Compassion and insight

By the time you read this it’ll be nearly a week into 2012, and it’s likely I’ll have already broken most of my new year’s resolutions.

Except, hopefully, one.

This year I’ve resolved to be a kinder person—someone who is not just nicer to those around me but also more empathetic and thoughtful.

It’s a resolve that’s been on my mind a lot lately, particularly at the close of 2011, as we all shared in the most wonderful time of the year in a manner that, at times, could be best described as grudgingly charitable.

Case in point: The seemingly endless argument over the etiquette of a “happy holidays” greeting vs. “merry Christmas.”

While some groused about how the term “happy holidays” had whitewashed the “true” meaning of the season, others complained that “merry Christmas” left them feeling excluded.

Really?

Is there anything more depressing than this kind of debate? The intent and sentiment behind either phrase is meant to be cheerful and filled with good will, yet we allow such arguments to suck our energy into a meaningless abyss.

It’s indicative of the depths to which our cultural conversation has sunk in recent years. There’s the school of thought that demands we tame our conversations into the safest, most generic and whitewashed of exchanges.

Meanwhile, the other line of thinking insists that to say anything other than the first thing that springs to mind is to be inauthentic, false and insufferably politically correct.

While there are threads of legitimacy woven through both philosophies, they also both seem to miss the point completely.

What’s so wrong with just simply being considerate—whatever your cultural or religious persuasion (or lack thereof)? Is it really so difficult—so horribly oppressive—to practice compassion and insight? Is it really so awful to be on the receiving end of someone’s good intentions?

I find that it’s not too far to make the leap from such complaints to the same misguided thought process used by those who protest the “policing” of such phrases and words as “gay,” “retard,” et al.

Nor is it too far removed from the same imprudent thinking employed when someone tries to defend the reckless behaviors—sexual harassment, racism and general acts of douche baggery—that we once excused, shrugged off or otherwise ignored.

Political correctness, such critics argue, isn’t just a feeble attempt to eradicate sexism, racism or any other “ism” you can think of—it’s an attack on our freedom of speech, a self-righteous attempt at thought control.

In actuality, most people who protest against PC speech and behavior aren’t really fighting the good fight against phoniness—they’re just beset with a horrible case of myopic narcissism.

In other words, here’s a ladder, now get over yourself.

Such persistent cultural stubbornness typically stems from a profound lack of empathy and an inability to think beyond our own societal parameters, a refusal to feel outside of our own experiences, a refusal to imagine, much less respect, another person’s perspective.

Some, of course, will always scoff at the idea of such manners, at the very notion of political correctness even as others tiptoe gingerly around words and topics, always on the prowl for punishable offenses.

But really, the answer exists squarely in the middle.

Political correctness isn’t about strangulating your personality or tamping down your opinions. Nor does it mean we should become vigilantes, fiercely regulating every word, phrase or idea that floats our way.

Political correctness—good manners, nice behavior, empathy, whatever—doesn’t mean you can’t be you. It simply means being a more open-minded, thoughtful version of you.

It’s really pretty easy.