Politeness is a Trap
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июн 2024
- The Sinister Politics of Politeness
Politeness originated as a counterreaction to tyranny. But it was quickly weaponized by elites to control the public. Today, politeness is used both to unify and divide us. So does politeness promote goodwill among our fellow man? Or is it just a tool of The Man to keep us down? Let’s find out in this Wisecrack Edition: The Sinister Side of Being Polite.
Support us on Patreon! ► / wisecrack
Join this channel to get access to perks ► / @wisecrackedu
=== Watch More Episodes! ===
Are Americans Too Sensitive? ► • Are Americans Too Sens...
How Debate Got Stupid ► • How Debate Got Stupid
What's the Point of Weddings? ► • Weddings Are A Scam
Written by Rachel Van Nes
Researched by Corrigan Vaughan
Hosted by Michael Burns
Directed by Michael Luxemburg
Edited by Mark Potts
Produced by Olivia Redden
Production Assistance by Gregory Elek
Music courtesy of Epidemic Sound
#politeness #culture #wisecrack
© 2023 Wisecrack / Omnia Media, Inc. / Enthusiast Gaming
Do you think politicians should have a dress code? If so, what should it be?
personally I think they should wear NBA style jerseys with special logos for their state or district, and their numbers should signify how long they've been in office.
They should dress like fictional serial killers.
I would love to watch a political debate between Michael Myers and the Joker.
They should dress like NASCAR drivers with names and logos of everyone who has donated large amounts to them.
They are... arguing over dress code... Theres still a shutdown looming right? Like, we didn't resolve that yet did we? We kinda have bigger issues rn
Swimsuits, transparency for their bodies since we cannot get it for their personal connections and business interests
Fun fact: The word "condescension" originally referred to the polite way to address one's social inferiors. The way the word is used today probably tells you a lot about how condescension was actually practiced.
Elaborate the last part of your statement. How exactly does it tell us a lot about how it was used
@@lawrencelord9777meaning people aren't capable of addressing others as lesser without also disrespecting them, and we got how the word is used today because the people who were disrespected saw right through it
Kindness has its limitations for those who don't have class or/and the right set genitals or skin color in the USA still. This is why identity politics is so bad and yet is needed when your dealing with this type of arrogance and haughtiness from society's elite class. I'm blunt abou6t my disdain and disgust for the rich but I'm no Marxist or fascist as those people to me just want to be like those rich people at the top being green with envy, no for me I'm disgusted by the rich and want them to stay as far away as possible seeing them as germ cells.
Personally i see politeness as a tool, And as with any tool it can be used for good or evil. the tool itself has no morality. People can and have said horrendous things under the guise of politeness while others can show kindess and care while talking "rudely". The intentions and external effect determines the morality of the person wielding the tool of politeness.
I see it the other way around : politeness is not a tool, is the great social equalizer that keep a standard between the mighty and the lesser. For once people have a common ground and may trade news, goods or services willingly under those circumstances.
However, insults, shame, violence, that’s the tools used from the bottom to disrupt and from the above to assert dominance.
I'd say it's both@@dylanvellut
@@Kartagoooo I agree
Perhaps this is purely semantic, but I would say it is a skill not a tool. In the simplest terms possible tools are things used to do some particular thing, while a skill is something you as a person does a particular thing with to a certain known degree of accuracy/timeliness/cost.
A skill is both a learned ability as well as a predictable one. Neither of those apply to tools in and of themselves (learning how to use a tool, is itself a skill). That one needs to learn what is and is not polite in a given context as well as it being something with known levels of what is considered good enough or not, should basically say politeness, or the act of being polite, is a skill in every instance (i.e. regardless of what is or is not polite in any particular context)
Perhaps the difference between being something you do and something you use is lost or meaningless to some people. There is overlap, i.e. to use a tool properly takes skill. But conversely, it does not take any skill to simply utilize a tool. Or in other words... Basically anyone can strum a guitar or draw a bow across a violin, but not everyone can play them.
Counterpoint to that idea is that I agree with you about it being a tool, but any tool whose only purpose is social manipulation is evil.
The absolute worst people I've known in my life were exceedingly polite. When I spoke out about my abuse everyone ignored/denied it because oh my they are just so polite. I had to leave everyone behind to actually break free of a few.
Being overly polite and being unable to show rudeness/annoyance is a red flag to me now.
Same! Some of the absolute worst people and organizations I have encountered in my life have been extremely skilled at civil, restrained "HR-ese," passive-aggressive "Bless-Your-Heart-ese," and/or nicey-nicey "New-Age-ese." In contrast, some of the most genuinely-ethical and truly-compassionate people I've known have sometimes been rather coarse and rough-around-the-edges.
I think it's important and instructive to note that people like David Duke and Richard Spencer have sought to avoid the use of outright slurs while "politely" and "rationally" dehumanizing minorities and calling for their subjugation or outright extermination.
Oh totally. In the culture I grew up in being non-confrontational is the norm. Ass-kissing is mandatory. Lots of people are two faced and borderline sociopaths. This crap makes any neurodivergent person suicidal
Part of Trumps popularity comes from the fact he didn't conform to the fake nice politeness of the elitists, and represented exactly the incivility normal people wished to express to many of their "betters", but could not or would not for fear of consequences. The hatred of him seems to be 90% from elitists taking offense as if an uppity peasant told them what for (which is what he was on the publics behalf), and then also demanding everyone else be offended likewise or lose their jobs.
Also narratives about who is supposedly marginalize or oppressed is a modern form of elitist weaponized politeness that is used to direct attention away from real issues, as well as to claim to be a victim for the purpose of seizing undue power despite perhaps actually already being better off than most, and as a way to fake moral virtue and concern for "the oppressed" while actually victimizing other people and even using the disingenuous claim as the excuse to do so.
This video is itself complicit in playing this very game of fake moral virtue and politeness by conforming to the artificial decorums imposed in the present day, that I was just describing.
