Introduction: The Roots of Fairness

In one of the most striking demonstrations of moral emotion among nonhuman animals, primatologist Frans de Waal observed two capuchin monkeys trained to exchange a small rock for food. Both were satisfied with cucumbers—until one was rewarded with a grape, the more desirable treat. Upon seeing this inequity, the monkey receiving the cucumber erupted in protest, angrily throwing the food back and refusing to cooperate (de Waal, 2013).

De Waal termed this response inequity aversion—a biologically grounded sense of fairness observed even in other social animals. This finding upends the traditional view that fairness is a human cultural invention. Instead, it is a social emotion evolved to sustain cooperation. In his words, “We evolved with sharing as part of the system” (de Waal, 2010, 2013).

This insight provides a fascinating bridge to human civilization. Using the Five Stages of Civilization Model (Kim, 2021), we can trace how the sense of equality and equity evolves—from visceral reactions for survival to empathic integration that underpins mature societies.

Stage 1: Fear–Dependency — Fairness as Survival

At the first stage of civilization, fairness is equated with security and protection. The primary moral code is “I must survive.” People accept hierarchy and inequality if it provides stability or safety. Fairness is primitive, physical, and tribal.

Much like the monkey in de Waal’s experiment, early human societies perceive fairness in immediate, tangible terms—Do I get enough food? Am I protected by the strong? Inequality is tolerated if the leader ensures group survival, but deprivation or betrayal triggers primal outrage.

Trigger of unfairness: deprivation or abandonment.
Emotion: rage or despair.
Historical form: feudal loyalty, tribal hierarchy, dependence on authority.

Stage 2: Anger–Detachment — Fairness as Merit and Competition

As self-assertion develops, fairness becomes tied to merit, performance, and effort. This marks the rise of competitive, achievement-oriented societies. Inequality is justified by the belief that the capable and industrious deserve more.

At this level, fairness is comparative rather than empathic: “I accept inequality if I could, in principle, earn the same reward.” Those who rise by talent or discipline are admired; those who gain advantage through favoritism provoke anger. Fairness is defined by meritocracy, not compassion.

Trigger of unfairness: undeserved success or systemic corruption.
Emotion: envy, resentment.
Historical form: capitalism, social Darwinism, individualistic ethics.

Stage 3: Guilt–Reparation — Fairness as Law and Moral Reciprocity

At this stage, fairness transforms into justice, morality, and social responsibility. The concern shifts from who earns more to whether laws apply equally. Equality becomes a principle codified in religion, ethics, and governance.

Fairness here is rooted in duty and guilt: the moral conscience ensures order through adherence to shared rules. Yet this form of fairness, though moral, remains external—it relies on compliance and fear of punishment rather than empathy.

Trigger of unfairness: hypocrisy, legal bias, or moral double standards.
Emotion: guilt, shame, moral outrage.
Historical form: religious codes, constitutions, bureaucratic justice.

Stage 4: Freedom–Independence — Fairness as Opportunity

In the fourth stage, fairness centers on freedom and autonomy. The ideal is equality of opportunity, not necessarily of outcome. Individuals should be free to pursue their potential without coercion or discrimination.

This is the stage of liberal democracies and human rights movements. Fairness is procedural rather than distributive—what matters is the fairness of the system, not its results. Yet, without emotional integration, freedom can degenerate into indifference: the privileged may mistake others’ structural disadvantages for personal failure.

Trigger of unfairness: restriction of liberty or censorship.
Emotion: frustration, pride in independence.
Historical form: constitutional liberalism, free markets, civil rights reforms.

Stage 5: Empathy–Integration — Fairness as Co-Flourishing

The final stage marks a profound evolution: fairness becomes relational and empathic. Equality now means ensuring that everyone has what they need to flourish, not merely the same opportunities.

Stage 5 societies practice equity—a form of fairness sensitive to context and need. Here, the strong assist the weak not from guilt or pity, but from an empathic recognition of shared humanity. The emotional and systemic dimensions of fairness are fully integrated: survival (Stage 1), effort (Stage 2), justice (Stage 3), and liberty (Stage 4) converge into compassion-based collaboration.

Trigger of unfairness: exclusion, humiliation, or exploitation of dignity.
Emotion: empathy, grief, and moral courage.
Historical form: restorative justice, open society, humanitarian ethics.

From Monkeys to Moral Minds: The Emotional Logic of Fairness

De Waal’s primate studies reveal that fairness originates not from rationality but from emotion. The cucumber-throwing monkey expresses the same moral protest that underlies human social justice movements: the pain of being devalued.

Humans evolved by transforming these emotional protests into moral systems. Fairness begins in the body (Stage 1), is refined by the ego (Stage 2), codified in conscience (Stage 3), expanded by freedom (Stage 4), and finally harmonized by empathy (Stage 5). Each level retains the emotional trace of its origins—protest against deprivation, resentment against injustice, guilt over wrongdoing, and ultimately compassion for all beings.

Conclusion: Toward an Empathic Civilization

Modern societies operate technologically at Stage 4 sophistication but emotionally remain caught between Stage 2 competition and Stage 3 moralism. Our debates over inequality—whether in wealth, race, or global resources—often oscillate between envy and guilt rather than understanding.

