US Hawks Hang Gliding Association

I was listening to one of the local talk radio stations yesterday at 11:14am. The talk show host was interviewing an elderly couple who had survived the concentration camps of Hitler's Germany. At one point they were discussing how human beings can stand by and watch such atrocities happen. That's when the host uttered these words:

Indifference always benefits the aggressor, never the victim.
                                 - Mike Slater, February 5th, 2015 at 11:14am

Of course, that's a corollary to the well-known "All evil needs to exist is for good men to do nothing". But Mike Slater's comment more clearly (at least more clearly to me) points out the implicit asymmetry between the aggressor and the victim.

bobk wrote:I was listening to one of the local talk radio stations yesterday at 11:14am. The talk show host was interviewing an elderly couple who had survived the concentration camps of Hitler's Germany. At one point they were discussing how human beings can stand by and watch such atrocities happen. That's when the host uttered these words:

Indifference always benefits the aggressor, never the victim.
                                 - Mike Slater, February 5th, 2015 at 11:14am

Of course, that's a corollary to the well-known "All evil needs to exist is for good men to do nothing". But Mike Slater's comment more clearly (at least more clearly to me) points out the implicit asymmetry between the aggressor and the victim.

Bob,

Indifference, in this case, requires a Social/Community/Group context. An "I could care less that So and So was the target of Bully A" kind of attitude is a perfect example of the above quote. But "indifference" can come in many forms.

Someone could also say: "The position of the aggressor means nothing (form of indifference) they ought/need to be held accountable." That kind of indifference does not benefit the aggressor - it goes the other way - the aggressor needs to pay, indifferent of their position.

A larger issue on this subject is -

How do you lead people toward CARING about damage that is done to a victim as well as the wrong done by the aggressor?

How about when the issue is presented to the public in such a way as to define the "victim" as initially being the aggressor and NEEDING to be "put down". Making the aggressor appear as a "Hero".

Often enough the "aggressor" is in a position of higher power/authority and can use that as an advantage, in justifying the "punishment" of the victim.

That little phrase ("Indifference always benefits the aggressor, never the victim.") involves some complex social dynamics.

Here's a interesting idea for you -

Imagine that the "victim" was a person in a position of power/authority and the "aggressor" was a previously unknown person of no real power/authority. Less chance of Social/Community indifference in that situation? Hmmmmmmm.