I'm sorry you experienced this. I'm polite because I believe in giving what I get. I'm polite because I want others to be polite. I know this guarantees nothing; people will be rude, but I feel better being polite despite others. To be honest, being polite makes me feel good. I hope it makes others feel good. 😃
Not downplaying yourself but it could be that you're using one bad experience to justify your hatred of a certain thing even when it logically doesn't make any sense Yes is there such thing as being too polite absolutely do people tend to want to believe people that they deem to be nice are incapable of doing badness absolutely I'm pretty sure you've done that yourself in time such as oh my such and such couldn't do that He's my or she's my or they're always so nice we all do it It's not about being polite in the evils of being polite It's just about people being naive and un able to handle someone may perceive as being nice and doing something wrong since we always especially nowadays do anyone that we disagree with as an enemy of every single thing you stand for by we I mean most of y'all to be honest with you if you don't like such then that means you don't like this this this this is and you think this and this and such and such person with a weird mustache is right and that's usually how that goes
“It often is the most marginalized in society who are expected to be polite but not to expect politeness”
Politeness - like tolerance - is an agreement, not a virtue
They politely colonized the land, politely suck us dry. Politely the french revolution was squashed, and our free pirate peoples dispersed.
I agree
Tolerance in the wrong situation can be a really really bad thing. When bad behaviour isn’t called out and scorned in the name of tolerance, evil thrives.
@@CoryPchajek Well, it depends on what you consider bad behavior. If you consider queerness to be bad behavior, then I’d say you should still be tolerant.
@@Reed5016 don’t get me wrong. Bad behaviour is hateful behaviour towards others that aren’t quite the same as you
Politeness has been used as an instrument for control within the elite also. For example Versailles palace was created primarily to stop the nobility having time to cause trouble in the provinces. Instead they had to stay at Versailles and be fully involved in increasingly elaborate and expensive rituals around dressing and food all centred on the King.
And it worked very well too until some other very impolite people got a hold of a guillotine.
Yeah it was so rude or them😂!
True. Same goes for Japan where a lot of the social codes from the Heian through the Edo period were about the elites controlling other elites and putting effort into avoiding grudges/feuds/honor duels
The French monarchy allowed to their politeness and physical distance from the city to cause them to drift out of touch with the needs of the people and the nobility. Decorum trumped practicality and they paid for it dearly.
I found it interesting how in education, coming from a working class background and making it to university, how politeness and 'social awareness' had an affect on how the institution engaged with me, what access I had to anything beyond bare bones lectures and labs and thus what grades I got.
...which conversely meant that my family and hometown would feel betrayed, because having left home, I had to deny my past to be allowed to hang out with people that would never really accept me and well yea... kinda through two stools on that one.
Whith politics and marginalization, it's way too easy to mask cruelty and hate with "concern". In instances like these it is perfectly reasonable, not to play along and call out the sharade.
Yup. The USA provides military support to several countries that are comitting ongoing genocide and war crimes, and instead of taking any meaningful action like making military aid conditional on not committing genocide, the US president politely asks those countries to respect international law and protect civilians. The politeness is a smokescreen
"Won't someone think of THE CHILDREN? Don't you care about THE CHILDREN?"
I noticed this early. Infantilization is also a useful weapon for the maintenance of status, since all status is entirely predicated on secret social and financial relationships. Everything else is just humans being themselves. Parents become accustomed to having to "take care" of others, since they see in children the flaws of men. It's a tricky world for just a person to be in.
Concerned Women for America springs to mind...
I've always thought of politeness, at its basic level, as a way to avoid interpersonal violence and encourage fairness: for instance, passing around the dinner rolls at the table so that everyone gets one, instead of a mad scrabble to grab as many as possible. All human cultures and even animals use politeness for this reason, and in that way it's a good thing. The problem occurs when politeness is used as a means of manipulation and control. In order to fight this control, we have to be willing to cut through the BS and be "rude" to controllers and manipulators; at the same time we need genuine politeness to calm down tense situations and find mutually beneficial solutions. True politeness is about love and consideration of others, not about empty and needlessly extravagant rituals to embarrass others.
Being polite isn't a virtue but genuinely listening is
As an immigrant to Mexico and Canada (double immigrant moment woo), the importance of being so polite so people have a good (and not immediately racist) impression of you, specially after 9/11, has been drilled so much in my head, and to this day my own mother still warns me to be nice to set a good image to people.
maybe you should be kind just cause? hard concept to understand i know
@@SPACEDOUT19politeness and kindness are different.
@@SPACEDOUT19 yes but also my acceptance in society shouldn't hinge on being polite and passive, specially if all being nice will do is mark me as "one of the good ones". God forbid I get mad about something with others.
@@SPACEDOUT19are you an idiot?
Yeah, sorry but I might be racist regardless, but politeness goes a long way. Not that I want to be impressed or anything, you do you.
I remember reading book where one of the characters didn't realize that his excessive politeness was identical to how the locals expressed _scathing sarcasm_ right under the noses of their nobility.
And it was for exactly the reason that you described. They were expected to BE polite without receiving politeness in return. So they used it excessively as a form of protest that they could actually get away with, because punishing a plebeian for being "excessively polite" would make that noble a subject of mockery to their peers.
Politeness is a cultural norm, and what may be polite in one context could be rude in another.
It reminds me of people who refuse to accept charity because they interpret it as an insult, when it is usually not intended as such.
What book? Interested in reading it
I have some thoughts on politeness, but I’ll keep them to myself, as I don’t want to be rude ❤❤❤
😂❤
You are being rude. You’re not sharing the information you possess.
To even reveal that you have thoughts obligates you to start talking, or you just might POTENTIALLY be a problem, and we can't have that.
I’ve wanted someone that people actually respect and listen to, to spill the beans on this hidden issue for a long time.
Who is that someone? We are all waiting
@@Fun_GPTi think that someone is wisecrack. i think that you knew that and instead took the opportunity afforded to you by some truly awkward phrasing to make a joke at someone else's expense. how incredibly impolite of you. you don't even know this person. do you typically crack a joke at another's expense before even making an introduction? your mother would be ashamed of you if she knew this is how you behaved in public.
@@xsifernxcouldn't have told them better
@@busimagenI love your questioning nature, typical wisecrack and philosophy fan. Why question things when you can just accept everything as “it’s nothing, has always been this way”. Keep up the good work mate! Why don’t you go ahead and share your thoughts on immigration while you’re at it?
"someone people respect and listen to"... so someone polite?
Seems to me that politeness evolved as a means for people in society to get along, especially for people who don't know each other but, over time, people stopped thinking about why they did it and it just became tradition that would be imposed on children by parents. Eventually, some people started exploiting politeness to manipulate people. Other times, the social "enforcement" of being polite got so strict it was impossible or too overly burdensome to maintain and new generations just gave up on it.
