A Common Enemy
Strength of unity depends on the parts I guess.
I remember in high school I was crying in a buddies car because a friend had lied to me about knowledge he had of my girlfriend at the time who was cheating on me with another friend. The same friend who was letting me stay at his house because I had no where else to go. I remember feeling justifiably enraged and betrayed. In that moment, I swore to get revenge and gearing up to get everyone I could on my side. In that experience, I came to the realization that significant bonds can be forged through having a common enemy. In fact my life now became centered around this idea. Life became a matter of choosing sides and the result was it left me feeling like it was me against the world. I was in constant conflict with the world around me and I couldn't figure out why nobody could see what I saw. As time went on and I started to become more emotionally mature (Not a lot, but a little) I was confronted with the question of whether a common enemy or a common goal was a better unifier. In lieu of finding an answer, I decided to resort to research to satiate this new jolt of curiosity. I found that the benefits of having a common enemy is to mobilize quickly, or to allow people to quickly come together to address a threat, creating a sense of urgency and has a potential for negativity. Then I found that having a common goal promotes a sense of shared purpose and collaboration, is sustainable in the long term, and allows for inclusivity. I went a little further and came across this quote from British journalist named George Orwell which says "Dictatorial government has to have an enemy and if there isn't one then to invent one." He is the same guy that had the famous quote "Who Controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past" These quotes got me thinking about what was really going on in my buddies car in high-school. The reality of the situation was that my pride got hurt, there were many aspects of who I thought I was that was threatened at the time. Aspects that if I thought I lost, I would be left weak and defenseless. As a means of self defense, I decided to create an enemy within myself and project onto others who showed similar characteristics. I was to condemn in others, what I hated in myself. In other words, I rejected what felt instinctually true at the time because I couldn't or wouldn't mentally grasp outside of the confines of my own constructed reality. I remember trying to convince my friend in the car that we had to shun everyone that was involved in this "Act of terrorism". The reality was, our friends group was so intertwined that no shunning happened and I slowly began to feel more and more disconnected from them all. I realize now, that was only a microcosm of what was happening within. In the decision to reject parts of myself, I was convinced that I could somehow control how you saw me. Little did I know that this psychological imprisonment created nothing but confusion for me and those around me. Upon further research I came across some of Carl Jung's teachings on shadow integration. He believed that you had to become aware of and accept the repressed parts of self. In short, you had to become that which you do not wish to be. To me this was evidence that the enemy I created from within kept me at odds with the world and until I accepted that, I would always be seeking for a common enemy. Now this got me thinking, does the world really thrive off of having a common enemy or is this just a contradicting assumption that limits growth? What if the world is setup in such a way to assist you with getting lost in that battle? What if the path to freedom has to do with embracing all parts, the good and the bad, and whatever else in-between? What if this black and white thinking has kept me from seeing the beauty in the chaos? So I went a little further in research (because I might as well make sense of this rabbit hole) and I found a video by Alan Watts called "Understanding Your Dark Side with Carl Jung" and there was a quote that said "In a set of rules in which yes and no are the basic and formally opposed terms when it is explicit in a set of rules that yes and no or positive and negative are the fundamental principles, it is implicit but not explicit that there is this fundamental bondage or fellowship between the two. The fear is if people find that out then they wont play the game anymore." Alan watts was talking about this when talking about Carl Jung's teachings of the unification of our dark side. In a story where control is paramount, sides must be created and chosen. In a story where the two find a harmonious existence, the ability to make your own choices becomes available. It really has me thinking, who then is controlling all this? But that may be an exploration for another day. So in my journey of a common enemy or a common goal being a better unifier the answer became clearer and I believe my experience allowed me to come closer to the truth. Once I cut through the bias I had and the attachment of who I thought I needed to be, the answer became quite simple and rather obvious.
#BuiltIn