Beneficence or Maleficence

Pay and Repent

There are no questions when empathy manifests in helping victims of a disaster or a serious illness. But there are many circumstances when it is not easy to figure out who to sympathize with and whether the help will be beneficial or harmful. Without considering the consequences, empathy breeds parasitism, the formation of complexes of guilt and victimhood, helplessness, and irresponsibility, and is not necessarily accompanied by gratitude. And the benefactor is not always motivated by genuine altruism; motives can be gaining political and moral capital or populist hypocrisy: “I feel your pain.”

The success of a politician under all regimes is determined by the ability to convince that his thoughts and actions are dictated by concern for the welfare of fellow citizens. “Everything in the name of man, for the good of man” – Program of Communist Party of Soviet Union; “Social equality and equal opportunities” – Program of the Democratic Party of the USA. Despite all the differences in basic conditions, equality of rights and opportunities in America is as far from reality as the people’s well-being is from the Soviet way of life.

In a democratic society, the question of who deserves compassion and support is not determined based on the recommendations of impartial analysts but rather on the conditions of the struggle for voters’ votes. Empathy serves as a convincing motive, covering up political interests.

In the Western world, millions of people live with complexes of guilt and victimhood. New history and the dominant ideology present the West not as the highest achievement in socio-economic, political, and cultural development but as an exploiter, colonizer, and hegemon, suppressing the rights and freedoms of other countries and peoples.

Although America formally did not have colonial conquests, its list of accusations of interference in internal affairs, change of government, and exploitation of resources in other countries is longer than that of anyone else. Globalization is perceived in much of the world as Americanization, and economic assistance as a way to subordinate to its own interests.

Regarding responsibility and guilt complexes associated with international relations, one can argue and prove that America has recognized and is ready to pay and repent for its internal original sin – the destruction of the way of life of the indigenous inhabitants of the country and slavery. The sincere desire to atone for past sins is not always productive and often worsens the situation of those they are trying to help.

American Indians have special rights: self-government (tribal sovereignty), their own police, and significant material benefits in obtaining housing, education, healthcare, and business development. However, the situation in reservations is critical: mass unemployment, high child mortality, low educational level, domestic violence, poor physical and mental health, alcoholism, drug addiction, and suicide.

Currently, only two and a half million Native Americans are living in the USA. According to demographers’ estimates, if their way of life had not been destroyed, there would have been more than a billion. Despite good intentions and colossal expenses, improving the situation does not work out.

Empathy towards the descendants of slaves – African Americans – also produces contradictory results. For many decades, every government, party, foundation, and research center has been developing programs, allocating subsidies, establishing affirmative actions, and conducting educational work to improve racial relations and living conditions of the black community.

However, the results are often contrary to expectations. Often, people from generation to generation cannot live without social benefits and do not want to study and work productively. A liberal attitude towards crime leads to recidivism, an increase in crime, from which the black community primarily suffers.

Even more absurd is the empathy regarding illegal immigration. Giving shelter to all the unfortunate and dissatisfied is an insoluble task; half of the world’s population would be happy to move to the more prosperous countries of the West. And those who illegally cross the borders are more often young and healthy rather than old and sick.

This does not address those who consciously try to change the face of Western democracies through new demographics and the protest movement of minorities. More people sympathize with seekers of a better life. However, few are personally ready to share their housing with refugees, provide them with work, and pay for their education and insurance. At the same time, American sanctuary cities are in a deep housing crisis, streets are filled with homeless people with serious mental illnesses, infrastructure is in ruins, and millions cannot survive without state benefits, receive necessary healthcare, or pay off debts. But here, empathy finds no place.

Europe pays a devastating price for the invasion of millions of people of different cultures, norms, and traditions. There are fundamental publications warning of the consequences of demographic changes. Douglas Murray (“The Strange Death of Europe,” “The Madness of Crowds,” “Bloody Sunday,” “Islamophilia – a Metropolitan Disease”) believes that Europe has embarked on a path of suicide and does not intend to deviate from this path. The degradation and capitulation of Europe are spoken about in fiction. Novels by Michel Houellebecq (“Platform,” “Submission”) predict the near future when Islamists will rule in Europe, are well-known, but it is impossible to change anything now. The point of no return has been passed. Riotous crowds on the streets of European cities, dictating their will to governments, are evidence of an existential catastrophe, which is justified by humanism and empathy. 

Homo Empathicus

The ability to understand and share the emotional experiences of another person or social group is an important component of civilized thinking and behavior. The essence of the biblical commandments: “Do not do unto others what you do not want done to you,” and to follow this requirement is possible only based on sympathy and compassion. Empathy can be an exceptionally strong experience; the stigmata of Catholic ascetics are identical to the wounds of Christ at the crucifixion. The pain and suffering of others can be felt as acutely as one’s own.

Plato considered empathy the highest form of knowledge, as it allows one to go beyond one’s “self” and see the world through the eyes of another. Without the ability to empathize, artistic literature and art are impossible; a narcissist, an egocentric cannot understand the state of other people.

But there is another view on empathy. “Push the falling,” Nietzsche said, “I do not trust all those who sympathize and avoid them.” For Nietzsche, empathy is an expression of contempt. It relaxes a person and creates dependence.

There is much popular literature about compassion and helping the poor and weak. Every memoir of a prominent politician, celebrity, or rich person contributes to this genre. Liberal pedagogy and psychology consider the cultivation of a sense of empathy a priority task. Mostly a set of banalities, but there are also serious studies in this area.

