When Non-Involved People Say 'Revenge Accomplishes Nothing' | Structural Analysis #21
While looking for ideas for an article, I suddenly remembered an event from over ten years ago.
It is truly embarrassing, but I was dating an outrageous person at the time, the way we broke up was not good, and I was acting out a bit on social media.
At that time, an acquaintance who was a third party and mentally unstable said to me, 'Revenge accomplishes nothing,' and I remember feeling like my guts were boiling.
I thought, 'Don't use someone else's conversation to satisfy your own ego when you don't understand anything.'
*For the record, I never said a single word about taking revenge...
■ The essence of this episode
It is not about whether 'revenge accomplishes nothing' is right or wrong, but why people feel the need to say 'stop the revenge' when they are not even involved?
As usual, thinking about it structurally, at least the following three points seem plausible.
1. Universalizing one's own values
They have turned 'I do not take revenge' into 'the correct answer for humanity.' They prioritize their own moral views over the other person's circumstances.
2. Self-presentation over problem-solving
The goal is not to help the person involved, but to take the position of 'I am calm and mature.' Therefore, whether the other person is saved is secondary.
The reason I was angry was precisely because of this.
It wasn't that I disliked the 'opposing opinion' itself. They took the position of an arbiter despite not being involved, and started preaching before even trying to understand the other person's feelings. That atmosphere of 'I am looking down from a higher vantage point' was the true source of my discomfort.
In other words, by saying 'revenge accomplishes nothing,' that person was performing their own emotional maturity, calmness, and freedom from hatred. And I, the person involved, was used as a stage for that performance without my consent. That is why I was angry.
3. Shallow experience in processing emotions
They do not know the process of 'expressing anger.' That is why they try to settle things with 'just forget it already' or 'let's move forward.'
■ People who say 'revenge accomplishes nothing'
They are not truly trying to save the other person. I think this structure is similar to 'universal advice' such as 'increase your sources of dependency,' 'it's easier if you forgive,' 'let's be positive,' or 'both sides are at fault.'
They don't pay the cost of understanding the other person; they just leave a general platitude and walk away.
That is why the person receiving it feels, 'That is not what I wanted right now.'
At times like this, what people want is certainly not some 'noble lesson.'
■ People who use others as stage props to promote their own character
I think this applies to more than just this current case.
For example:
・People who use others as material for preaching
・People who use others' failures to show off their own competence
・People who start talking about 'that's why I do XX' in response to someone else's misfortune
・People who urge victims to forgive in order to promote themselves as 'a person who can forgive'
In all these cases, they are not looking at the 'person themselves,' but are using the other person as a tool for their own performance.
■ What I realized through this analysis
At first glance, my analyses may seem to have disparate themes, but I am pursuing something relatively common.
'Do people see others as individual human beings? Or do they see them as tools to satisfy their own desires?'
Rather than 'love analysis' or 'human observation,' it is a structural analysis of 'the moment when people turn others into tools.'
With that said, I intend to continue 'identifying and verbalizing the structures where people treat others as tools,' so please follow me if you would like.