anger

A few weeks ago issues at work forced me to drop almost completely off the face of the internet. One of my key employees got arrested, bailed, arrested again shortly after for a second, identical offence, then remanded in custody for three weeks leaving me short staffed and in employer limbo. I was stuck with the question of how do I proceed legally in a way that is best for my business? Things have almost resolved themselves now; the employee has asked for his P45 and I'm training a replacement.

At work he's always done the job requested of him and never been aggressive towards anyone. What he does outside of work is his own business unless it impacts on mine. He's got the potential to be a great person if only he could break the cycle of drinking, drugs, depression and the violent outbursts. I've heard the way he used to talk to his mother on his mobile. If he wanted something from her, such as cash, and he couldn't get his own way he would launch into a string of angry expletives that would make Obnoxio proud.

Anger, frustration, aggression and confrontation were not good weapons in the fights he was having with his mother. He could not, through force, convince her to change her beliefs (specifically that she should help him financially). I tried on many occasions to persuade him to put the phone down before launching into the tirade but to no avail. If he had done then things might not have got to the position that they have.

Why was he arrested? His mother took out a restraining order against him forbidding him from having contact with her, her partner or his younger brother and sister which he breached, spectacularly, twice over a weekend. Apparently it isn't the first time he's smashed up parts of her house either.

You might be wondering where this self indulgent ramble is going but stick with it for just a little bit longer. I might even get to the point I wanted to make.


The majority of people who have a vague interest in the political outcome of the country take their first steps into the murky world of politics through the media. Whether that's the unbiased and fair opinions of Kavanagh in the Sun, Maguire in the Mirror, Toynbee in the Guardian, Hitchens in the Mail, the sedate Question Time or the everyday business of Parliament that is PMQs. The public face of political discourse is partisan and deeply entrenched. They agree with the utterings of the politicians on 'their' side and dismiss out of hand those made by 'the opposition'. Maybe they'll seek to find out more about the issues by expanding their exposure to the political circus. Their ideas about who is right and wrong become more entrenched as the rhetoric flows. Ideas are dismissed out of hand because of who proposed them, not on the merits or results of the ideas themselves.

I've seen numerous examples of this kind of behaviour pattern in the real* world, on blogs, on forums, on Twitter. Two opposite viewpoints fighting each other with anger, malice or petty one-upmanship. Neither prepared to give an inch towards resolving their differences. Both trying to outscore the other in the race to prove their idealogical superiority. Neither prepared to accept that nothing they say is likely to persuade their opponent to change their mind on the subject because of the way it's delivered. I've seen it repeated time and time again. It can take the form of verbal abuse or physical violence but two forces coming together in this way rarely result in a positive outcome for either.


My editor (wife) has been reading through this post as it lengthens and laughed at me. Loudly, heartily, the laughs racked her slender frame like the severe asthmatic coughing on entering a smoke filled room. "You yourself are a ranty bastard" she accused "and what the fucking hell is the point of all of this?" She is, of course, correct with her accusation. I am a ranty bastard and this post is rapidly becoming unwieldy in length.

You can, through force and intimidation, make people tell you they agree with you but once they've disengaged from the conversation they'll mutter to themselves about what an utter twat you are. They may even tell their friends, who hold their viewpoint, that you are a twat. Their friends will agree with them thus further reinforcing their views. There is no way that people can be persuaded to change their minds by force - it only serves to strengthen their prejudices.

The thing that works for many, including me, is humour. Humour is softer. Make people smile and they are far more likely to contemplate what you say than if you attempt to browbeat them into submission. Humour cajoles and teases, places ideas that can be remembered fondly, makes friends, sneaks in under the radar, it's a warm and fuzzy feeling that you want to return to. Humour is bright sunshine to the cold wind of anger. It's more effective in the long term game than direct confrontation.












* For illustrative purposes only. Philosophers and physicists can argue whether the world which we perceive through our sensory organs is the 'real' world somewhere else.