What Ever Happened to Empathy?

In the post-September 11th world, a growing trend resounds: the absence of empathy. People who have endured extraordinary circumstances and have survived them are victims. However, the new guise that has been bandied about in the media as well as political circles is the fact that a "victim" is less than fashionable. In essence, the "victim" is equated with "the opportunist".

Problematically, by signifying the victim as almost a persecutor on the public's emotions, empathy seems almost at a standstill. In my discussions about this, it has amazed me how quick it is to accuse someone who has suffered with "whining" about their plight. It is as if that no one wants to hear about stories of survival against the odds anymore--especially when they have to do with highlighting social disparity.

Many explainations try to elaborate why there is such a lack of empathy exists in America. One attributes this aspect to an almost encouragement by our national leaders, pundits and other spokespersons to revile and demonizing the victim because he or she would reveal flaws in "the system". Another goes forth to purport that Americans are almost urged to be "self-oriented" and "cool", being praised for not letting their emotions show. If one cries or spills forth their story, then it is a show of vunerability that does not deserve any comfort or assurances. Still, another one equates victimhood to purity. According to theorist Alyson Cole, the victim has to shown to be above amorality before the public sympathizes with him or her.

It is as if the attack on victimhood has to do with a backlash of the "confessional culture" of the nineties. Everyone from the former President on down the line spilled their guts about what ailed them. Talk shows such as Geraldo, Donahue, Oprah, Jenny Jones and Rikki Lake were at their height. Victims had become the spectacle for good ratings as they shared their stories with others across the television audience.

After September 11th, the tide changed. Pundits became more like official spokespersons, especially if they followed the usual "talking points". And if certain groups that didn't fit within the "system" spoke out, they were instantly shouted down because they were part of a larger "victim culture". Especially, the recipients of this unwarranted chastising would be members of the disenfranchised. Their stories and experiences against the "system" were now taken to be drivel because they did not embrace a sense of "individuality". Furthermore, breaking the silence of what they experienced in terms of social disparity was not "taking responsibility" for "one's self".

This is part and parcel of an individual-oriented society. When one is taught to solely focus on one's concerns, they feel no outer connectedness to others--whether it is in the same group or outside of it. With self-oriented thinking comes a lesser need to reach out to get to know others because there is no since of identification. Lack of connectiveness leads to little empathy, not by any shape of the imagination. Even worse, when citizens are praised for their individualism without accounting for a sense of community, then there is sort of a suspicion about other people who are connected to a group.

Some of the greatest books, such as George Orwell's 1984 and Aldous Huxley's Brave New World were predicated on the evils of group thinking. And if you get down to recent Star Trek Lore, then you have the Borg--who only want others to join the group and think along a singular line.

Individuality tends to be more indicative of democracy and freedom. Yet, when one looks under the surface, individuality also causes loneliness as well. With so much love for one's self, then one does not look outward to see how they are part of a larger society of people, let alone care about their welfare. In this manner, there is no way to see how one might be connected in the chain of others in society. And without any way to discern how being part of larger community works, then there seems to be no allegiance--except to one's self.

To break it all down, there is nothing wrong with personal individuality. Each person possesses their own traits that make them unique. That is important. But when it gets in the way of caring for others and identifying with them, then self-oriented thinking transforms into self-centeredness. Without thinking about "the community", then there is no greater sense of history or culture. What is even more, there isn't a sense of feeling when there are others of the same society who have experienced extreme hardship.

Emotional exhaustion against those who suffer exist instead.

A lack of sympathetic demonstration for those who suffer subtlely indicates how our society is in a sorry state. It is especially sad that this is punctuated by continuing the trauma of the victim by either dismissing or denouncing the message--especially when it has to do with something contrary to a set of given beliefs. Perhaps the reason why a lack of empathy is so successful is that it is easier to maintain and implement than actually trying to practice the manner of caring.

Perhaps, it is time we relearn how to care and connect with our fellow citizens instead of putting them in the midst of accusation.