Compassion for political adversaries—smart or disastrous?

The doormat question

When I recommend that compassion is a smart strategy for navigating today’s choppy political waters, some people get their backs up.

How can I be expected to have compassion for people who are trying to hurt me?

Why is it always our side that has to have compassion?

Compassion is easy for you to recommend as a privileged white dude, but is it really doable for the rest of us?

All fair questions.

The key is to understand exactly what I mean by compassion. I am not talking about being passive or supine. Compassionate is not synonymous with doormat.

Perhaps another way to define compassion would be “non-hatred.”

It comes down to this: What’s going to make you most effective in these divisive times? Anger and hatred may get you off the couch, but these emotions will eventually burn you out and degrade your cognitive capacities. Rage can even temporarily reduce your peripheral vision.

By contrast, compassion—for yourself, for the vulnerable, even for your “enemies”—is a cleaner-burning fuel. It sustains you through the inevitable ups and downs. Compassion actually improves your peripheral vision.

If you wish for people on the “other side” to be happy and healthy, that doesn’t mean you are rooting for them to succeed in whatever destructive plans you think they might have. Happy and healthy people tend to not want to destroy stuff. In fact, people who harm others are harming themselves. Hard as it may be to swallow, they deserve our compassion.

They do not, however, deserve our complicity. Compassion in no way precludes taking decisive action.

Here’s an illustrative story from the meditation teacher Sharon Salzberg: When she first went to India to study Buddhism, she asked her teacher: How can I be compassionate for someone trying to steal my bag?

The teacher replied: You can very compassionately whack them with your umbrella. In other words, you can take a very firm stand to defend yourself or others—even one that involves wielding an umbrella—but it need not be motivated by hatred.

Today on the podcast, I talk with the writer (and hardcore meditator) Diego Perez, aka Yung Pueblo, about how to pursue the Buddhist ideal of boundless compassion without being a doormat. We also talk about how to have a happy marriage, how to have an open mind without abandoning your values, and the difference between love and attachment.

Paid subscribers can listen to today's episode ad-free here.

If you upgrade to paid, you also get lots of other stuff, including: access to the episode cheatsheet at the bottom of this email (which includes key takeaways, time-coded highlights and a transcript); the ability to comment on my posts; access to my subscriber chats; and access to my twice-monthly live sessions, in which I guide a meditation then take your questions.

Join the party.

Episode cheatsheet

The big takeaway

Diego Perez (aka Yung Pueblo) shares insights from 12 years of serious meditation practice and how it has transformed his relationships and perspective on life. He talks about the importance of developing compassion, understanding the impermanent nature of reality, and making conscious choices to shape our future selves.

Meditating your way to better relationships and a clearer mind