Anxiety and the Modern Age

 

In these times we are living, predictable human behaviours are showing. Once more, the flaws of humans are brought more sharply into focus.

 

One of the most maligned services, health care, is suddenly the darling of all- with everyone screaming, we must protect health care! The thing which cost Obama a lot of his political capital, the thing which people get rich and elected running against, is now the most important thing. To understand why we need not look far- firstly herd behaviour- everyone says it is good so I think it is good too, as I have been told to think that- and, secondly, once again we find ourselves bowled over by the brilliance of William Blake’s understanding of human nature with a quotation I oft use here to explain the seemingly illogical nature of actions:

 

Mutual fear brings peace

‘till selfish love increase

 

Or in other words, we love the EU, health care etc. when it serves us to do so but as soon as the crisis ends, and is forgotten, it becomes, oh how dare people escape being murdered based on ethnicity by coming to MY country, how dare poor people have health care etc.

 

As we are still within the current crisis, one aspect of human nature is being brought to the fore- that is mental health. As many people around the world are personally or indirectly experiencing the consequences of ‘lock-downs’ people are now concerned about mental health. Why? Because they are told that they think about it and because it personally affects them.

 

Anxiety, it seems, is a new invention which has been caused by the current crisis. However, this may blow your socks off, anxiety has existed longer than the last three months it has been around in the West.

 

Anxiety either stems from or is an inherent part of evolution. If the sabre-tooth cat wants to eat you, then you run the F away! Climb a tree and the danger passes. Once one is in the state of anxiety, the body is heightened and chemical reactions, which I will not pretend to understand, take place. Once the danger is adverted the body returns to its normal state. If one chooses to stand and fight the sabre-tooth cat, then the anxiety also goes away with the person being very dead. On a more serious note, once the fight or flight reflex is resolved, the body returns to its natural homeostatic state.

 

The difference between now and then is the nature of the threat. Whilst one can stand or fight (die) against a prehistoric monster (humans, tee hee), the threats which we now encounter, the monsters under the bed, are not those of the corporeal sense, rather they are of the mind. The constant bombardment of the senses by these threats means that the body cannot help by aiding a quick, to quote Monty Python and the Holy Grail, ‘run away!’, so one cannot escape from these threats which plague the thoughts and minds of those who suffer from anxiety.

 

After a while, and as more sources of anxiety enter into the lives and minds of those with anxiety, the body does what it does best. It protects the person. The feeling of emptiness experienced by those with anxiety is simply the mind saying that I cannot cope with all of this right now, so it will bury it all, leave you empty, until a time that it can be dealt with.

 

This feeling of emptiness is terrifying so people engage in behaviours, often destructive, in order to ‘feel’ again (promiscuity, drug abuse, self-isolation, shopping) only to find that these do not help with the forms of anxiety, rather they even, at times, add to them as money, for example, becomes a concern. The truest form of anxiety is the fear of, or the reality of, losing the foundations upon which we build our lives. Once what we take for granted is gone, all we can do, it feels like, is fall. And thusly, the cycle continues, and one finds one’s self lying under their bed too scared to go out.

 

I have neither the right nor qualifications to suggest how to break this cycle (I am not a Facebook poster, after all) but there are those out there who have lived with anxiety for their entire lives, who have a greater experiential or empirical knowledge of anxiety, its causes and solutions. Maybe now would be a good time to break the cycle of our predicable behaviours and consult those who actually know what they are talking about- those either with the condition or those who have an understanding of the condition, or in other words. Experts.

 

 

‘till next time

The ‘I’ in ‘Team’

 

The Spanish football team Barcelona are undergoing a crisis. Currently top of the Spanish first division, La Liga, and in the later stages of the UEFA Champions League, experts are saying that this is the worse Barcelona team for many years, and they are very worried. The reason why they say this (I guess they just wish that Barcelona were bottom, soon to be relegated) is that the team seem to be very dependent on one player- the record breaking six time Ballon d’Or (best player in the world), Argentine superstar and, arguably, the best player of all time (although he is no Stéphane Pierre Yves Guivarc’h) Lionel Messi. The thinking goes- if Messi does not play well then Barcelona ceases to exist.

 

We all know the truism, ‘there is no ‘I’ in ‘Team’’, something which is drilled into us from an early age, however, as with many truisms, it is possible that this fortune cookie wisdom, which fits on a PowerPoint slide, lacks nuance.

