|
|
 |
|
|
Archive for the '5. Obsession' Category
Friday, September 14th, 2007
In yet another example of how leaders, political pundits and many others are helping to crush the public’s capacity to discern fact from spin, President Bush role-modeled this very problem during his speech last night. For the facts, click here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20766644
If this practice were a one-time aberration, or if only a few people did it, well… there are always a few rotten apples. But, it is being role-modeled every day in every way by far too many political, business and even some religious leaders, by lobbyists, by media pundits and talk radio hosts, and by everyday people across the political and ideological spectrum. After all, if so many leaders do it, it must be okay, right?
The truth is that is practice of making it impossible to distinguish supposed facts from actual spin clouds everyone’s capacity for discernment. This widespread practice renders even the most well-meaning people unable to make informed decisions despite their best intentions. This example of widespread lack of integrity undermines the very foundation of democracy and free society.
It is time for people across the political, ideological and advocacy spectrum to start insisting to the leaders, advocates and commentators that they support cease this practice once and for all. We need to focus less on attacking the “other side” for doing this and focus more on using our power where it can be felt, through insisting that “our side” stop doing this.
Posted in Unintegrity Varieties, From the News, 1. Lying, 5. Obsession, 6. Disregarding Highest Good, 7. Unilateral Decisions About Highest Good, Examples | No Comments »
Monday, June 18th, 2007
Here is a story straight from the news providing an example of a prosecutor’s political aspirations being more important than his integrity. This fellow seems to have made his desire to be elected to a higher office more important than whether he wreck the lives of innocent people. It cost him not only his position but his right to practice as an attorney. Yet, still he would not take full responsibility for what he did. Read for yourself from the following excerpts (for the complete story, go to
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070617/ap_on_re_us/duke_lacrosse_94;_ylt=AsXojDh40yiYM3nf.q_cxbJlM3wV):
By AARON BEARD, Associated Press Writer
RALEIGH, N.C. - District Attorney Mike Nifong was disbarred Saturday for his “selfish” rape prosecution of three Duke University lacrosse players — a politically motivated act, his judges said, that he inexplicably allowed to fester for months after it was clear the defendants were innocent.
The three-member disciplinary committee… stripped the veteran prosecutor of his state law license.
Even Nifong and his attorneys supported the decision, though the veteran prosecutor refused to admit to the end that no crime occurred at a March 2006 lacrosse team party.
The committee said Nifong manipulated the investigation to boost his chances of winning his first election for Durham County district attorney. In doing so, he committed “a clear case of intentional prosecutorial misconduct” that involved “dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation.”
F. Lane Williamson [the chairman of the three-member disciplinary committee that stripped the veteran prosecutor of his state law license] specifically cited Nifong’s comments in the early days of the case, which included a confident proclamation at a candidate forum that he wouldn’t allow Durham to become known for “a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl.” He also called the lacrosse team “a bunch of hooligans” at one point.
Appointed district attorney in 2005, Nifong was in a tight race for the office when a stripper told police she was raped at the party.
“At the time he was facing a primary, and yes, he was politically naive,” Williamson said. “But we can draw no other conclusion that those initial statements he made were to further his political ambitions.”
During the ethics trial, Nifong acknowledged he knew there was no DNA evidence connecting Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty to the 28-year-old accuser when he indicted them on charges of rape, sexual offense and kidnapping. Nifong later charged Dave Evans with the same crimes. But months later, state prosecutors concluded the three players were “innocent” — a fact Williamson hammered home on Saturday.
“We acknowledge the actual innocence of the defendants, and there’s nothing here that has done anything but support that assertion,” Williamson said.
Williamson said it appeared that throughout his investigation, Nifong was looking for any evidence to link a lacrosse player to the accuser’s story in order to support his initial comments that he was sure an attack occurred.
“He’s already out there,” Williamson said. “He’s way out there by then. He looks foolish if he does not go forward.”
