Top Adsense

Yellowtard vs. Dutertard: On Fighting Your Own Shadow

Political polarization & the self - Who are fighting who? - Trying to uncover your inner self can be a tricky process.  ‘Dutertards’ versus ‘Yellowtards’

‘Dutertards’ versus ‘Yellowtards’ - There are ideas we defend that define, in our minds, our own identity. We believe. We believe in the honesty of certain people and in the dishonesty of others.

An uncivil word war is taking place between two opposing camps in the Philippines. One camp scornfully calls the other “Dutertards,” and the Dutertards contemptuously call their opponent “Yellowtards.”

The term “Dutertards” or Duterte Die-hard Supportes (DDS) refers to supporters of the President who are viewed by the opposing camp as tolerating absolutely no form of criticism of President Duterte. Dutertards are accused of putting blind trust in the President, and of treating him as a virtual god who can do no wrong (Poon).

The term “Yellowtards” or Dilawan refers to those perceived to be loyal to former president Benigno Aquino III, and who are viewed by the Dutertards as losers engaging in sour grapes and who cannot move on from the defeat of their presidential candidate. They are accused of faultfinding without appreciating the overall good that the President’s actions are supposedly bringing to the country, and of treating him as doing nothing right.

We support ideas we like. We label them correct and we act to dismiss doubts about them. We take sides about ideas and political issues as if that was the right thing to do. And yet, from a rational point of view, this type of support and belief is not justifiable. 

Should we actually have to take sides? Taking sides compromise our abilities to seek for the most correct description and circumstances based on facts. Should we need to start reformulating the way we debate ideas? Our current bias is probably behind the emergence of social media extremism.

We hold beliefs about the actual state of the Philippines, about how things actually are. And most of the times those beliefs are so strong that we feel justified in saying that we know. We often choose to say we know the truth and we defend those beliefs as if they were indeed true.

Instead of looking for truth and correctness, in our reasoning about political & social issues - most people attack others as a person to win arguments: ad hominem. Defending the ideas of those groups, or the region belong which greatly inlfuence the way we see ourselves. 

How we could counter this insidious bias?

We tend to fight for political issues simply because they support the conclusions we wish were true. But openness to new ideas matter. Philippine society, social media and other  institutions are currently built around the concept that ideas should be defended. We were educated to stand for what we believe, that debating means defending instead of analyzing ideas. 

Is this the best way to do things? I say openness to change is also paramount.

We often define who we are based on the political side we support. But, by doing so, we condemn ourselves, even the brightest ones among ourselves, to irrationality and stupidity.

Other people - Dishonest. Arrogant. Envious. Frustrating. Shortsighted. Selfish.

And yet? Other people are not hell, as the expression goes. They are all we have. They are not even “other.” They are us. We are all part of one whole.

“Love thy neighbor as thyself,” he said, “all the rest is commentary.”

Love thy neighbor as thyself. Nothing could be more urgent right now. Why must we rise above these crazy political distinctions, this enmity and bitterness and dunking on the other side? Because we love our neighbors—because the other side is made up of our neighbors, it is us.

Everyone we meet in person or onine is an opportunity for kindness. The fruit of this life is acts for the common good. That’s all that matters.

Everything else is commentary or less.


Your ‘Shadow’ Self – What It Is

What is the ‘shadow’ self according to psychology?

The ‘shadow’ is the side of your personality that contains all the parts of yourself that you don’t want to admit to having. It is at first an unconscious side. It is only through effort to become self-aware that we recognise our shadow.

Jung and the Shadow

The term ‘the shadow’ was made popular by Carl Jung. He saw it as the uncivilised, even primitive side of our nature. He believed that we needed to fully see this dark side of ourselves if we were to be a fully integrated human.

Jung didn’t feel it was just individuals who had shadows. He also talked of the ‘collective shadow’, where people united their shadows in groups or as societies. He saw this as a very great danger to civilisation when a collective shadow was ‘projected’

No comments:

Got Something to Say? Thoughts? Additional Information?

Powered by Blogger.