Exactly. Philip Zimbardo is a psychologist who did a lot of work in this area, including the (in)famous Stanford Prison Experiment. He wrote a book titled, The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil which, despite its rather dramatic title, offered much information from various studies as well as life examples about how people – often without their being aware of it – will follow their designated group/social “roles” and perform the most horrendous deeds to feel part of the “group.”
One of the most important points was that most people who succumbed to group immorality and violence were otherwise “good, upstanding” folks beforehand.
Zimbardo made the point that life situations and studies revealed that the people most susceptible to falling into this kind of behavior were the ones who said, “I’m a decent person and would never do such things myself.”
Why?
Because they were blind to their own darker impulses and the potential for them to act on them.
As usual, mindfulness and the willingness and ability to honestly look inward, honestly recognizing any dark potentialities, allowed for some psychological “distance” from them and was conducive to skillfully working with them, to let them go.
When compromise is not possible or one side is blatantly ridiculous in its demands, you exercise agency and do what you think is right. Centrists are open to hearing both sides but are not limited by them. Sometimes you side with one side over another and sometimes you go your own way.
Can you give any examples of “Centrists” Ralf. Who are the prominent “Centrists”? What countries are led by “Centrists”? In the UK New Labour was considered “Centrists” and was responsible for some pretty diabolical acts. & Clinton? He imprisoned a fair few.
I’ve also seen certain individuals who are clearly extreme in there views describe themselves as “Centrist”.
I’ve heard some try and equate centrism with the “middle way”, which is cute.
While a mendicant is practicing such meditation, if their mind inclines to talking, they think: ‘I will not engage in the kind of speech that is low, crude, ordinary, ignoble, and pointless. Such speech doesn’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. Namely: talk about kings, bandits, and ministers; talk about armies, threats, and wars; talk about food, drink, clothes, and beds; talk about garlands and fragrances; talk about family, vehicles, villages, towns, cities, and countries; talk about women and heroes; street talk and well talk; talk about the departed; motley talk; tales of land and sea; and talk about being reborn in this or that state of existence.’ In this way they are aware of the situation. ‘But I will take part in talk about self-effacement that helps open the heart and leads solely to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. That is, talk about fewness of wishes, contentment, seclusion, aloofness, arousing energy, ethics, immersion, wisdom, freedom, and the knowledge and vision of freedom.’ In this way they are aware of the situation.
Practiced sincerely, Dhamma and Vinaya permeates indirectly and resists the world with its sensual affirmation. Order establishes itself in relation to Buddhist principles spontaneously with our practice. One does not need to agitate and poison one’s head with the world’s problems. True heroism is in ascetic life and deep contemplation. I am grateful to Ajahn Brahm and other Greats for all that he has done in the world, we are in good hands.
Hannah Arendt‘s account of Eichmann‘s character is contested:
[Peter Hayes] points out the fact that Arendt was completely gulled by Eichmann. Diaries and conversations we now have from his time in Argentina prove without doubt that Eichmann knew full well what he was doing, volunteered for it and had a long record of antisemitism. He was an instigator, not a pen-pushing bureaucrat.
In addition, I had a long rant typed out about my irritation at Buddhist monastics engaging in the culture wars by repeating „with us or against us“ rhetoric and similar overheated and undercooked takes, but then I realized it‘s a huge waste of time
So here‘s the only relevant information: I‘m frustrated and sad, and every time I fail to ignore these political threads, my faith in the transformative potential of the Dhamma takes a beating. Do with that what you will.
Time to shut off the internet for a century and practice in seclusion.
This really was my entire point.
Probably for the best!