 

For all of his undoubted qualities, Messi relies heavily upon other players. If this were not the case, then Barcelona could just field one player and win everything. However, the team need a goalkeeper to keep the ball out of the net, they need defenders to protect the keeper, they need a midfield to win the ball and create chances and they need goal scorers to score when Messi is having an off day. However, for the team to be successful, for Messi to be successful, each and every one of these eleven pieces has to be working at optimum efficiency (as seen in the debacle against Liverpool when Liverpool managed to overturn a three-nil loss to win on aggregate 4-3). This then creates the question, what is a team?

 

A team, as we have seen above, is a collection of individuals who form as one to achieve shared goals. The roles within the team may be different, however, for a team to function each and every role must be working properly.

 

The myth of the team, as purported by the asinine and incorrect truism, is what holds teams back from success. It is what creates a bullying culture in business and is used to justify bad behaviour. What do I mean by this? Well, in order for a team to function well, it has to be a ‘happy’ team. I don’t mean happy as in ‘happy-happy’, I mean happy in the sense of all members feel valued and then, as they are in a good headspace, productivity increases, and the work is done to a higher standard. The truism is often used as a weapon against team members who are unhappy and is wielded by management as a blunt instrument. There is a distinct correlation between management and insecurity- i.e. those who are most insecure wish to obtain power to help their insecurities, which, it turns out, just makes them worse as the sword of Damocles (or in middle-management terms, the toothpick of Jerry) hangs over them and what they fear most is losing that one thing they have coveted.

As the tone and atmosphere of any workplace is set by management (despite what they would have you believe) then the pettiness of the individual will set the tone of the whole team, or as Cato the Elder, a Roman senator, put it, ‘Those who are serious in ridiculous matters will be ridiculous in serious matters’, or in other words- one who is concerned about how things appear (such as hair or shoes etc.) will be grossly ineffective with matters of substance (e.g. bullying, mental health (as we spoke of before) and general well-being).

 

And thusly we reach the crux of the matter. A team is a collection of individuals (‘I’’s) all pulling towards a single goal. If the individual is tended to, i.e. kept happy and onside not through threats or intimidation but through respect, then the team will thrive. Machiavelli said, ‘it is far safer to be feared than loved’ however, Machiavelli was a middle manager who would spout gibberish such as ‘there is no I in Team’ to consolidate his power. If you want to understand power, don’t look to those who have it, look to those who live under the rule of it, for they will be able to give you a clearer understanding of what power actually is (see Plato’s Republic, for one example) and soon you will see that there is no real power, only the appearance of ‘power’. If you want to be successful in business and in the creation of successful teams then one must tend to the individual within the wider context otherwise the bad root will give birth to bad fruit which will spread bad seed and soon the whole of the society (or team) will be corrupted. As Wittgenstein said,

 

‘Put a man in the wrong atmosphere and nothing will function as it should. He will seem unhealthy in every part. Put him back into his proper element and everything will blossom and look healthy. But if he is not in his right element, what then? Well, then he just has to make the best of appearing before the world as a cripple’

 

And then maybe people will get off of the back of Messi and appreciate him for what he is, an ‘I’ in a team of ‘I’’s who creates something beautiful, as a team.

 

‘till next time

Mental Health First Aid

 

A while ago I attended a meeting with members of a senior management. The meeting was, in part, an opportunity to role out the new initiative, which was being implemented, and that was Mental Health First Aid.

 

The premise of it was set out as such: If you brake your leg, wouldn’t you want someone to come up to you and help you and if you have a leg that is previously broken, wouldn’t you like the opportunity to tell your story to those who ask? Likewise, if you are suffering from a mental health problem, or have one diagnosed, wouldn’t you like to have people come up to you and speak to you about it?

 

Well, let us unpack the first part of this. If I fell over and broke my leg and someone came over to me, I imagine the conversation would be along these lines:

 

• I saw you fell over
• Yes, yes I did
• That was hilarious
• Ok
• Your leg looks broken
• Ah, that’s why it hurts so much and is pointing the wrong way
• Would you like me to look at it for you?
• Are you a medically trained professional?
• I am not, I am just the first person here and subsequently am the resident expert on broken legs!
• Ah, I see, well what would be really great is if you could find an expert to help me…

 

As we can see from the witty banter (twitty?) when one experiences a medical moment, one requires an expert for help, not just the first person off the street who thinks themselves to be an expert. And if this is how it is when one is experiencing a visible problem, imagine if it was something invisible (we will look at the notion of visible and non-visible laws at a future date), such as mental health.

