So, here is the second writing prompt of the LYL Blogging Challenge + Start-a-Blog email course pack:
“What really makes you angry about the world?”
Dale Carnegie used to say that anyone could become a great public speaker if they were angry enough. And when it comes to helping people and living your legend, starting with your biggest frustrations can open up a lot of ideas as to the difference you want to make. Think of what consistently makes you mad about the world and what you wish was different.
Then write a few sentences or more about it and why.
“What really makes you angry about the world?” – sounds the writing prompt for today… Which probably could have been phrased more correctly as “What does make you really angry about the world?” And already the fact that it wasn’t makes me a bit angry. The fact that native speakers tend to know less about their language, be knowingly more frivolous with the spelling and grammar, and believe that everyone will understand. “C’mon, that’s obvious!” – no, it’s not. At least, far from always.
Well, their parents and friends with whom they are in continious contact will understand, because those people have been engaging in a feedback cycle long enough to learn most of intended meanings and make a kind of a translation table. People from their region may understand certain local perks and dialects. People from their country may understand the meaning, based on a certain common reference framework which enables guessing the direction of the thought.
But the world does not end there, and neither does the intended audience (most of the time at least the intended audience for any online content is larger than that – even while the actual audience at first may be not). There are many other people, starting from citizens of other contries with the same native language but different habits of expression, and going all the way to foreigners who have just recently started to learn the language and are still uncertain even with the most common vocabulary.
My main idea of this part: I would like people to care enough about the audience of their message. Which includes also using digressions from the orthography and grammar of the mediating language only when it is necessary, for example when it conveys important traits of author’s personal style.
In a much more general sense, it is ignorance that makes me angry. I get mad about people who believe that they are the Center of the Universe, that they know some Universal Truths which should help or be useful to everyone, in all life situations and in any context. I have said many times already, and I will say it again: I strongly believe in the absence of one-size-fits-all beliefs, ideas, advices, etc., with a single exception: unconditional love. We are all in this Life, on this planet together, and unconditional love has been, is and will always be the engine that can really put us through (think: solution for wars). Otherwise, most of the time we need to either find our own answers, or use advice of people whom we trust, who really care about us, and who know us, our personality, our ways, circumstances of our life good enough to make appropriate suggestions.
In the spirit of unconditional love being the one and only Universal Truth that I believe in, I get angry about two more things: intolerance and close-mindedness. Because I believe, again, that each of us is unique, is living a unique life experience, which has a unique set of circumstances when considered as a whole and in detail. Yes, there are many many common things, but focusing on common leaves out the uniqueness which may be critical in some cases.
Personal example: there is an idea that the fastest way to accomplish a goal is the straight, direct route. And this idea is tied to the suggestion to leave everything extraneous aside and focus on achieving the goals. But this suggestion does not really work for my life, because I am not focused on checking off as many boxes as fast as possible. I want to enjoy my life and have fun in the process.
Take a road trip between points A and B. For a specific example, think about the road from Portland, OR, to San Francisco, CA. There is a fast way via the interstate I-5, and there is a longer, slower, scenic way via US-101. I think you can guess which one I’d usually prefer.
Same valid for most of other things: very often, I intentionally choose or unintentionally go a longer way, but the learning and fun which I gather on that way are priceless. And because of the fun, sometimes I move through that longer way much faster and achieve the end results sooner than I would expect by going the “no-bullshit / no-nonsense / no-distractions” short way. And the end results are better and more fun themselves.
To summarize / make my point of this part clear: I don’t like when people heavily push their opinions, interpretations, methods, advices on others as the only right ones. I would like people to let others to be who those are, to have own opinions, to find answers for themselves.
Finally… indifference. I get angry about people who take benefits of their environment and lifestyle for granted and destroy things just for fun. Things that somebody else might have invested a lot of time in building and maintaining, but which these people can turn into ruins in a matter of seconds or minutes.
For example, stickers. I am leading a personal shadow war against stickers on public informational tables (read: I scrape them off). I don’t care if a person covers their personal belongings in stickers – let them stick whatever to their ass if they want it – but I am unconditionally against irrelevant, distracting or blocking things in places where people look for information they really need.
Another example: people who put their feet in shoes on the seats in public transport. Especially if the seats have the cloth surface, as most German public transport does. In contrast, I either keep my feet down, or take my shoes before “extending my seat coverage” :D
Yet another example: graffiti over windows and doors of trains / public transport. I have mixed feelings about graffiti on trains in general, as many people do it but only a few deliver a high-quality work that is worth seeing by thousands and not just by their buddies (plus for some trains I really like the original color schemes and clean style). However, I am totally against paint over windows and doors, for the same reasons as I am against stickers on the public maps, direction pointers or similar public informational spaces: people do use them for accessing certain information, and you never know when it can be critical for someone. Actually, in case of train windows, the feeling of being on the move without knowing where you are (being detached from a typical reference system) is a very, very, very uncomfortable one. Add to this an occasional defect in the train announcement system and a person with low psychological endurance – and you might end up with an emergency rescue / ambulance case.
Main idea here: I would like people to notice the work of others (esp. cleaning and maintenance staff), notice the value of infrastructure, of access to information, of equipment and tools, appreciate their surroundings and approach them with awareness and care.
To be honest, I am against this whole perspective of using anger as a discovery / motivation tool.
As a feeler, I am probably taking the concept of “really angry” more serious than it was intended. In addition, in the total accord with the Law of Attraction as “like attracts like”, one angry thought tends to be followed by another, and then another, and then another ( see the text of the post above ;) )… and after a short time, I got an avalanche of anger where I have been happy and excited for a whole week before.
That feels really bad. And as any avalanche, it is a very dangerous thing. Yes, such a process can pinch us out of the comfort zone far enough to wake up the sleeping powers within and finally decide to do something about it. But it also has the ability – and in my opinion, much more chances – to stay destructive, weaken us (read: kinesiology) and put us into a very low and depressive state.
I would prefer to have the prompt phrased as “What do you really, really care about?”
Though now as I give my attention to it, it has very similar weaknesses as the anger approach. Again, based on the description of LoA by Abraham-Hicks, every subject is really two subjects: something wanted and the absence of it, – and the biggest trick is to learn to emotionally/vibrationally focus on the wanted. And it is not about the words used to express a thought on a subject. Again, one can be talking about something they care about, have the images of their past successes or future plans running in the background, and feel empowered. Or, they could be saying the same words but the backround would slideshow images of their failures and ideas that seem impossible or out of reach, out of factual priorities (what we think of as important vs. what we actually devote our time to), and they would feel down.
In the end, it is all about our personal attitudes and interpretations… But anyway, I believe in the higher power and potential of positive, constructive inputs and impulses.
That’s also why I am against the terms “revolution” and “forceful overthrow” in the description and rules of Live Your Legend, and I would never invite anyone to “Join OUR Revolution” but I am instead promoting LYL as an online+offline community of positive, active, passionate people who change the world through the work they love to do.