Very accurate
Your comment was more to the point and more accurate than the rambling 17 min video.
It’s funny how essentially, the powerful used being nice as an excuse to be mean to people that weren’t nice enough… to them
I think there's a big difference between kindness and politeness. Holding a door is simple kindness. Using the correct fork or term of address is like a secret handshake that shows you're a member of a certain class.
Kindness is not a tool that can be utilized, it's a state of mind. Politeness is a set of actions to manipulative fools into believing you're not evil.
I never understood why people confuse politeness with weakness. Then, they think you're crazy when you're forced to open a can of wupp-ass!
There's a quick moment in Star Trek: TNG that I often think about when this topic comes up:
Basically, that little weasel-boy Wesley Crusher is walking down a hallway when he accidentally bumps into some random Starfleet shlub, who seems particularly outraged over the whole thing. Wesley is initially deeply apologetic (perhaps stemming from his weasel ancestry), but then notices that the guy he bumped into is actually an alien, and so immediately starts telling the guy to fuck off and leave unless he wants to get the shit kicked out of him. In response to this, the alien proceeds to happily fuck off, and pleasantly calls Wesley a friend as he does.
Immediately afterward, we learn that the shlub who got bumped into was actually part of a culture that absolutely despises curtesy, viewing it as phony and deceitful.
I've always enjoyed that little interaction, and I think it's a fun one to over-analyze.
Something tells me you don't like Wesley Crusher...can't put my finger on it...
I don't exactly like Wesley but he isn't that bad, objectively. He DOES serve as an admirable punching bag.
I don't remember that episode. Thought I'd seen em all.
@@NuxBloodhoof I think it is the fact that he belittled him by calling him "boy".
@@TheJeremyKentBGross I am not that far through my rewatch. And I think I have already seen it, so I am fairly certain it's in the first 4 seasons.
Whoever wrote this I love you. I'm british born and bred and HATE with a red hot passion the disingenuous phoney niceness that is frankly rampant in British society. Sadly their arms length keep people out class nonsense is playing a role in the endemic lonliness issues in the country. I have pretty much rejected being British as my identity and look to other cultures now to inspire because there is little inspiring about a country that fetishises its own sadness and pedestals subconsiously class systems.
In very few other places will you find a more insidious form of niceness than in Canada.
Debbie, you are so right. The saying "it's better to be respectful then polite" should be the way things are here. Sometimes I feel like the only way I can get on is because I nailed RP from childhood (though God I was plummy aged 9, surprised I didn't get bullied worse). Suffice to say, it's come in handy more times then I like. It's the veneer of social acceptability like most social expectations, a gloss not anything substantive.
@@CoryPchajek Idk Midwesterners can be pretty passive-aggressive from my experience
You need to meet American Black people, believe me it's refreshing! I'm a Canadian of long droll British decent!
@@CoryPchajekyes! The nicer Canadians are the more they will be slagging you later!
Byung-Chul Han said a few things about politeness. To keep it short, he says that a society that is pushing authenticity is actually encouraging rudeness so that it feels "authentic" in an interactive sense. But rudeness actually accelerates time itself by ignoring the ritualistic. Rituals like politeness are an agreement that help to keep us on the same page. Even if you're not polite, he would encourage you to attempt to keep some sort of rituals in your life to maintain sanity.
I’ve been thinking about this recently. How politeness and corporate speak and the myriad of euphemisms one can find to disguise the massive loss of jobs, homes and lives as a “soft landing” for those who create and maintain inflation with their obscene concentration of wealth.
This topic is extremely interesting and the video was wonderfully written and presented! Love from Brazil ❤
That was an interesting thought, except I don't follow the last sentence of the first paragraph.
Inflation is caused when banks, usually to support government deficit spending (but also a little bit with consumer debt), just make up tons of new money out of nothing to be spent, which upon entering the economy causes much more money to be chasing the same amounts of goods and services (or perhaps fewer if you also mandate the close of businesses, *cough cough*), meaning prices rise.
"create and maintain inflation with their obscene concentration of wealth" doesn't make any sense I understand, since wealth concentration is in part a product of inflation, not it's cause.
All money is debt, and thus a claim against existing products and services. If the amount of money in circulation was fixed, it would consistently be worth a constant percentage of the entire economy, and you would have a more fair trade on what is owed you from your previous efforts put into the economy.
When the government in cooperation with the central bank makes up loads of new money in order to spend beyond their tax revenues, they reduce the percentage of the total economy each dollar/euro/whatever is worth, in effect stealing the buying power of everyone's cash savings and income without actually/directly taking a cent.
They are counterfeiting effectively, because while you have to earn debts owed to you (in the form of money), they just make up debt out of nothing owed to themselves (money they can spend), and say they own those trillions in made up money against a balance sheet.
That's a big part of why people who understand this oppose larger government, and especially government deficit spending.
Often when companies are said to be making record profits, it's usually not adjusted for inflation (which is never reported or computed honestly anyway). Thus, the size of the number of dollars/euros/whatever earned can go up substantially, even while being a smaller percentage of a claim on the total economy.
Meaning that despite having bigger and bigger numbers of dollars on your/their income checks, it may actually buy less and less because as a percentage of the total amount of dollars in the economy, it actually went down substantially. Thus minimum wage for example can double in dollar amounts and yet still buy half or less of what it did years before.
(Minimum wage was only 3.90 when I was a kid, but bought several times more food etc than minimum wage does now.)
If rich people and or corporations just stuck all their money under a mattress or in a swimming pool of gold coins like scrooge McDuck and never spent it, you would actually be better off because that would reduce the total amount of money in circulation, reducing or counteracting inflation (perhaps even causing deflation), because that money wouldn't be competing with your money to buy stuff. Thus your dollars would be worth a larger percentage of the total amount of stuff being traded, competing more easily to buy things.
There are many more dollars to vacuum up when they keep making up more of them. That makes it easy for a lot more of them to concentrate in the pockets of whomever puts more value into the economy than they take out of it, or entities directly on the government teet.
But you are definitely right about euphemisms to disguise ugly realities, including corruption and theft. That's 100% a tactic, regardless of your misunderstanding the cause of inflation.
Note that we don't have capitalism anymore with this system. (Saying we do is another manipulative euphemism).
Nobody will pay you (interest) to borrow your savings (capital) because there is always more cheap/free money coming from the government and central bank to borrow instead. (ie fake "capital")
If we still had capitalism, you would be able to retire comfortably on the interest from a small amount of money added to a savings account every month, which used to be the case a couple of generations back.
