Skip to main content

UK Postal Strike : Why I’m compelled to support the posties whatever my inclinations

"Our not being immediately afflicted by the concerns of others does not absolve us from suffering from the consequences of apathy. We might misattribute the cause of these consequences, but consequences are not similarly misdirected.


Our not being immediately afflicted with the concerns of others does not absolve us from suffering the consequences of apathy. We might misattribute the cause of these consequences, but consequences are not similarly misdirected.

Whilst the media, Royal Mail, members of various political parties, amongst others, tend to portray the threat of a postal strike as an ‘attack on customers’ – stopping short of saying ‘innocent civilians’ – ‘taking the nation hostage’, being a ‘great inconvenience’, and so on, I’m willing to give up the prompt delivery of my bills, presents, cards, letters, withhold all purchases requiring delivery by Royal Mail, and boycotting Royal Mail by not pursuing my philatelic pursuits, for not only the sake of our ‘posties’, but for something of greater significance – the reinforcement of collective empathy.

It is clear from the way the impending strike is being portrayed, that there is a concerted effort to fragment the population by interests, and more specifically, self-interest. Just as I’ve witnessed many a blogger gravitating toward self-validating enclaves of interest and refusing to spare a thought for anything without, I fear the replication of this mindset in the non-binary hemisphere. I’m unnerved by the constant reference to the postal strikers as ‘socially irresponsible’ and ‘self-interested’ when this can only be true within a milieu where mass self-interest is true. It is only when empathy is collectively dispensed with, that all collective action by groups can be logically viewed as self-interested. Picture a situation where a particular group demonstrates for equal rights and the unaffected masses grumble at their holding up the lanes that lead to a great sale and you’ll know what I mean. It is a paradoxical situation where mass apathy is relied upon or reinforced so that empathetic action pursued by groups may be viewed as apathetic. For the strikers to be viewed as ‘socially irresponsible’, the masses will first have to have their social responsibility and empathy compromised. This sees a redefinition of the very idea of ‘social responsibility’ and ‘empathy’, and it relies on the reduction of the individual to a self-serving entity with a severely contracted appreciation of the familial for its definition.

This cannot be countenanced. Thus, my unreserved support for the ‘posties’. They are struggling for something much more that might very well be beyond their own immediate cognizance – as all struggles are for much more than the worth placed on them by its participants due to our proximity to the self and related interests. However, It is only in our empathetic recognition and appreciation of the generic status and definition of collective empathy and social responsibility that enables us to discern its true meaning and enable it come to fruition through the act of another. In that, the strike action impresses upon us the significance of generic empathy in an industry-specific dialect.

Hence, I do not see the postal strike as an inconvenience, an ‘attack on customers’, or an act that ‘holds the nation hostage’, but an opportunity to affirm my faith in the value of collective empathy and social responsibility come what may. Our not being immediately afflicted with the concerns of others does not absolve us from suffering the consequences of apathy. We might misattribute the cause of these consequences, but consequences are not similarly misdirected.


Click 'show' for '5 reasons to back the post strikes' by Socialist Worker UK.Show



according2,

ed

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.

Manifesto Against Same-Sex Marriages and Homo-Promotion

My stand against homosexuality is based on the following.  It is a logical, rather than a personal, decision.

Under the slogan, 'the freedom to love', it in principle justifies incestuous, group, etc, marriages.  All it requires is 'consenting adults', without an inquiry into what it means to be an 'adult' in intelligent, moral, and introspective terms.

This in turn encourages a ‘go with your feel’ tendency, which in itself gives rise a myriad of tendencies that go unquestioned.  Right and wrong ceases to matter, and even if something is illegal, one can still view it as society just having its own bias against it, just as it once had a ‘bias’ against homosexuality.

‘Nothing is natural.  Everything is just a matter of preference.’  That is the basic thrust of this unfortunate situation.  In fact, having a preference is in itself seen as evidence of one’s intelligence.  No attention needs to be paid to intellectuals, thinkers, philosophers, sages, religious te…