We have to take a moment to go deeper into the ideas of fault, responsibility, and blame — at least if we’re going to make practical headway for folks caught up on those issues. It may seem odd that an essay on becoming a strategic thinker would take so much time to dwell on ideas like responsibility and blame. What may be counterintuitive is that blame is, generally though not universally $^l$, an empowering force. Not the act of blaming; the act of blaming is generally disempowering to the person doing the blaming. Receiving blame is empowering. When we assign blame, it is difficult not to assign responsibility along with it. When someone says, “Don’t wear that or you’ll attract the wrong kind of attention.” The retort is frequently, “You’re victim blaming.” discounting the fact that the statement is a direct assertion of agency to create an effect. Similarly, if someone uses a word or expression that is found objectionable, they may be blamed for the entire internal experience of those within ear shot. We make people really powerful when we assert that they can keep the responsibility for our cognitive condition.

While the main claim of this chapter is summed up pretty neatly in the title, and this essay has already gone pretty far into the idea of responsibility, there are a few more important notes to make. This chapter will extend our discussion of responsibility and agency with a couple other important relational elements that direct the nature and outcome of conflicts, namely: opposition and anger. These considerations combine to add new facets to the character of a conflict. And it is worth it to take some time to examine these facets independently and in combination.

The rest of this chapter will become available following the success of this Kickstarter campaign.

Prev: Coping Mechanisms | Table of Contents | Next: Trust & The Danger Zone