Many people think capitalism is broken, and they are right. Not because capitalism doesn't work or because some already won it, but because by allowing the endless creation of new money you don't actually have capitalism in anything but name only. What you have is unlimited theft of buying power, and something increasingly close to central planning. Wealth redistribution, but up.
The words, "Bless your heart" come to mind. I hate that so much. Corporate speak and teacher speak also try to be too polite and end up sounding pretentious. Skirting around honesty, making veiled requests, and asking someone to "read between the lines," as it were, is a waste of time. I value blunt, honest talk. Sometimes it stings, and that's ok with me.
Dude I pray you never stop making videos
The knowledge you share and understanding you give is of immeasurable value
And it’s delivered in a fun way?? My favorite chanel since 2014
Appreciate you!!!
"Affably Evil" is a trope noted on the TV Tropes website that highlights the difference between being good and being polite. Its counterpart, "Good Is Not Nice" might also be pertinent to this discussion. Sometimes these tropes prove accurate in real life, too.
Tropes become tropes because they're so fundamentally relatable that stories repeatedly use them to generate a predictable audience response. Of course they're often accurate to real life, that's how audiences can relate so easily.
That's the second time I've heard of a period somehow meaning you're angry instead of the normal punctuation.
Yeah, this is walking on eggshells.
It depends on the context, I think. Like, a period ending a sentence in the middle of a paragraph is obviously fine. But ending a one word reply, or something similarly casual and informal like that, it seems to imply a coldness. It's sort of like someone you know on a first name basis suddenly addressing you as "Mr./Ms. Lastname". It's inserting formality into a usually informal context, creating distance.
@@ErikratKhandnalieWell said. This is my understanding as well
I use the word "period" to aggressively emphasize a point.
@@ErikratKhandnalie That seems unreasonable and like you're reading way too much into it. Ending any sentence with a period is a habit pretty much everyone will have, and it seems absurd to interpret it as if it means anything more than that.
In some cultures I guess politeness is seem as something different. In Brazil for example it can seem to others as a polite person actually is snob or untrustworthy, like if you're polite you're not sincere/honest enough to be taken seriously. It's hard sometimes and when your politeness is expressed as generosity for instance you're seem as an idiot and people will be happy in taking advantage of you.
It's worth noting politeness and etiquette are not the same.
16:15 It's not cruel to be kind. But don't use kindness to be cruel. Beautiful words michael! that's what we all need to hear!
14:45 "smile and eat cheese curds"
Not strong (only aggressive)
Not free (we only licensed)
Not compassionate, only polite (now who the nicest?)
Not good but well behaved
(Chasing after death, so we can call ourselves brave?)
Still living like mental slaves
Hiding like thieves in the night from life
Illusions of oasis making you look twice
Hiding like thieves in the night from life
Illusions of oasis making you look twice
Beautiful. You have a future in poetry. (Maybe).
@@CageBlack1443 The Bluest Eye (Excerpt: ”Hid Like Thieves From Life”) by Toni Morrison
Black Star, nice.
we take the black star line right on home
@@supersam5802 I was not aware of the existence of this.
As someone with a disability, I completely concur that marginalized groups are expected to be super polite all of the time. We are not to be angry about our condition(s), and we better not complain. We need to be docile and happy to just be alive. 🤮
The "lesser creatures as you should be grateful we permit you to remain alive" thing. It really is disgusting.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 it really is.
The double standard is absolutely infuriating.
Being able to complain or even have a bad day is definitely a privilege, when it shouldn't be.
I think civilty is necessary when it is necessary. In other words if someone is telling a gay person that their love doesn't matter, or telling a trans person they shouldn't exist, or telling a POC that they aren't welcome then civility should take a back seat. We aren't all bleesed with the biting wit of Julia Sugarbaker from Designing Women. Sometimes you just have to tell some to f off expeditiously. But if someone is engaging politely with you and expressing a humane but still opposing point of view then civilty should prevail.
@@tauntingeveryone7208 your last paragraph doesn't make sense, why is the onus on the other person to be "virtuous" i.e understanding to the very irrational emotional outburst of the person who's identity is being questioned? To be virtuous is to think about an issue without the fog of emotion, obviously practically speaking discussing taxes is less likely to bring out emotions vs discussing identity, and again practically you should expect arguments tinted with emotion and if you want to have the maximum "virtue" you should be prepared to deal with this emotionally tinted argument, but that doesn't mean the person being emotional is somehow rational or virtuous.
@@tauntingeveryone7208 emotions are natural, not rational you seem to be confusing the two.
The word is derived from the latin ratio;to reason; dictionary definitions being:
based on or in accordance with reason or logic.
able to think sensibly or logically.
able to think/reason clearly.
endowed with the capacity to reason.
An emotional person is indeed not being virtuous. To your point about a virtuous person not casting their opponent as irrational due to an emotional breakdown, I AGREE! It is indeed virtuous to be aware as youve mentioned, but its also virtuous for the other person to not have an emotional breakdown in the first place, to think calmly, WITH REASON and logic regarding an issue which was raised be it taxes or identity.
@@greed864 this still begs the question why emotional restraint is a virtue..
@@greed864 a man who argues in good faith, doesn't resort to semantics...
i think somewhere along the way, politeness got confused with passiveness like class did with arrogance.
As Anthony Blanche says in Brideshead: "Charm is the great English blight. It does not exist outside these damp islands. It spots and kills anything it touches. It kills love. It kills art. And I greatly fear, my dear Charles, that it has killed you."
I had a extremeist friend who when he was trying to get me to consider his views, would intentionally state extremist views, (I believe) hoping that politeness would prevent me from expressing my true views, or forcing me to politely go along with his abhorent views.
I did not do this, because I'm older & very independent. However, I believe many people & a younger me would have entertained abhorrent ideas for the sake of deeply ingrained societal valuing of politeness.
Just an observation.
Yeah, right-wingers in particular will gleefully poke at liberals in assorted ways, because they assume the liberals' own ethics code will prevent them from clapping back in an uncivil or hateful manner.
I remember a quote going a little bit like this; "do not die if you can fight, do not fight if you can growl, do not growl if you can talk, and not talk if you can evade.". I do not know were this qoute came from. But I will say that civility may be what keep us at the talking point rather than regressing to growling. Not that we move to the next stage. But we do not want to mske more enemies than we have.
