Nov 19, 2023·edited Nov 21, 2023Liked by Nina Welsch
As ever you've hit the nail on the head. For years women have had "being nice" thrown at them if they didn't conform to expectations of how they should behave and now kindness has become positively toxic at times. We absolutely need more integrity.
Thanks for responding to my column in such a civilised way without recourse to insult. It's rare but very much appreciated! You make some very fair points, not least on the danger of well-intentioned but ill-considered "kind" legislation.
But I would push back on the idea that compromise is weakness, niceness or, worse, empty-headedness. Look at Northern Ireland where, 25 years ago, with 3,000 dead, loyalist and republican leaders compromised with the very people, sometimes specifically, who wanted them dead.
This was not weakness or niceness or kindness. It was courage. It was moral resilience. It was intellectual rigour. I don't claim any of these, but I do defend those at home and abroad who are willing to leave their comfort zones and seek some way forward in the full knowledge it exposes them to bile from both sides. More bile, in fact, than is usually directed at the "enemy" on the other side.
Forgive me if I quote at length from my colleague Danny Finkelstein in a recent column about assisted dying, which became a column about centrists:
"Most policy decisions, in other words, come down to a judgment about mitigation and proportionality. There are few controversies — perhaps restricted to disputes about matters of fact — in which only one side has merit. It is understanding this, and living with its implications, that is the core of the politics of the centre.
This leads centrists to four main conclusions. First, because there are many valid perspectives, the constitution must be pluralist, protecting free speech and the exchange of ideas as well as the rights of minorities.
Second, centrists accept the charge that sometimes, in hot disputes, we favour mere compromise. This is not because we are weak and buffeted about. It is because a stable society and the rule of law require that at the very least the vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time, must be willing to live peacefully with the solutions upon which society agrees.
Third, ensuring that arguments are properly considered and risks mitigated requires competent government and respect for the facts.
And finally, being in the centre involves resisting the allure of populism, the idea that there is a single “spirit of the nation” or “will of the people”. Nigel Farage’s description of the European referendum result as “a victory for real people” is a classic example of populism, suggesting that those who voted differently weren’t even people."
Thought-provoking and sensible, Nina. What a pass we’ve come to when hypocrisy masquerading as ‘kindness’ is acceptable, but ‘integrity’ is a dirty word. As for ‘resilience’…🙄
As ever you've hit the nail on the head. For years women have had "being nice" thrown at them if they didn't conform to expectations of how they should behave and now kindness has become positively toxic at times. We absolutely need more integrity.
Thanks for responding to my column in such a civilised way without recourse to insult. It's rare but very much appreciated! You make some very fair points, not least on the danger of well-intentioned but ill-considered "kind" legislation.
But I would push back on the idea that compromise is weakness, niceness or, worse, empty-headedness. Look at Northern Ireland where, 25 years ago, with 3,000 dead, loyalist and republican leaders compromised with the very people, sometimes specifically, who wanted them dead.
This was not weakness or niceness or kindness. It was courage. It was moral resilience. It was intellectual rigour. I don't claim any of these, but I do defend those at home and abroad who are willing to leave their comfort zones and seek some way forward in the full knowledge it exposes them to bile from both sides. More bile, in fact, than is usually directed at the "enemy" on the other side.
Forgive me if I quote at length from my colleague Danny Finkelstein in a recent column about assisted dying, which became a column about centrists:
"Most policy decisions, in other words, come down to a judgment about mitigation and proportionality. There are few controversies — perhaps restricted to disputes about matters of fact — in which only one side has merit. It is understanding this, and living with its implications, that is the core of the politics of the centre.
This leads centrists to four main conclusions. First, because there are many valid perspectives, the constitution must be pluralist, protecting free speech and the exchange of ideas as well as the rights of minorities.
Second, centrists accept the charge that sometimes, in hot disputes, we favour mere compromise. This is not because we are weak and buffeted about. It is because a stable society and the rule of law require that at the very least the vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time, must be willing to live peacefully with the solutions upon which society agrees.
Third, ensuring that arguments are properly considered and risks mitigated requires competent government and respect for the facts.
And finally, being in the centre involves resisting the allure of populism, the idea that there is a single “spirit of the nation” or “will of the people”. Nigel Farage’s description of the European referendum result as “a victory for real people” is a classic example of populism, suggesting that those who voted differently weren’t even people."
Love this, Nina!
Thought-provoking and sensible, Nina. What a pass we’ve come to when hypocrisy masquerading as ‘kindness’ is acceptable, but ‘integrity’ is a dirty word. As for ‘resilience’…🙄
Kind is clever.