took me to the farm to observe me and take me to a hospital if I suddenly took an ominous turn.
Slept OK, much to my surprise. Woke up today feeling twenty-five years older than I did when I woke up yesterday. Fucking hell. Will be wearing my knee brace and walking with the cane until I can get the knee operation worked out. You betcha.