Correctly identifying the enemies we have is the point of politeness... or rather, it's to obfuscate the enemy.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 can you give an example?
@@williamharper6625 In the US during the 1960s there was a pretty large fuss about the "right" way to protest. That is a pretty direct example of "politeness" being used as camouflage for the upper class sabotaging the lives of the average citizen. Obfuscating the real enemy by vilifying the method rather than the goal or intent.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 ok, when looking at those examples a lot of those movements already did the others things first before fight or even growling.
Quick shout out to the introverts of the world. Im as polite as they come; but, more than i can count, people have judged my outward energy as a measure of my kindness. It was a pain
Coming from Wisconsin I can confirm that all we do is smile and eat cheese curds, life is great
I love Wisconsin so much. Drink a spotted cow on our behalf.
I think it would be better to be respectful than polite. Now, this doesn't immediately solve the problem, my dad and I certainly have very different ideas about what showing respect is, but I do think that arguing about being respectful would at least put the disagreement in a healthier starting position
Beeningpolite is about trying to give the other person a high sense of importance, is an standaransed way to make the other feel respected like you have stated, respectfulness is and idea so it is not always the same, so people came up with manners to show importance and make feel the other important.
Respect is earned, courtesy is freely given. That's what politeness is.
how is this not just semantics?
@@dr.kekyll2244 Semantics is the study of meaning. What you're intending to say is that they're being pedantic.
As an aside, I find it humorous that even pointing out this fact will often have people think I'm being pedantic about semantics.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 no, i meant semantics because i was referring to the original comment. i was ignoring your pedantry.
Politeness ALWAYS works to everyone's advantage, as long as it is GENUINE -
And if it's not genuine, then it of course comes across as hostility.
The problem is that it's never genuine, because of the social context.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 - Wrong. There's always a genuine variety of everything. But if the one and only variety of politeness is the only one which you're truly familiar with, then you're quite shallow and empty.
@@scotthullinger4684 I'm excited to learn what a genuine variety of scam is. The notion that it's impossible for anything to be inherently deceitful is a bit silly. But, I'm sure you'll grow out of your naivete eventually... or meet a nigerian prince that leaves you destitute as your donations never seem to reach them.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 - I'm talking about scams which fool intelligent people. No intelligent person is going to believe that a Nigerian prince has some goodies waiting for him. It takes a genuinely stupid person to fall for such crap, and there's surely NO shortage of scams, or stupid people.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 what exactly is the ever-present, unchanging social context that makes politeness inherently deceitful though?
Personally I'm a fan of escilating intensity. One should begin with politeness and escilate from there when nessesary. It might not always be enough to ask nicely, but niceties don't ruin an attempt at firmer escilation of tone, wheras coming out swinging makes moving to a more gentle touch far more dificult to pull off, and alters the frame of the conversation to a more hostile one.
This is the way, escalate as the conversation goes.
I used to work as a Geriatric Nursing Assistant at a rehab center/nursing home. There was one day at work when I had a moment where I was trying to go to one of the nurses to ask them a question. I was kinda swamped with caring for the various residents in my section. So I basically just went right into asking them for a favor without exchanging any formalities.
Halfway through trying to ask one of these nurses for a favor, they interrupted me very forcefully with a "Good morning." 😒 I took note of their very serious demeanor and responded with a "good morning?" 🤨 I was so taken aback with the way they forced me to be polite that I could barely even mouth the response. Meanwhile, I am thinking to myself what was even up with that. It felt very rude to interrupt me like that. I pretty much found out that this nurse wouldn't even respond to you unless you observed basic social formalities. It seemed really counter-intuitive, considering we work in a field where people are constantly demanding us to get them stuff and we are on the clock.
No offense to that nurse, but I had a lot of work to get done. And every second counts when you have 10+ residents to care for. So forgive me if i don't want to waste time observing simple social formalities, I thought to myself. 🙄 Needless to say, I stopped going to that nurse for anything. 😅
On the other side, they may have been absolutely swamped themselves - and felt some frustration at your interruption. They could have been pushing back at your request, reminding you that it is easier to do you a favor when you promote goodwill and shared humanity. I've been on both sides of this exchange, and learned to preface inconveniences and interruptions with markers of shared humanity/struggle/etc before proceeding.
@@kts8900 that makes literally no sense at all
@@kts8900This is interesting to think about and I can understand that point of view. If someone interrupts me I prefer them to just come out with it so I can help them and then get back to what I was doing
@@kts8900yeah i agree, ah simple good morning is not only a social norm its a way to connect and to level. Just blatently asking something is rude. The function should remain and not only the social norm
bullshit like that is why I hate being with the in-laws
they make everything feel like you're in some bullshit medieval palace kdrama show
even worse, they're not even korean, and are exactly the type of people that koreans on tv look down upon
Earcropping was a pinushment for petty crimes where they would literally cut someone's ear off. It's not even the worst petty punishment. They also used to sew people into a sheet then beath the sheet. They also used to make writers who broke the law literally eat their writings, forcing pages down their throats, only stopping when they thought the person would die.
so thats where "i'll make you eat those words" comes from
@@TheNinToaster"More.... pages......"
What matters is most is treating other beings with kindness, compassion, civility, and dignity, and I feel the majority of our social norms and niceties should be firmly rooted in that overall principle. Any rule or expectation that doesn't serve that ultimately purpose, or worse, actively undermines it should be critiqued at the very least, if not tossed out altogether.
Yeah that's called Civility Politics.
I listened to a Politics on the Couch podcast which touched on the issue of politeness being used to suppress criticism. They were discussing a UK context but basically it’s impolite or disrespectful to call the prime minister a liar or bullshitter, so you shouldn’t do it even when that’s exactly what they are doing. This expectation only works when everybody is operating in good faith but it also means the system has no recourse against powerful liars. Of course, if representative democracy is to work then there needs to be rules of decorum so that debates don’t devolve into screaming matches, there also needs to be mechanisms to make sure this decorum is not taken advantage of.
Debates in The House of Commons are hardly models of decorum. They basically consist of the right and left being sarcastic at each other. And we've recently had two Prime Ministers (Boris Johnson and Liz Truss) basically forced out of power for being bullshitters. In the U.S, on the other hand, presidents seem to get away with being utterly incompetent and still serve out their full term.
