When to own.. and when not to own
posted by Caelidh | July 21, 2010
- Login or register to post comments
- Print this page
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
IcerocketMany years ago I became very empowered by the concept of taking ownership of my life. Being "personally responsible"... at the time it was a revolutionary concept for me and it allowed me to shift away from structures that told me I had no power.
Fast forward. I kept hearing more and more about "personal responsibility" and "self empowerment' On the face, these two items sound very positive and enlightening and to some extent they are. However, I have increasingly had issues with the abuse of the "personal responsibility" movement.
I think that some folks misuse that concept. I hear it ALOT in Conservative circles when someone doesn't want to waste time helping a fellow human being.. they cry "take personal responsbility for this or that".. Whether it be their poverty or health. However the "personal responsibility" mantra I feel has become a convenient way for many to not take ownership themselves. If someone steps on your foot.. they can cry out "well it is YOUR personal responsibility not to have your food under mine". I see this a LOT in business, corporations, the healthcare debate etc..
For example, if someone gets cancer that is probably caused by a company who is polluting the environment, someone would say "take personal responsibilty and move".. (and yes I have heard this).
I think many of us are struggling to be better people AND to become aware of tendencies to become victims.. but sometimes we ARE victims... unintentionally. It doesn't mean we have to WALLOW in victimhood.. but if someone injures you.. you are technically the victim of that crime, or abuse, or wrog. Sometimes taking personal responsbility is NOT owning what is NOT your's to own. Dont' get caught up in the fluffy conversations and debate and platitudes about being PERSONALLY RESPONSBLE.. when some of the stuff you should be pushing back and saying HEY.. This isn't MY fault.. it's yours.. and I am not taking ownership of it!.
This can happen in personal relationships to corporate environments.
On the flip side.....
I went to a VERY PC School during College and while I consider myself a very happy liberal.. I did increasingly find issues with the PC movement and ownership of language. I think it is important to be conscious of our language and be more tolerant and aware.. but also to realise that we allow ourselves to become "offended" by the things folks say. That is something that definately DOES take your power away. If someone called me a girl instead of a womyn (an) .. I can choose to be OFFENDED and set up structures to force the other people to call me a womyn instead of a girl.. instead of merely owning my own issues around why I might be triggered by such language. (again.. not saying being conscious of our language isn't important.. but sometimes it runs to the extreme)
Overall, I feel that it is VITAL that we are conscious across the board. Understanding OURSELVES is the first part of taking REAL responsiblity.. and knowing WHEN to own and when not to OWN any issue. When to speak out when wrongs ARE done instead of being cowtowed into guilt because we didn't move out of the way of the nuclear bomb falling on us.
That is REAL empowerment.
Namaste
Comments
The Secret
— Jul 21, 2010
You have summed up perfectly my issues with the Secret.... Thanks!
Peace and Creation
I think this becomes an
— Jul 21, 2010
I think this becomes an issue mostly because we are born into it.
When does something become wrong? Many feel victimized by the State but not until the discovery of such disparities becomes acknowledged. We can't forget that we have received benefits and privileges even if victimization is one of those benefits and privileges. Something one cannot be aware of until they've reached the age of reason.
I think this appears to be were we try to put the responsibility back on the State. While I may feel the State does in fact victimize it's citizens, I must also consider why the State might be doing this. This appears to me an interdependency between the Citizen and the State. The Citizen having first being born naked into the world stands little to no chance of survival alone. So the State does provide some degree of protections without your consent in exchange for the Trust set up by Citizenship.
The State then uses this Citizenship status to carry out industry on our behalf. The State has then become dependent on our collective participation and tacit acquiescence. Which, only until having reached a particular resonance in consciousness perceives this as wrong. If the State taught us to live without the State would the State continue to exist? Probably not. So for the State to exist it needs someone to be a victim so it can justify it's services.
As one begins to become aware of their condition. What then becomes the personally responsible thing to do? It does seem true the term is used many different ways meaning different things to different people. But I wonder, if when one perceives themselves as a victim, what's next if not to take personal responsibility to alter the circumstance?
I think this goes a bit deeper than your moving the foot analogy. Perhaps if your foot were on a conveyor and every foot on the belt is doing turns around a foot stomping machine; -And perhaps if you were previously absent then suddenly awoke to find yourself in such a position; -And the machine is powered by the occupants. Certainly the system can't tell if you're awake if you stay for another round when it's been stomping on your foot your entire life.
Even if one takes personal responsibility to unplug and remove themselves from the operation and continues the responsibility to bring awareness to others still plugged into the system riding the conveyor and getting their feet stomped. The ultimate responsibility still lay on the individual to wake up, no one else can do that for them.
This is were I think the misuse or perceived misuse is most prevalent and personal responsibility and empowerment becomes most subjective. I could explain what I think these things are, but you may not see things as I do. Thus, we're left at square one and all anyone can do is suggest taking personal responsibility without or perhaps only vaguely defining what that is in the hopes that the other party will, and hopefully come to at least similar conclusions. At least in part what, "Sometimes taking personal responsibility is NOT owning what is NOT yours to own.", means to me.
I have noticed in some circles a disdain for any concept of ownership. Self or otherwise material. Not sure how this plays itself out in your axioms, but it does appear problematic for some.
"Seek not abroad, turn back into thyself, for in the inner man dwells the truth..."
