I am rethinking power and compassion, and having new thoughts about their expected and actual relationship in contemporary Western society. Channeling Friedrich Nietzsche for a moment, perhaps strength and power are more natural, instinctive aspects of one's humanity than are compassion and altruism. Perhaps compassion and altruism are learned behaviors. Perhaps it is envy that turns one against power and control, and for those in possession of it (the power and control) perhaps this envy of others further strengthens their determination to hold onto it.

I look around and see numerous power struggle mini-dramas played out daily; (some within myself). Perhaps this acknowledgment of a human need for power can create a greater understanding for behavior lacking compassion. Perhaps this immorality (still channeling Nietzsche) is as it should be.

If immorality is as it should be, then why does it seem important to so many to put on a compassionate face? Why not be truthful? (i.e. "I have the power and you don't - na-na-na-na-boo-boo!") If I add a pragmatic perspective to this nihilistic view, perhaps it will lead to an answer; or at least a yet deeper understanding of the forces at play.

American philosopher Richard Rorty (1931-2007) said that 'truth is what your contemporaries let you get away with.' Today, in contemporary society, one must temper their hold on power with representative compassion and altruism. To do otherwise would endanger that hold on power. We have 'learned' that compassion, kindness, consideration, generosity, and other like-minded synonyms are expected behaviors, while their antonyms (some of which are necessary to gain and hold power) are unacceptable and/or (at the least) frowned upon. So perhaps we have created a two-headed, two-faced monster (2 faces on both heads?) consisting of one's natural inclination toward power and one's learned inclination toward compassion. According to this line of thought (and based on personal observation) a fair portion of altruistic behaviors, and in many cases simple kindnesses, are motivated by one's instinctive yearning for power.

I believe most of us have at least some power in some arenas (and like it), and are envious of those with the power in other arenas. Keeping this dichotomy in mind, I will say again, perhaps the immorality associated with power is as it should be.

Now I will argue against the power of power ...

Having seen Hurricane Katrina and the immediate aftermath firsthand, I can attest to many, many acts of compassion and altruism that were (to me) obviously natural and instinctive. During a time of crisis people pulled together and, with no ulterior motives, helped each other. So perhaps compassion and altruism can also lay claim to an ancestry as ancient as that of power. Unfortunately (referring again to Hurricane Katrina) within a few days the balance of power(s) was reinstated. For those few days though, true authority was weakened or absent and the playing field had been leveled. With everyone on equal or near-equal footing, and with so much to be done, giving everyone equal opportunity to help, power struggles became unnecessary. It was when the flood of outsiders (both those coming to take advantage and those coming to take charge) swamped the area that power restablished its predominance over compassion and individual power struggles reappeared.

So it appears that power's predominance over compassion may be a result of socialization and specialization, but I believe large scale and small scale personal crises show that compassion is every bit as instinctive and hard-wired as is power. There are unlearned and learned aspects to both and in today's sociocultural climate we have learned to act in accordance with both, but we have also learned that (except in a time of crisis) it is more advantageous to seek, gain, and hold power, thus making it more automatic and instinctive, and relegating compassion to a learned/forced behavior or facade.

Which brings me to the question, can one transcend their contemporary humanity and reach an authentic, untainted compassion? Some (including Nietzsche) might ask, why would one desire to transcend their humanity to show weakness, when humanity is all one has? I would argue for the transcendental compassion, if for no other reason, as an exercise in potentiality. I believe there are other reasons; however, I also believe it to be a daunting task to convince the multitudes to subject themselves to crisis-mode stress AND leave their comfort zones AND relinquish power and control for something so laboriously menial as closing the gap on Truth, Wisdom, and Happiness.

Though I believe we currently operate on a premise of pragmatic nihilism, I disagree with Richard Rorty that the fact that 'our contemporaries let us get away with it' makes it truth. The Truth is beyond our reach. And though I may or may not be on the right track with power and compassion; and though I will never (in this Lifetime) know the Truth; I will continue to reach ...