Politician: We advocate for the relocation of extrajudicially spawned individuals as well as their subsequent vivi-cessation in a way which minimises the subjects periprocedural contentment.
Audience member: F*ck off! That's genocide, you abominable monster!
Politician: There is no need to let emotions get the better of you.
Audience member: Yes there is, when literal genocide is proposed!
Almost everyone else: Well SOMEONE lost their cool! 👀 Glad we have such a well-spoken and coolheaded leader
So sad that tone of voice and choice of words are so much more important than actual actions and content of speech...
Court Jester: _Me arse!, gentlemen_
Tbf if the audience was composed mostly of """extrajudicially spawned individuals""" then the tone of voice would not be so important. The right of the dominant group (i.e straight white males in the US, other groups elsewhere) to not be mildly inconvenienced or annoyed is de facto more important than basic human rights of other groups of people because most people have a severe scarcity of empathy and compassion for people outside our immediate social circles.
@@ValterStrangelove4419 You have too much faith in humanity. American politics consists primarily of idiots too stupid to realize the politicians they openly support are actively working in contradiction to their best interests, yet supporting those politicians anyway. If what was actually said was what voters acted on, none of our politicians would ever have gotten enough votes to win an election.
An example of valuing Style over Substance 😞
@@ValterStrangelove4419 true, but that's just another type of injustice making the whole situation even worse
I was not expecting the ECW clip at all, but I loved it!
What's missing from this video, I think, is also that politeness is a blueprint for unfamiliar parties to socialize. It's a signaling thing. Engaging in politeness shows you understand the rules and are "with it" for lack of a better term.
All that said, it's not necessarily bad, but I think this does form a kind of overreliance on etiquette, where one becomes dependent on a specific form of formal communication and has trouble adapting to unfamiliar forms and speech.
In short, it's a good short hand for those in an in group, but by the same token, it is a barrier between unfamiliar groups because it requires flexibility to come to understand.
Also, eat butt, Michael.
Yes and no. As a blueprint or idea(l), yes, if there was a universally intrinsically understood politeness. But in reality, there's rules and expectations, and people who set those rules, and culturally different sets of rules. Even if you put them in place with good intent (just a blueprint), and without any intent of gate-keeping, they do become gate-keeping. Their very existence dooms anyone who does not know them, or lives by a different set of rules, or wants to be their authentic self, to be perceived as impolite, or uneducated, or rude, or even offensive. By setting up expectations, you inevitably set someone up to fail them.
To me, politeness seems just like an unnecessary hurdle in communication.
Personally, I prefer to strive for kindness - and not as an expectation I put onto other people, but as a standard I hold my own actions to. Much more fair and authentic imo.
Wow, the idea that "being pleasant to be around" is apparently a cultural thing as opposed to an instinctive one just blew my mind.
That's not related to politeness, at all. "Pleasant to be around" would be kindness, and that is instinctive.
I see politeness as being more equitable to being “nice.” Sort of like commenting “thoughts and prayers” on a sad Facebook post. It’s an outward display of “look at me, see how amazing I am!” Whereas kindness is doing what needs to be done to make something better. It’s often quiet and even sometimes grumbly, but doing something out of love and compassion. It’s using your own power to shed light on those who are suffering and doing whatever you can to help take away some of their burden. Kindness isn’t doing things to draw attention to your perceived “goodness.” It’s not doing it for the accolades. Politeness is all for show. Kindness is actions that actually make the world better.
There has never been a single non-evil person to ever comment "thoughts and prayers" on a sad facebook post.
i felt like this video might be coming after the žižek article. Amazing as usual
There was a period of time where Wisecrack was doing a lot of sponsored/promotional content causing me to unsubscribe. I came back though, and I'm really glad to see the genuinly thoughtful content going strong again. The past few months have been jammed with really good videos y'all. Thanks for everything you do ❤
ah look. the ping pong variety of youtube subscriber in the wild.
Generosity, humility, honesty, patience, and temperance are virtues, and I can see why people conflate politeness with some of those virtues.
Humility is just a form of politeness that's used as a weapon by evil people to arbitrarily condemn threats. And generosity is often a shield used to vilify the poor while defending the upper class. I agree with the other three though, honesty patience and temperance are virtuous indeed.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 All of those virtues can be used for ulterior motives, but I agree with your overall assessment. Generosity and humility can be used more cynically than the other 3 virtues I listed.
Both politeness and rudeness are a message. It's the first thing that is noticed when one is expressing themselves, before even processing the meaning of the sentense.
It signals whether the person is willing to negotiate or not.
I think the idea here is encapsulated very well in the hospitality industry, where the work (waiting tables, bartending etc.) is often looked down upon as 'lower', the staff are expected to be very polite, often in the face of extreme rudeness and even hostility, and it is mostly those with ideas of what their 'station' might be that are the rudest.
I get so uncomfortable in venues where the staff are clearly expected to cosplay Victorian butlers or what have you, while the customers get to act however they choose.
This changed my perspective about being nice and polite..
As a former Resident of Wisconsin, you picked probably the worst and best example all at the same time. Slow Clap.
As a young girl who had to live as a target of emotional abuse, derogatory remarks and grooming behaviours, politeness was my shield and weapon to protect me and get me away feom situations that cornered me until i grew up enough to leave. That is why I'm very polite to strangers but my loved ones get my full personality
Literally just ran my intro to psychology lecture on personality. Asked my students if they knew what "Midwest nice" is. I feel very seen. (Btw from Wisconsin)
You should always seek to treat others in the manner you wish to be treated
They should too.
@@DapperHesher Gotta start somewhere man :)
Politeness = acting nice and obedient in either the hopes of reward or avoiding punishment. Respect = having the emotional intelligence to treat all people in a humane way, until they deserve otherwise. Also, eat the rich
I like your comment. I agree 100 percent.
Respect is earned, courtesy is freely given.
Friends, romans, countrymen; PUT DOWN YOUR PHONES!
When I went to India a few years ago, I went to the movies where everyone in the audience stood for the national anthem before the movie started.
In Brazil we do play the national anthem, at least half of it, because it's a three and a half minutes epic.
eu posso confirmar, realmente é foda pa krl
In Macedonia we play 2/3 of our national anthem on sporting events when the opponent is from different nation (and occasionally booing at the opponent's national anthem if they're from a nation we don't like). When the teams are from different cities, we don't play often.