One of the most serious ethics violations Nifong was found to have committed involved his failure to turn over DNA test results that identified genetic material from several men — but no members of the lacrosse team — in the accuser’s underwear and body.
In court documents and hearings in May, June and September, Nifong told two different judges that he had no more evidence that could be considered helpful to the defense…
Nifong declined to comment Saturday while quietly slipping out of the courthouse through a side door, but his attorney had announced earlier — after the committee concluded he broke the rules — that Nifong considered disbarment an appropriate punishment. Nifong had already pledged to resign his $110,000-a-year job as district attorney, and he will not appeal…
Posted in Unintegrity Varieties, From the News, 1. Lying, 4. Non Self-Responsibility, 5. Obsession, 6. Disregarding Highest Good, Examples | No Comments »
Monday, November 6th, 2006
By now you may have heard about the Colorado pastor who was the president of the National Association of Evangelicals. He was a crusader against homosexuality and drugs who stepped down in disgrace from both his national role and his congregational pulpit, saying to his congregants the following:
“The fact is I am guilty of sexual immorality. And I take responsibility for the entire problem,” Haggard wrote. “I am a deceiver and a liar. There’s a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring against it for all of my adult life.”
People who try to war against that within them that feels “dark and repulsive” cannot win that ware through using willpower. Only through fully digesting the originating trauma and its healing it negative aftereffects can this occur. Too many people in leadership and spiritual positions deny the vital importance of doing psychological healing in order to live in integrity with one’s professed values.
The moral of the story is that, as I have put it for years now, “People function at the level of their wounds not their wishes.” Huge amounts of damage have been done in political, business and spiritual circles as a result of denying this vital fact.
To read more about this particular example, click here. I only ask you to compassionately keep in mind that this is but one of a vast universe of examples — today’s example. There are, sadly, plenty more where this came from, and in all walks of life and all religions.
Posted in Unintegrity Varieties, From the News, 1. Lying, 5. Obsession, Examples | No Comments »
Saturday, October 28th, 2006
Obsession, in the context of Unintegrity, means my goal is so important that I will reach it no matter what damage I do to myself or others along the way. It is this kind of obsessiveness that gives rise to the cliché, “the ends justify the means.” Unintegrity-based obsession comes in three main flavors: Obsessive Overdrive, Obsessive Secrecy and Obsessive Crusading.
Obsessive Overdrive
Obsessive Overdrive is a state in which all life balance is compromised as a single-focused goal is pursued. A very common example is the leader or entrepreneur who focuses on business at the ongoing expense of personal balance and cherished relationships. Of course, in real life, most business people have busy periods. I am referring to this imbalance being more the rule than the exception.
Even people doing profoundly noble work in service of higher good, such as Mohandas Gandhi, can fall into this trap. It has been commonly reported that his wife and children chronically felt neglected by his single-mindedness on being of service in the world. In serving this way, he may not have served those he loved in ways that nourished them. This is an important illustration for two reasons. First, Unintegrity is possible even in those whose good intentions are unquestionable. Second, Unintegrity is possible even when doing profoundly valuable things to improve the state of the world.
Obsessive Secrecy
Obsessive Secrecy is a state in which secrecy is demanded in order to maintain abusive forms of power. Of course, in real life there are times when secrecy is required for integrity to be preserved, such as client-psychotherapist confidentiality or client-attorney privilege. In contrast,
A classic example of obsessive secrecy comes from my experience as a psychotherapist. To preserve confidentiality, this example is a composite of a number of situations my clients have shared with me. It is the husband and father who essentially leads a double life. On the one hand, he is highly regarded in the community as a church elder and civic organization volunteer, and who has won many awards for all his community service. On the other hand, he is verbally abusive with his wife and has incested his daughters, and has then threatened to kill them if they ever told a soul about what goes on at home, insisting that what goes on in his family is nobody’s business. The words he hides behind are, “a good and righteous family never airs its dirty laundry in public.”