 

• I see you sat down in the corner
• Yes, yes I am
• Are you ok?
• I am suffering from depression
• Ah, you are sad! I was sad once too! I broke my fingernail and I know exactly what you are going through…

 

As we can see, in neither instance is the help offered appropriate as neither time was an expert involved. Whilst it is easier to understand a physical problem (although you can never know what another experiences) when it comes to mental health, the one size fits all, the relating and the ‘ah, person X is doing this, so I must do Y’, approach cannot be helpful. Rather it seems very much like a tick-box exercise, as opposed to a genuine effort to provide help. The fact that many people find this ‘one size fits all’ approach to be ground-breaking and in-depth, just makes one realise how little is actually known about human behaviour and the complex world of the mind.

 

As to the second point, it makes the assumption that people will want to talk about what has happened in the past, ‘I broke my leg and have a mental health problem’, which, some might but many will not, especially, as we have spoken of before, those who genuinely suffer for those who genuinely suffer are those who complain least (general rule of thumb- the more one complains, the least likely their suffering is great).

 

 

So, let us continue. The organisation who was running the meeting continued to say that many people in their company have: mental health problems/different sexualities/different creeds and skin colours/and all of the other things one is taught is wrong by society. The company was keen to point out that these people ‘hide’ (huh?) when they should be able to live openly as who they are and things, such as the Mental Health First Aid kit, should let them do so.

 

As the original premise was incorrect, as mentioned earlier, so was the subsequent thought (building house on sand etc.). If a person, to stick with this premise, has a mental health ‘problem’ (it’s amazing how many of these people with ‘problems’ are the nicest people one can meet, makes one wonder why being ‘good’ is seen as a mental health problem in society) then the best thing would be for them to speak with an expert who either knows of the condition/disorder personally (i.e. experiential evidence) or b) is a medically trained professional specialising in mental health. If not, then a) their ability to genuinely help will be diminished and b) the person will be less likely to speak up, especially how many people consider themselves to be experts at/on ‘everything’ and thusly will act as they ‘think’ best, not knowing how much harm they may be doing, as Proust wonderfully illustrates:

 

‘Perhaps she would not have thought of wickedness as a state so rare, so abnormal, so exotic, one which it was so refreshing to visit, had she been able to distinguish in herself, as in all her fellow-men and women, that indifference to the sufferings which they cause which, whatever names else be given it, is the one true, terrible and lasting form of cruelty.’

 

It was said at the meeting that often those who are suffering from a mental health problem don’t speak up because they cannot, often it will be because they don’t want to. One should learn the difference between one who wants to but cannot and one who chooses not to and then one should ask why and attempt to find the correct solution. It must be stated, as Proust shows, that one of the biggest problems in helping people with mental health problems is the attitudes and ignorance of those who, maybe rightly or wrongly, are arrogant enough to assume that they know best.

 

 

 

The second point on this is if the person, who is trained in the relevant fields, then goes to the manager of the individual and says, with consent, that person T either is suffering from this or, as not all information needs or should be disclosed/shared (note: disclosing information without consent can break ‘trust’ and without ‘trust’ then none of these policies, or future policies, will work), person T requires this or that based upon the expertise of the one speaking, unless the person has a high enough level to be able to enact changes, they are all at the mercy of the manager who, without the relevant experiences and knowledge- two components essential to the leading of understanding- can chose to shrug and refused to implement that which is required and may disclose the information.

 

We cannot say for certain that any of the negative things mentioned here will happen. Often they may not, but as long as there is the element of doubt mental health cannot be treated as just another malady, and, even though we are, allegedly, living in the ‘age of compassion’, those who suffer on a daily basis will be less likely to speak up for fear of the repercussions being worse than their condition, which although hard, they have developed coping strategies, strategies which, as Proust notes, may very well be undone by the ignorance of those who declare themselves to be experts.

 

‘till next time

 

 

 

 

Honesty

 

The truth is one of those things, it is one of the most important virtues. However, honesty and the truth aren’t as black and white as they seem. If, for example, someone puts on a dress and says ‘do I look fat in this?’, the answer that one should give is, ‘you are such a beautiful person, I hardly notice what you look like, let alone what you are wearing’, an answer which never goes down well. Why? Because it is too honest.

 

Honesty is important, especially in the formation of one’s own self-image. Oft we hear one say that they are ‘always honest’, yet many a bad behaviour is explained away by saying that it is ‘honesty’ (‘would you rather we were not honest?’) yet there is honesty and there is honesty.

 

Honesty is something which is holy and special. It is looking at someone and bearing your soul to them without lies, without obstruction. But as with all things which are sacred, the notion of time and place play a significant role.