I think you need to distinguish politeness from etiquette. I don’t think we’re just polite out of fear or because of power. A peasant can be polite to another peasant out of respect or friendship. Plus, people in other parts of the world have politeness too you know? It’s called pro-social behaviour, it’s a human thing, not invented by the rich and powerful. It’s been studied and it’s an evolutionary mechanism that fosters good functioning of a group of humans.
politeness establishes your power
Love these videos.
Hey Wisecrack guy! I love you and not in an in-love way, but I like that you are on this planet at the same time as I am. It is a special feeling that brings me knowing that we are in existence together. This is for you, my existent brother! I love you and your videos and your opinions!
I often ponder similar things about dress codes. Con men will wear the nicest suits while remorselessly destroying your life. But if someone does not adhere to the dress code, his opinions and views are immediately invalidated. It is a weapon to distract, some would raise more stink because of a tan suit than a drone strike in the middle east.
Things like manners and dress code are markers of respectability, not of morality. They are two different axes. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who truly believes that respectability inherently makes someone more moral. But in positions of power and influence, respectability is more important than morality from a realpolitik perspective, and always has been.
@@AJX-2 sounds like you would be one of those, who gets robbed blind by a mega church pastor.
@@brennenderopa believe whatever you want, man
Would adorno call politeness fascism ?
what wouldn't that guy call fascism . . .
Thank you so much for this video!
love the nuance and subtlety on this subject
nothin’ like fake politeness 😅😢😂
For the algorithm 🎉
Thanks for the compliment from Wisconsin, I appreciate it.
Etiquette is BS, not the same as politeness.
Tbh I’m never happy with ppl who are just nice vs ppl who are characteristically noticeably unique. Politeness is just arbitrary social requirements that people abuse to avoid dealing with anything unpleasant 🙄
This is easily the video with which I disagree more than any other. The formality of politeness is essential in governance in order to maintain a democracy. With the Internet causing a dishibition in public speech, it opens the door to politicians who use populist rhetoric. While some may be more inclusive like a Bernie Sanders, far more will be exclusive like a BoJo or a Trump. Maintaining the politeness with its formal speech and dress codes is one method of maintaining our ships of state through these more turbulent times.
You lost the plot when you claimed Donald Trump's politeness was the source of his popularity.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 I never said that. I said that he, like Boris Johnson, is an exclusionary populist who uses impolite speech. While it would not eliminate their politics, stressing the importance of maintaining decorum among our politicians would help limit their oversteps.
@@johnstanczyk4030 I think you've gotten even more in the weeds there... using the pretext of "civility" as a bludgeon to crush opposition is straight out of the fascist playbook, and is a strategy Trump and his cronies utilized themselves. It wouldn't limit them, it literally did empower them.
@@dontmisunderstand6041 While politeness may be a major part of conservative discourse in order to maintain the contemporary social structure, I do not think that any fascist party has really been concerned with politeness. The violent national rejuvenation precludes concerns of proper terms of address or salutations; those belong to the old decadent order that needs to be replaced.
Politeness and decorum helps to prevent the name-calling and mudslinging that turns one's political opponents into enemies.
@@johnstanczyk4030 Think about the BLM stuff from a few years ago. Or antifa.
I LOVE your Grateful Dad hat!!
Great video you guys never cease to make me think.
Comment for the algorithm
This video is rolling out on the heels on me receiving a 3 day ban on Reddit for merely suggesting that I would be ok with Elon Musk suffering a massive heart attack, but posed in the form of the quote from the boss from _Office Space_ . How does suggesting that it'd _"be great"_ if that happened constitute a threat of violence? Why did my appeal and subsequent issue reporting fall on -deaf ears- blind eyes? Was this an example of toxic positivity on the part of the Reddit admins? Some things will forever remain a mystery.
If I still used Reddit and saw your comment, I would have found it funny. Sorry you got banned for something so dumb
we support any content related to Office Space.
A couple of explanations for this One it goes against subreddit rules two It goes against a general rule of harassment On reddit itself
Back in the day, concerts from classical composers were rowdy affairs like a modern rock concert, people shouting and cheering. That's why there are so many instruments, to make enough volume to rise over the crowd. The quiet silence we see today was brought in by elites to keep out the lower classes, who were much rowdier.
On the internet part- it's basically "What a profile pic and username do to a m.."
I agree with the point you're making that politeness can be weaponized to hamper protest or make dissenters look bad. However i'm still in favor of politeness because the opposite is worse. Even if someone is masquerading their hate/oppression with politeness, it's still better than raw, unfiltered hate/oppression.
As an Autistic person,
The enforcement of Politeness in everyday conversation is just the worst.
While I agree that being nasty to others is bad,
The amount of stupid rules that make up what is considered polite it simply too many.
As an example: I get asked a question. I answer honestly, and suddenly I'm accused of being rude because I was too forthright for the person who initially asked.
And that's not getting into all the tone policing and rules about how you carry your body and how your face looks when you're talking and whether someone is making a joke or not.
It's awful and I just don't enjoy being around people anymore after so many years of pushback.
I’m a believer in being “polite,” but I’m also learning that political revolution doesn’t happen historically in a context of being polite.
Great question
As usual, I suppose the answer is “it depends”
Politeness is a sign that the people you are talking yo have power over you.
This is why conventionally attractive, wealthy people will often behave like total aholes.
They know they can get away with it.
Thats too one dimensional, some people may weaponize it that way but it's too broad of a brush to claim it's the only thing happening. I know many, many, MANY nice, considerate people who simply want to show they care and respect others and thus are polite.
Most people are polite to servers, it's not because servers have power over you, it's because most people aren't cunts.
It sounds like you're conflating the idea of "politeness" with "manners". Politeness, as I've understood it, has has been more rooted in empathy and recognition of other's humanity. Manner's, on the other hand, are the actual rules and guidelines by which a culture defines humane behavior. On a systemic level, a news outlet can weaponize shame against protester but if you've ever worked on a group project you know that a base level of respect between parties is necessary for healthy cooperation. But if you change what it means to show respect, change the manner by which we recognize humanity, that's how you ostracize and disenfranchise a community. I can't work with that person because protesters aren't respectable.
I think it's a bit of a comment on respectability politics. Like for example Chloe Zephyr(?) getting kicked out of the gov for making the law makers confront the harm they cause with their transphobic laws. She got emotional and rightfully angry but thats not allowed so now shes no longer allowed intonthe building and bas to sit on the bench outside the chamber.
