It is easy to love a multitude. Multitudes consist of ‘nameless’ faces. Whenever a person declares they love Americans, or Christians, or gay people, or Muslims, or say, ‘black lives matter’, they declare that they love a nameless multitude, they declare love for a concept.
‘American’ is a multitudinous noun. Same goes for ‘Christian’, ‘gay’, ‘Muslim’, or ‘Black’. Names are proper nouns, not concepts.
All it takes to declare love for a nameless multitude, for a concept, is words, words that in reality can be empty.
In an increasingly segmented world within which people sometimes prefer not to interact with their neighbors, loving the multitude creates semblance of presence of love in people’s lives.
The reality of life is, we all seek to love, and be loved. I am not talking here specifically of romantic love. I am talking about being treated right by others, and wanting to treat others right. When you have an equal chance at impressing your boss, you are loved, you are treated right. When your boss is not afraid of being stabbed in the back so you can take their place, they feel loved, feel treated right.
But then people rationalize. Bosses have been known to throw subordinates under the bus, so stab first, protect yourself. Bosses, well to protect themselves have favorites they believe will protect their backs, favorites whose promotions are not dependent on their performance. In the anticipation of possibility of not being loved, society devolves into the worst possible equilibriums.
People have luxury of hatred for some persons, or feelings of superiority relative to others only because they experience love from some segment of society.
If you place one white man on an Island filled with five black persons who themselves are not reverse racists, he will make at the very least one black friend. He will find at the very least one black man he can connect with and appreciate.
In an increasingly competitive world, people are afraid to be vulnerable to those closest to them, those most likely to be in competition with them, which typically are colleagues and neighbors.
If we are to be vulnerable to others, we do not mistreat others in anticipation of, and for forestalling of direction of mistreatment at ourselves.
Risky? Yes. Dangerous? Most likely. But the alternative of preemptive wrong is placing an entirely population in the drug zone. Some of the drugs are legal, some are illegal, but the outcome is the same, which is, mindfulness has become drug dependent. Some people perhaps are not consciously aware that their bodies’ demand for drugs eminently is psychological, as opposed to physiological.
When a person’s mind is relatively strong, in order to protect itself, the mind can corrupt the body so the body exhibits symptoms that demand drugs. This is a well established medical phenomenon.
Preemptive wrongdoing for protection of the self is placing an entire population in the drug zone. Mindfulness increasingly is becoming drug dependent. Drug dependency increasingly is celebrated.
The mind protecting itself?
In this increasingly competitive world, attempts at keeping some semblance of love alive require movements that love multitudes, movements clustered around nameless multitudes, around concepts, as opposed to identities.
But the truth of the matter? Loving of multitudes never really works for satisfaction of people’s demand for love in their lives.
Ask yourself this, why is it people tend to glow when they feel in love? Is it not because they have desire and opportunity to be known by another, and desire as well as opportunity to know another?
Call it endorphins, call it irrational feelings, the problem is not that people ever feel in love, the problem is they never replace feelings of love with a well defined choice to, so long as it lies in their power, remain in love.
Consider a person who finds a job they love. Is it ever possible the job always will be 100% exciting?
Is it ever possible the job never will present any challenges?
Is it ever possible that the person never will experience frictions with bosses, subordinates, or peers?
Absolutely not. But people stick with jobs they love so long as they are able to figure out a way to deal with any challenges that come up. The feeling of loving the job translates into a choice to keep the job so long as there exist rational responses that have feasibility of resolving any challenges that arise.
If people who feel in love would replace feelings of love with choices, this with full realization that it is impossible that love never will face any challenges, romantic love would have better chances of survival.
I am not talking here about ‘negative’ challenges, such as loss of a loved one, or loss of a job. I am talking positive challenges.
Love can be challenged by positive events, in fact more likely than not, is challenged by positive events. If money is the most, or second most important rationale for divorce, love is more likely to die in response to positive challenges.
I am talking positive challenges or stresses that come with better jobs, bigger houses that require more effort or money to maintain, one more child to take care of, menopause, which any woman who lives long enough must experience, mid life crisis, which every man who lives long enough experiences, promotions that create new challenges, that take away time from significant others. In midst of certainty of positive challenges, it is naive to imagine love never ever will face any tests.
Love that crumbles in face of challenges, is feeling of love that never transforms into choice to love.
It is naive to assume love that is tested never was meant to be in the first place.
If you truly desire to experience love in 2019, the love you seek only can be found in at the very least one meaningful love relationship within which you seek to be fully known, and to know fully.
Sounds dangerous? True.
But has meaningful love ever been discovered any other way?
Have there ever been a relationship that thrived over decades of time that did not involve a willingness to be fully known, and to be known in full by another?
Start tentatively if you must, start cautiously, look out for warning signs, and be prudent in your choices of opportunities for love, but do yourself a favor, START.
If you owe yourself anything in the new year, owe yourself this, that you will look for love either in your existing relationships, or seek out at least one new relationship in which you can know another as fully as you are known.
Do not make a new year resolution. Just start. Like the wise Nike advert advises,
‘Just Do It’.
The problem with resolutions? They do not survive sputtering. Once you sputter, you lose momentum. Better to consider love a lifestyle change, a change that always will be, a change that never will require a resolution.
Typically, no one ever resolves to eat. They just do it; the desire to eat comes naturally. Typically, no one ever resolves to sleep. If people had to resolve to sleep, sleep apnea never would be a disorder.
Resolutions set targets. Lifestyle changes specify directionality of life. You can fail at a resolution. You never can fail at a lifestyle change for ‘tomorrow’ presents another opportunity for success.
If you will find love in 2019, the best way is for it to become part of you, part of who you are, part of what comes naturally.
If we all will love one person to the extent we are able, if we all are loved by at least one other person to the extent they are able, if love shared between any two persons transforms into choice to love that transcends challenges of life, the nameless multitude acquires a name, everyone loves, everyone experiences love.
May 2019 be a year in which you commence, or recommence a lifetime’s journey towards getting to know and appreciate another as fully as your own self is known and appreciated.