Vindicated and Vindictive

Do you ever come across a word that seems to be carrying a lot more meaning than what appears on the surface?  Well, I do and a statement I heard yesterday about someone being (or feeling) vindicated led me along a bit of an indirect path to arrive at some new (for me) insight.  Because I’m always alert for new insight, I thought I would just document this process and because insight is more valuable when shared, I am making it available to the rest of the world here.

Vindicate seems like a positive, right?  “Finally, I was vindicated in my opposition to their policy.”

It seems that we all have a desire to be vindicated.  We say, “I won’t say ‘I told you so’…” and somehow feel that we haven’t said it or that we have softened the blow.  Even that statement contains the need for vindication.  It’s never enough to be right (either factually, ethically or morally).  No, we need that one additional step of maintaining our “rightness” and, even better, the satisfaction of hearing another person say that we were right.

There is another word, vindictive, that is almost always used in a negative sense.  We say that someone is vindictive and bitter for example.  This is not intended as a compliment.

As you might guess from looking at both words, they are related and come from the same Latin root.

Latin vindicare (claim, vindicate, punish)  [http://www.myetymology.com/english]

While we may have some misgivings about a definition (vindcare) that uses the concept we are trying to define, the association of claim and punish in one word is very interesting.  If you’re still reading it means you find it interesting, too.

We of western (European) descent and culture marvel at the need for vengeance that drives (to our eyes) much of the politics and culture of the Mid-East.  We hear that a killing (murder?) was justified by the perpetrator on the basis of avenging a wrong that was committed many generations previously.  In fact, Albanians everywhere seem intent on avenging such a wrong which they see as having been committed on each of them as members of a specific sub-culture by another sub-culture.

The Basques in Spain and even, to a degree, the Quebecoise of Canada are given to a similar cultural perception.  In the U.S. there is a movement by the descendant of Africans brought to this country as slaves to demand vindication in the form of reparations from the descendants of those who did the enslaving.  More recently, the US cried out with a single voice for revenge following the World Trade Center attack.  The few voices for restraint were completely ignored because  they came from outside the cultural norm.  I note that in each of these cases the original transgression has been attributed to “them.”  “They” did this.  They is a nation or an organization even though the perpetrators were individuals.

The point is that humans seem to feel comfortable with an expectation of (claim for) punishment for a wrong.  Those who “are vindicated” are no less guilty than those who “are vindictive.”  The beneficiaries of vengeance (morally appropriate punishment) bathe in the same blood as the vindicators.

For those interested in the wisdom of the Book, Micah Chapter 6 verse 8 tells us

And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God

Over and over we are told that mercy trumps justice and, in fact, this is one of the central tenets of Christianity.  It is certainly a tenet of Buddhism and, for all I know, of Islam. 

Vindicate and Vindictive tell us much about the human condition and the very long path we must negotiate to achieve our potential.

Principles and Pragmatism

We are being held hostage by a group of people new to their job (inexperienced) who see principle as the trump card in the deck. The fact that they took a solemn oath to serve the people of the United States and to always act in the best interests of the people seems to have been lost in the shadow of partisan principle.

They have taken to cutting off debate on every issue by redefining the issue in terms of their principle. In another context this would be called obstructionist, bullheaded, stubborn, and (in light of their oath of office) unprincipled.

In order to see just how foolish their principle is we have only to take it literally. If spending on the part of government is evil, let's take away the government's ability to spend. If taxes are evil, let's abolish taxation. Without the ability to spend, taxes are unnecessary anyway.

Imagine what the nation's economy would look like. It would cease to exist. But we don't want to abolish government spending, you say, we just want to reduce it. At this point principle is no longer involved. Deciding how to reduce is a matter of prioritization and negotiation rather than principle.

The irony of the situation is that their principle has so impaired their ability to see that they continue on, digging an ever deeper hole for themselves. Anyone who chooses to see is aware that the nation and its people are not being served by unprincipled adherence to principle. This group's blind service to their principles was the cause of the economic woes we find ourselves in today. All can see that, instead of improving the situation we are being forced in the other direction. When one of these people gets in front of a microphone and insists on deeper cuts, the world wraps it blanket tighter around itself and prepares for the worst.

If one person always had the best idea, we wouldn't need a Congress. I suppose Hitler and Mussolini had principles, too.