Respectability politics has never saved anyone- Dr. King and Malcolm X were still unalived, and they spoke well, wore suits and (At least in Malcolm's case) focused on togetherness.
If your aid to marginalized communities is based on how nice they are to you, then your allyship is self-serving and patronizing at best.
They lived longer than chairman Fred Hampton did, he was assassinated by the fbi for being too revolutionary
I think you're falling into the paradox of tolerance.
"...paradox of tolerance as the seemingly counterintuitive idea that “in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.” Essentially, if a so-called tolerant society permits the existence of intolerant philosophies, it is no longer tolerant."
Respecting nazis just makes nazis respectable, especially in the eyes of others. It's mainstreaming their ideas and shifting the Overton window of acceptable beliefs far to the right. You might find The Alt Right Playbook an illuminating series of videos to watch.
Genuinely asking: Do you believe people need to be unfailingly polite to people who do them tremendous harm?
If your support for an oppressed group is conditional on whether or not those people are nice to you, then it's not genuine.
You're definitely falling for the core conceit of respectability politics, which is unfortunate because, as he says, it's really there to uphold the existing unjust power structures.
People being rightfully angry about unjust treatment should not turn you against them, unless they go so far as to dehumanize others and try to enact their own oppression on their enemies. But make sure you're not disavowing an entire movement based on the purposefully magnified reports of a few bad actors.
Matt Walsh spotlighting the most violent and unhinged trans activists is him doing respectability politics to convince you the entire movement is evil, when really most trans people just want to be able to live the same loves as everybody else and aren't sending bomb threats to places. He was ecstatic when he learned there was a trans school shooter, but fails to acknowledge his show leads to plenty of acts of stochastic terrorism, and many school shooters mention him and his colleagues in their manifestos for why they did what they did.
Don't fall for the trick.
Do you guys have the links anywhere to the research that you include within your videos?
"Do not attribute to malice, that which can be adequately explained by stupidity" - Hanlon's razor.
I heard something about how people perceive written comments as harsher than they actually are. I've found my life is better when I try my hardest to assume the person taking the time to open a dialogue with me is trying to help/be kind/nice. It's defused several people actively trying to start fights with me.
Just because someone offers some potentially constructive criticism on something you created, doesn't mean they don't think it's an excellent piece when considered in it's entirety. Assume anything they didn't mention was great and they only point out things with room for improvement. From that perspective, you crushed it!
Also I believe people are the sum of their actions. If you've done great work in general, this one criticism is likely just a drop in the ocean. You don't know if they were abused all their lives and have bad judgement.
Good people also have off days. It's amazing how often people turn out to have recently experienced hardship when they lash out at you and you ask them if they're okay. It's often more about them, than you.
The world is a much better place with this perspective.
Now use your damn turn signals you irredeemable cretin!
😮I agree wholeheartedly.
Turn your blinker on and I'll let you in front of me- but don't just cut me off without warning.
Don't assume stupidity when malice is an equally valid explanation. Ignorance can be incidental or intentional, so don't use ignorance as a blanket justification for all evil. The key here is that adamantly sticking to either side of that is wrong. Use your best judgment to figure out whether they're stupid or evil on a case by case basis.
Robert E Howard, author of Conan the Barbarian stories, uses this setting to explore his framework of barbarisim versus civilization, in favor of barbarism or savagery. While i don't agree with the logical ends of what he proposes, I do particularly love this quote as a summation: "Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing."
I think soft power relies heavily on signifiers and abstract concepts that COULD point to beneficial actions for people SOMETIMES. The implicit potential for future prosperity for many is enough to stave revolt. A pleasant thought with barbarism is the complete lack of such abstractions as "potential" or "future prosperity." Good rulers bring prosperity right now. Bad rulers fail to bring prosperity right now. We get to feel smart when working with abstract concepts, but this could be used as a trick to placate a population without actually providing anything of material value.
Interpersonally, i think it's very easy to erase people from our lives, and this may drive how we engage with people we've just met. It can be a song-and-dance to endear yourself to people who have their finger hanging over a delete button. Of course this means there are more protections against abusive people, and this is very good. It also means and easy temptation to completely avoid relationships with diverse people with differences that would have been ironed out if a chance was given. contrivances like work force us to be around people that we may not have met otherwise, but "deal with this person or you'll starve to death" feels too ghoulish to be a solution.
I don't want to forgo politeness really at all. There is an incredible benefit to knowing when you walk into a room full of strangers that a certain behavior can be expected and safety assured. I think politeness is also something we can use to explore relationships deeply while knowing there's still something to hold onto when things get difficult, but it's certainly no replacement for getting to know someone, and the process of getting to know someone is always going to be uncomfortable and real and good and worth it. if politeness is isolating us from eachother, giving us excuses to write people off, then it's not working as intended.
Omg THANK YOU SOOOO MUCH FOR THIS. ESPECIALLY IN CALIFORNIA, the politeness is the most TOXIC COLLECTIVE PERSONA hypocritical snobs use to get away with anything.
Your best vid! We need new ideas of decorum that specifically adress mixed income\mixed background groups. I've lived under these rules,and they really help. For example,everyone takes turns paying for lunch,you do kinda flat tax that. But if someone is really struggling they don't go hungry. However,this can include emotional struggles,so the lowest income aren't the only possible beneficiaries.
This video is excellent.
That was genuinely interesting
I've been saying this for decades, "they've weaponized politeness!" Particularly in banks, they mess up & are so polite about it & if you don't respond in kind you're the one out of line
Respectability Politics goes one degree deeper than even the double-standards flaunted by those in power. When an oppressed community starts to self-police, in the belief that fighting on the unfair terms the oppressors set, (the ones that make them easy to ignore) will somehow result in the oppressors ceding ground to the ones who play nice. This all undermines activism and splits communities.
And that's not even getting into how the strictures of civility as established by the ruling class are explicitly exclusionary of minority groups by design. It's not just that the rules of civility are inherently classist, they are also white, male, straight, christian, and all the other flavours of Default that society fixates on. It's yet another reminder to excise the cop in your head.
The reality is that most conflicts arise not because we're not polite to each other but due to entitlement of politeness and hiding the real issues until it is too late.
A lot less politeness and correctness would go a long way towards normalizing the conversations due to more transparency and softer venting that would prevent explosive outbursts.