 

What do I mean? Well, if we look at a case study where a person is told by their work manager that ‘people don’t like you, and are right not to do so’, and when one replies ‘uh…’, the manager replies, ‘I’m always honest’, then we can break this down into three things.

 

• Self-image

 

It is important for the manager to explain away their behaviour which they know to be bad by making them self look vitreous (‘but the enemy I see, wears a cloak of decency’ (Dylan)). In other words, they are saying that the truth is the greatest (or one of) virtues and as they speak it they are virtuous and if you are upset, well, ‘I’m sorry that you feel that way’, no, ‘I’m sorry I upset you’, or ‘I’m sorry for what I said’, nope it is all ‘what I did was right and if you are upset, well, there’s only one person to blame’.

 

This ‘brutal’ honesty is a one-way streak. If the employee was to reply,

 

‘yes, that is life, there are people who like you and people who do not like you. There are people who don’t like me and people who don’t like you. So what? Why don’t they like you? They don’t like you because you have a narcissistic personality disorder, your greatest pleasure is not the success of yourself but the failures of others, as long as you are responsible and cannot be blamed. You are vastly inferior to me in terms of intellectual and emotional intelligence, plus I know more about your ‘specialist subjects’ than you, even if I have no interest in them, which you know which is why you treat me this way and then coat it in the mask of ‘virtue’ as you cannot face who you really are, as Camus said, ‘People hasten to judge in order not to be judged themselves’ or as Nietzsche said, ‘But thus I counsel you, my friends: Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful. They are people of a low sort and stock; the hangmen and the bloodhound look out of their faces. Mistrust all who talk much of their justice!’ but don’t worry, I am just being honest! You know I am honest!’

 

Then I doubt the laissez faire way in which the manager dealt with their own honesty.

 

• Reputation

 

If listening to Taylor Swift has taught me anything, it is that ‘reputation’ is very important (try her, you may be surprised, she writes the songs my heart would right if it were petty and illiterate yet catchy). However, by controlling the story and creating a culture where one can put down another to their group and call it ‘honesty’, one can create an image of being inscrutably virtuous. This goes back to the many weeks on which I have written about images and group think and, it seems, that this is a truth that we cannot escape. People are insecure and this makes them petty. If it were that all children could be taught of their value from an early age, an internal value (poor Tey Tey was taught from an early age that her only value was that which was given to her externally), then many of these problems would be removed and people would be generally, happier.

 

• Fear

 

Often people not act in a certain way due to fear, and this fear is often of being alone. They will, actively, ostracize another so that they will not be excluded themselves. Whilst this is in the workplace, it is also in daily life.

 

Let me tell you about a girl I used to know. This girl’s self-image stemmed from external locus. In other words, she only felt that she had value if she was in a relationship. She was lonely and then found someone, she told me that she was happy to have ‘found anyone’, to help her (they now live together). Six months later it turned out that the boy whom she always secretly liked, liked her too. However, as one does not mess about with another’s relationship, the boy, although it was widely known that he liked her, never ‘made a move’. Why? Because he was being honest and not causing unnecessary pain. The girl, although it was widely known that she liked him, would often complain that he hadn’t ‘made a move’ (note: I am using terminology I don’t really understand). The situation, from what I was told was thus- she liked him, he liked her. She liked him more than she liked her partner, he was single (at the time). The solution was simple- all she had to do was be honest and tell her partner that she no longer cared for him and then, once single, approach the boy that she liked and run the risk of being rejected and being alone. She never did (to my knowledge).

 

Yet, if one was to ask her she would say that she was being honest and remaining within her relationship, one all knew she was not happy in. If others were to be honest to her and say, ‘see above’, then they could be seen as going against the grain and thusly be seen as causing the problems by their honesty. So, in this instance, honesty is just a guise for fear, fear of being excluded.

 

 

 

Yes, honesty is important in affairs with intimates and the Law but when it comes to interpersonal relationships, be they not intimate or professional then, when it comes to the truth and, well general behaviour, I think we should follow the teachings of J.M Barrie, the creator of the boy who would never grow up,

 

‘Always try to be a little kinder than is necessary

 

‘till next time

 

 

(P.S. there are two blogs this week, scroll down to read the second one- which I didn’t want to write or publish but felt like I had to)

How President Trump Won and Why He Will Win Again

 

I recently finished a biography of Obama’s first six years in the White House. The three main take aways from the book were thus: 1: Obama’s biggest problem was that he was too smart and, as with many smart people, couldn’t understand or communicate with those less smart than he. 2: He really doesn’t like politics and 3: Joe Biden is an excellent politician. Biden, for all of his ‘gaffs’ was kept on the ticket, and in the White House, because he has the most excellent of qualities for a politician, a unifier. Biden was able to communicate and work with people from all political spectrums and reach deals with those who despise the word ‘compromise’ (Obama, it must be said, is one).

