I sat and thought about something. Because of things I’m reading too, of course. How fair, ethical is it to diagnose presidents from afar? And to what extent is it useful? Attempts are of course made by psychiatrists and others (Trump suffers from severe narcissism, he has such a disorder, while Putin’s behavior can possibly be partly explained by Asperger’s/Autism).
But that’s not really what I wanted to write about. It was something about conflicts, difficult encounters and relationships… A basic wisdom, huh, is that “it’s not only one person who is wrong, if two persons argue”? Often the way forward becomes to realize that you – after all – have some part in the difficult. At least there is a key to being able to improve the relationship or thaw a conflict. To take the first step, apologize, admit your own shortcomings and errors, to invite to compromises, to try to make amends, etc. And usually that works. We know this because we are normal people and we are surrounded by such people.
Yes, this is generally true, but not absolute true. There are relationship problems and conflicts where this simply doesn’t apply. Between the thumb and forefinger 1 in 50 (or maybe it’s 1 in 500, it matters less) of all strained relationships lack such a common, “human” solution. That’s how I experiece it, anyway.
And without trying to remotely analyze either Putin or Trump, in depth, I actually think both belong to this latter, more difficult category. A sad minority. On fractions and locks that occur in relation to them, it is not possible to use ordinary intuition or gut feeling. An outstretched hand does not make an impression, it is at most experienced as useful.
It sad, but true, I think.