Obsessive Crusading
Obsessive Crusading is a state in which a person passionately pursues a cause more as an expression of unresolved trauma, mental illness or megalomania (extreme obsession with having ultimate power), than as an outgrowth of a high-minded state. The milder form could be called Traumatized Obsessive Crusading while the apt term for the most extreme form is Ideological Obsessive Crusading. Of course in real life, there are people who passionately pursue causes from high-minded, love-based states of mind, heart and spirit.
Periodically, a story makes the news in which a parent’s child has been killed in a particularly brutal way by an elusive killer, and where the parent has vowed to not rest until the killer is caught and “justice” is served. As understandable as this might sound on the surface, I am talking about the parent who wants revenge more than true justice, and who is willing to sacrifice their health, livelihood and remaining family in order to get it. Seeking an outer fix (revenge) for an inner problem (grief and rage) is not only ineffective, but it requires huge amounts of Unintegrity in order to pursue. This is an example of Traumatized Obsessive Crusading.
At the far extreme of Obsessive Crusading is Ideologically Obsessive Crusaders. There are people who invoke some variety of higher principle (a philosophy, religion, or even science) to justify advocating hatred and violence.
Sometimes this person acts alone and sometimes this person recruits followers. Always this person insists s/he is doing this in service of higher good, and most often s/he vehemently insists that those who do not subscribe to his/her ideology are the devil. Always as well, these people are ultimately revealed to have a history of severe trauma, mental illness or megalomania (extreme obsession with having ultimate power). They are usually willing to die for their cause, but more often are willing for others to die for this cause. Jim Jones is a good example, but any number of examples can be found throughout history.
The most famous of the 20th century Ideologically Obsessive Crusaders was Adolph Hitler. The most famous of the 21st century is Osama bin Laden. What all Ideologically Obsessive Crusaders have in common is an extremely severe and dangerous, but unclassified, psychological disorder that I refer to as Fanaticism Disorder.
Whether Traumatized or Ideological in variety, Obsessive Crusaders are fiercely devoted to, and usually in highly disciplined “integrity” with, their beliefs. Yet they are in a state of Unintegrity. What gives this away? Crusading that advocates hatred or violence as a result of projecting one’s own disowned inner darkness onto others, is never in service of highest good.
Posted in 5. Obsession | No Comments »
Saturday, October 28th, 2006
I offer you a couple of warnings before I launch into the examples:
- This is Not About Blame: As I said above, the purpose of this chapter is not to lay blame but to expand your awareness of the range of ways in which Unintegrity expresses itself. Because I see the Unintegrity Pandemic as a systemic problem, I hold to blame no one individual, culture, religion, organization, business, profession, political party, governmental agency, country and organization of countries. I propose instead that each one of us has a huge role to play in solving this problem. Each individual, culture, religion, country, organization, business, profession, political party, governmental agency, country or organization of countries. So, as you read the rest of this chapter, I ask you to not dwell upon the question of who is at fault. Rather, simply open your eyes to how pervasive the Unintegrity problem is, so you can begin to focus on the solution (an integrity revolution), instead of continuing to view each of these illustrations as separate problems needing to be addressed separately.
- Refrain From Despair: While it might be tempting to throw your hands up in despair as you read about the magnitude and pervasiveness of the Unintegrity Pandemic, please keep in mind that this book is about a solution to this problem. Only this chapter is about the problem itself. I therefore urge you to treat this chapter as a call to consciousness and as a means to motivate, not as an invitation to despair.
- Examples Cross Categories: I have placed the examples you are about to read into individual categories to make it easier to understand each category. In reality, though, most of these Unintegrity illustrations could just as easily have been used to illustrate other categories as well. So, if you find yourself thinking, “This example could have been an illustration of arrogance as greed,” that is probably true.
Posted in Unintegrity Varieties, Unintegrity Overview, 1. Lying, 2. Undependability, 3. Unteachability, 4. Non Self-Responsibility, 5. Obsession, 6. Disregarding Highest Good, 7. Unilateral Decisions About Highest Good, 8. Dysfunctional Systems | No Comments »
|
|
|
|