I have always been the kind of person who looks for the best solution for all those involved when I attempt to correct the problem. The logic behind this form of “do unto others” is simple. If everyone around me has as much access to their needs and desires as everyone else, and understand this to be true, then I am more likely to receive the same freedoms of expression from them that they receive from me. It is a fundamental application of the Golden Rule. I probably led a pretty sheltered young life, because I only learned that this particular characteristic was not common to all my fellow humans at around 7 or 8 years old, when I discovered the neighborhood bully. Yes, we are all born with the same basic desires, needs, and dreams, but whatever that original birth POV (Point Of View) is, the experiences each of us have had since birth are widely varied. In present day America, it is clearly apparent to almost everyone that a black human being does not experience the same privileged and encouraging experience that a white human does, and I don’t even want to be distracted into a discussion of gender inequality, as it is just another example of my main point. Having realized that everyone I meet does not necessarily wish me the best in any given encounter has caused me to learn guard behaviors, specifically not to take any ones proposal at face value. Still it took me a long time to figure out all the important tells (the facial and body language signals we all give out) that would forewarn you that a person was inclined to approach you in a particularly underhanded way. Finally, I now arrive at the reason for the title to this article.

While the phrase, “the pot calling the kettle black” normally feels like a simple “stick and stones” expression to the pot. I have taken a long time to realize that the deeper meaning of this phrase is a call to everyone else, specially the kettle, that the post is merely describing a character trait of itself and not necessarily the other. We all see both pots and kettles as having the potential for being black from the soot of the cook fire, but a good washing after every use, or an electric stove could make the visual characteristics of each very different. As we know, neither pots nor kettle have eyes, so they can’t see each other and the pot, if it feels at all, can only feel itself, so it knows whether it is covered in soot, or not but can’t see the pot’s actual state. So the point of view that “others are mostly like me” evokes the response “you are so covered in soot” when that isn’t actually necessarily, a fact. My inability to discern these tells is probably more extreme than the con man’s, as having such skills would be a basic requirement of the job, which is why the can approach with such obvious good intention. But the Pot/Kettle issue can provide some insight into the problem. I have always been startled and chagrined, when someone has accused me of being devious or underhanded, because I don’t do that kind of thing. Now I realize that, besides the misunderstanding of my intention, this person is also  was telegraphing their own approach to dealing with others.

They don’t see that your are not being devious, because that position is both harder for them to fathom, and has no tells that they recognize. They recognize their own tells in others and are so sensitive that they see those tells in behaviors that are not unnecessarily related to the character trait.

Understanding how this works gives both hope and distress to the idea of using some. as yet not understood principles of social engineering, to maneuver society away from the Roman model and into a more equitable arrangement for all human beings, not just the few that our current social model chooses to elevate over the rest of us.

The hope comes from the possibility that a persuasive realignment of each POV to one that can accept the concepts needed to operate justly in a social setting. Or at least tailor motivators that are understood by those POVs as a means to accomplish their ends. The structure need to support a wide range of POV, but still dampen down those aspects of our personalities that are detrimental to the individual as well as society as a whole.

The distress comes from the fact that there is no, one size fits all solution. The extreme solution has been tried many times, but revolution only results in a different set of rich and powerful, not an equalization of the access to resources and freedoms. If it is to be a revolution it somehow needs to be non-destructive in how its goals are achieved. That is a very hard path to follow as the story of Jesus tells us when we view him as a freedom fighter. In many ways Gandhi executed his non-violent revolution with much better success than Jesus did, by using the basic principles that Jesus taught. It isn’t clear that India is any freer from Roman influence in their society than the rest of us, but they did remove the yoke of British domination from their collective shoulders. We see similar behaviors in the protests going on in the U.S. today, they are almost totally non-violent, and the government’s response has been anything but non-violent, sparking additional outrage in the whole population, not just the abused protesters. This is, in essence, what Gandhi orchestrated in India, and is an adequate blue print for how any revolt against Roman enslavement should be structured. The true challenge is finding a way to manage an economic system that does not involve the banks and is not corruptible. The fundamental problem is to get a large enough portion of the population to follow along to make any significant dent in Roman power.

PS to Phred: OK, I like the blue background on the front page, and it isn’t too bad on the posting display page, but for folks that are getting on in age, and have a mild case of cataracts, find this new black on blue presentation of text. It would be much better to present the text as either, Black text on a White background, or White text on a Black Background. One or the other would be much better than the current arrangement.