 

However, this quite excellent strength of Biden counts against him. In the campaign for the Democratic nomination for President (which he won), fellow democrats were railing against him as he said that he once worked, in the Congress, with Republicans known for being pro-slavery. The point Biden was making was that, although he disliked the men, they were fellow representatives of the people of the United States and must be worked with on the behalf of the said people (We the people…). Yet, for many democrats, this simple truth was too much to handle and people rubbed ash in their hair and screamed bloody murder.

 

To put my political biases on the table, I revere Obama the same way that previously Kennedy was revered. I think the most excellent candidate for President would be Nancy Pelosi (recent grandstanding aside) and I read the New York Times and The Times of London.

 

Politics is an extremely nuanced business with there not being any real ‘Left’ or ‘Right’, market solutions are important, as is the state protecting its citizens. However, this is not how politics plays out. When Fox News was created it was created with a simple mission- to be economically successful. This, it was decided (you can check it yourself if you think I am biased) would be achieved by creating a conservative echo chamber with people screaming abuse at the other party, not offering nuance or political balance. And it was very successful and made a lot of money. The reason why is that there is an inherent divisiveness in politics. It was not created by Fox News, rather Fox News cashed in on it. Trump, a man who, by all accounts of those who like and dislike him, thrives on discord. He likes chaos as it entertains him, he likes people to fight for his affection. In other words, he is pathologically unsuited to be president, yet he won. But how?

 

Well it was very simple, actually. Whilst a presidency cannot be seen in isolation- Obama saved the economy after the 2008 market crash and then set it up which Trump then continued. Credit belongs to both just as the blame for the crash belongs to both Clinton and W Bush. The way that the presidency is played in the media is as if the 4/8 years are in complete isolation as to what came before and what comes afterwards. Yet this is not new, what is it that Trump did which let him win and means he will probably win again?

 

Well he combined the partisanship of conservative media with the short-term thinking of a presidency in the media. In other words, Trump created conflict. He picked fights with the media, he bullied subordinates, he spoke utter crap. Whilst an intelligent media would dismiss this as the tantrum of a baby, both liberal and conservative media lapped it up. Acosta and Collins from CNN made themselves news stories in their opposition to Trump, Hannity from Fox made himself news stories with his rants in defence of Trump. In other words, both sides of the media fell into the palm of Trump’s hands. As the opinions of many citizens is shaped by the media, the public lapped it up. Now if someone disagreed, instead of saying ‘meh’ and moving on, the public both left and right started screaming FAKE NEWS at each other as the art of the disagreement ebbed away into nothing. Experts were shunned and the loudest mouth became ‘fact’. All the while, Trump sat there smiling, he knew he had won (as I wrote about before in a piece similar to this) and as Rome around him burned, Trump and his friend Johnson, sat fiddling their wives’ friends.

 

And whilst one might dismiss this as politics and the media, the real-world implications are shocking. Trump, repeating the Fox News line that the Coronavirus is the ‘Chinese Virus’, managed to inflate racial tensions in the US and around the world. The number of attacks on those from Asia or of an Asian descent is growing exponentially and whilst, before, one could see these as they are, unjustifiable racist attacks built on ignorance and, well, fear and envy, now with the words of the President, these attacks are being justified. The liberals cluck and shake their heads but are too toothless in their responses. Rather than calling this what it is- domestic terrorism, they are getting bogged down in the politics. And whilst all that people see on this issue is from the media (unless you personally are involved in some shape or form) no one thinks about what is happening as they are all too busy shouting political nonsense and ‘FAKE NEWS’ at each other, no one actually doing the one thing that it would take to bring down Trump and his nasty victory. No one will actually listen. Whilst we can blame this all on Trump, the Democrats, Obama (for some reason he keeps getting blamed, despite being out of office for four years, go figure) Obi-Wan Kenobi’s words still echo in our ears

 

‘Who’s the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?’

 

Personal responsibility. Whatever happened to that? Instead of blaming racists, Trump, Fox, CNN etc. take personal responsibility and say ‘hmm, what is actually being said to me and what is actually happening?’

 

You may be surprised.

 

‘till next time