“Against Empathy” by Paul Bloom shows that intentions and actions without understanding the context, without a plan, and without considering the consequences deprive one of the ability to distinguish good from evil to have rational judgment.

In Germany, a monograph by Fritz Breithaupt, “The Dark Side of Empathy,” was published, and an English translation was issued at Cornell University. Although the book is not at all in line with current political correctness, the critics’ reviews are enthusiastic: “A brilliant kaleidoscopic study of the terrible things we do because of the ability to experience empathy, an important book warning against the naive belief that empathy is the way to eliminate our social vices,” “People often commit cruel crimes… as a direct result of empathy.”

Recently, Professor Breithaupt moved to America, and we met at a concert of Bach’s “St. Matthew Passion” thereafter, at his home in Bethlehem, he gifted me his book. A deep, conscientious study, not subject to politicization and self-censorship. The author shows that empathy can be a source of virtue but also maleficence: “We usually assume that empathy leads to moral behavior. But in many cases, the result is the opposite – from everyday callousness to exploitation, oppression, terrorism, vampirism, false compassion. By its nature, empathy is not only incapable of stopping such acts but actually motivates and promotes them.”

The book contains convincing facts confirming these conclusions, from personal relationships to global phenomena. The most impressive is the analysis of Angela Merkel’s behavior, “reacting to her false dynamics of empathy” suppressed in herself and the country a rational attitude towards illegal migration. A sentiment for which Germany today pays a high price with acute problems of adapting people of a different culture, the rise of Nazism, and the resurgence of anti-Semitism. (However, at one of the international conferences, a prominent German journalist referred to Merkel as a “cold-blooded politician” who was aware of what she was doing and incapable of empathy.)

Without Conscience and Reason

Breithaupt’s book was published before Hamas’s barbaric attack on Israel. But it convincingly explains how the obvious and indisputable can be presented in the distorted mirrors of twisted pseudo-empathy consciousness. The tragedy is not only for the Jews but for the entire civilized world that Hamas terrorists have found such broad support.

Understanding the attitude of international organizations and individual countries is not difficult – it is determined not by legal and moral considerations but by geopolitical interests. There are almost 2 billion Muslims in the world, they possess large natural and financial resources, and although many of them have been engulfed in internal and external wars for decades, there are no major differences in their attitude towards the Jewish state.

The West, taught by the experience of wars with radical Islam, fears a clash of civilizations, a resurgence of terrorism, and an exacerbation of internal division and extremism. The current conflict occurs in the conditions of a new world order, a struggle for spheres of influence, and is actively used by interested parties for their own interests.

And yet, the explosion of savagery and the transformation of anti-Semitism into a global phenomenon cannot be explained only by geopolitics and private interests. In pro-Palestinian demonstrations in America, there are many more participants than in pro-Israeli ones, and the majority are not Muslims; in pro-Israeli ones, there are very few non-Jews. How could it happen that in elite universities, citadels of knowledge and reason, student organizations consider the “Israeli regime fully responsible for all the ongoing violence”? Among the youth (18-29 years old), 56% support the Palestinians.

Jew-haters accuse Israel of genocide, apartheid, and discrimination against Palestinians, who live in better conditions than their co-religionists in many Muslim and other countries. In the past decade, more than a million Muslims have died in armed conflicts, and tens of millions have become refugees. In many countries, Muslims are persecuted, subjected to violence, and live in conditions of apartheid, but all attention is focused on the Palestinians.

Defenders of Palestinians do not want to see persecution of LGBTIQA+, women’s rights violations, and suppression of civil liberties in Muslim regimes. They do not want to think about the fact that the way of life and thinking of the Western person is unacceptable in the Islamic world. Radical Islam is against everything that its Western defenders consider their ideals, values, and norms of behavior. Who among Western youth, submitting to Sharia, would give up short skirts, exposed bodies, tattoos, ripped jeans, and other attributes of the cool new world?!

The reasons for pro-Palestinian attitudes are largely due to early indoctrination with the chimeras of colonialism, racism, and discrimination. However, this is not enough to explain why Palestinians, under the guise of Hamas, are heralded as heroes on university campuses and by street crowds. At the same time, Jewish students fear wearing a kippah. Today, it is dangerous to identify oneself as a Jew even without a kippah. How have the illiterate proponents of “inclusivity,” “Critical Race Theory,” and “Awakening” replaced serious academic courses and silenced thoughtful professors? What united the anti-Israel stances of Professor Barack Obama and the worldview of illiterate imbeciles who tear down posters with photos of hostages, draw swastikas on synagogues, and destroy gravestones in Jewish cemeteries?

Most of those accusing Israel deny bias against Jews and do not consider themselves anti-Semitic. Many are sincere in their beliefs. Their anti-Semitism is hidden behind a mask of empathy and support for the weak and discriminated. All the evil and injustice in the world recede in the face of concern for the Palestinians because this allows supporting maleficence while feeling on the side of good and justice.

Understanding the nature of empathy allows us to explain the phenomena of “useful idiots” striving to build a better world in which they will have no place, “Stockholm Syndrome” – the attempt to please, appeal to one’s enemies, and many other pathological manifestations of liberal consciousness and behavior.

Professors Bloom and Breithaupt convincingly demonstrated the dangerous side of empathy. But the trouble is that irrational hatred and stupidity are not subject to rational thinking.

Translated and edited by Carol Grunberg