Peace and goodwill

The epidemic of aggression, anger and violence consuming our society is worrying. Anger seems the dominant emotion in the country today. Its blinkering effect allows no space for reason, harmony and dialogue. It is often an involuntary response to unwanted actions, perceived to be demeaning, disrespectful or threatening. It leads to an overpowering tendency to decry opinions of people with whom we differ as na?ve and silly, and an inclination to simplify the world into either black or white, instead of acknowledging the innumerable shades of grey. Anger also energizes us to retaliate, provoking aggressive sometimes violent behaviour.

In Parliament, we observe that politicians seem to have given up even the fa?ade of dignified debate.

Screaming and shouting at each other at the slightest provocation, anything and anyone in a politician’s life is fair game. But anger is not limited to the political arena. We note the outbursts of frustrated sports personalities and the road rage of impatient drivers; we experience the glum disrespect of those involved in service industry and the acrimony and rancour of industrial relations.

The horrifying, mindless and senseless murders leave us numb! The sages argue that the rapid, unpredictable changes taking place around us at all levels - nationally and internationally - have a strong impact on the language of public discourse, where anger and animosity are fast replacing inquiry, curiosity and empathy.

We also know that people’s choices and decisions are a product of both emotions and rational thinking. How do we effectively manage anger, a normal human emotion, so that it does not so effortlessly degenerate into the wanton aggression and violence that scar our country? We need a strong antidote to counteract the threats constructed and fear generated as social mobilisation strategies to manipulate public opinion in order to legitimise the views and incite enthusiasts of this or that group.

Is it too much for our leadership, political and organisational, to choose the path of exercising courtesy and self-control even under provocation? Their caustic language and bitter exchanges appeal to the aggressive instincts in followers, ultimately leading some to violent responses. Surely, leaders can disagree without issuing threats, which may be interpreted as a call to arms? We expect them to be alert to the widespread repercussions and unintended consequences of the disorder they sow when they incite an unthinking public.

But we citizens do share in the responsibility for the current mayhem. Hopefully, infused with the spirit of the season, we transform ourselves from passive spectators to vigilant activists in the cause of peace and goodwill, emboldened by the assurance that citizen action does work.

Winston R Rudder Petit Valley