The evolution of fairness calls for a new emotional literacy: learning to experience justice as mutual care rather than moral superiority. As de Waal (2013) suggested, fairness is not an artificial ideal but a natural instinct that has evolved to preserve cooperation. The task before humanity is to consciously extend that instinct from our small tribes to the whole human family.

Fairness began with a monkey refusing a cucumber. It will end, perhaps, when humanity learns to share grapes—not just with its neighbors, but with all of life.

References

de Waal, F. B. M. (2010). The age of empathy: Nature’s lessons for a kinder society. Broadway Books.

de Waal, F. B. M. (2013, October). Moral behavior in animals [Video]. TED.
https://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_moral_behavior_in_animals

de Waal, F. B. M., & Brosnan, S. F. (2003). Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature, 425(6955), 297–299. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01963

Kim, R. Y. (2021). The five stages of civilization: From an integrated psychological and psychoanalytic perspective. Living Free Publishing.

Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.

Singer, P. (2011). The expanding circle: Ethics, evolution, and moral progress. Princeton University Press.

Tomasello, M. (2019). Becoming human: A theory of ontogeny. Harvard University Press.

The post The Evolution of Fairness: From Primate Emotion to Civilizational Empathy appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

The new prime minister, Sébastien Lecornu, barely survived his first week in office under threat of censure. Meanwhile, NGOs warn that France has been “dropping out of democracy” since 2017, as authorities restrict protests and dissolve associations. Public trust in politics has cratered. Adding to the turbulence, former president Nicolas Sarkozy was sentenced to five years in prison for criminal conspiracy, a dramatic symbol of both accountability and decay.

To many, this looks like another round of French chaos — a society forever oscillating between revolution and repression. But seen through a developmental lens, France’s turmoil makes sense.

A Nation Caught Between Stages

My Five-Stage Model of Civilization suggests that societies, like individuals, mature emotionally. They move from fear and dependency (Stage 1), through anger and rivalry (Stage 2), through paternalism and conformity (Stage 3), through assertion of rights and freedom (Stage 4), to a final stage of collaborative maturity (Stage 5), where empathy, consensus, and fairness guide public life.

France today is stuck between Stages 2, 3, and 4.

• Stage 2 anger is visible in the barricades, strikes, and violent clashes. Citizens feel betrayed and lash out against institutions.

• Stage 3 paternalism persists in France’s centralized state. Leaders govern as stern parents, imposing austerity from above.

• Stage 4 rebellion erupts in civil society’s demand for liberty, dignity, and authentic voice.

What France lacks is Stage 5 maturity: politics built on empathy, inclusion, and collaborative problem-solving.

Echoes of History

This is not new. The French Revolution of 1789 embodied Stage 2 anger; the Napoleonic state reflected Stage 3 paternalism. The uprisings of May 1968 were classic Stage 4 rebellion against conformity. France has even glimpsed Stage 5 — in its role founding the European Union after World War II, and more recently in citizens’ assemblies on climate policy. But these flashes of maturity have never been institutionalized.

What Stage 5 Would Mean

In a mature society, budget debates would not trigger barricades. Instead, they would be mediated by permanent forums bringing together government, unions, employers, and citizens.

Economic reforms would not pit austerity against welfare. They would balance prosperity with fairness through “communitarian capitalism,” where fiscal stability coexists with social protections and transparency.

Justice would not mean only harsh policing of protests. It would include restorative programs that address the roots of crime in trauma and exclusion. Communication would not be dominated by slogans and demonization. It would be authentic, empathic, and inclusive.

Stage 5 is not utopia. It is simply the next step of social maturity — a way of harmonizing freedom, equality, and community.

Paths Ahead

France now faces several possible trajectories:

• Regression: Hardening repression and deepening anger spiral into instability.

• Stagnation: Paternalistic half-measures preserve order but fail to restore trust.

• Oscillation: The country swings endlessly between rebellion and repression.

• Progress: Incremental reforms gradually build new trust.

• Leap: A national pact — a kind of “Stage 5 social contract” — resets fiscal policy, social fairness, and democratic legitimacy.

Which path France chooses depends less on debt ratios than on emotional development at the collective level.

Toward Maturity

If France is to move forward, it must transform its turmoil into dialogue. Leaders should institutionalize citizens’ assemblies, negotiate fiscal choices openly, and embrace transparency in taxation and spending. Justice must shift from punitive reflexes to trauma-informed rehabilitation. Education should teach empathy and conflict resolution, not just history and math. And above all, political communication must become authentic: leaders who listen as much as they speak.

France is not alone in facing this challenge. Many democracies oscillate between anger, paternalism, and rebellion. But France’s long history of revolution gives it both the risk of regression and the possibility of leadership.

Today’s turmoil is a test: can France rise from protest to maturity? The answer will shape not only its own future but the trajectory of democracy in Europe.

The post France’s Protests Reveal a Democracy Stuck Between Anger and Maturity appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

The United States faces an ongoing crisis of violent crimes committed by individuals with severe mental illness. Mass shootings and random street attacks instill fear, but the political response remains polarized. Republicans tend to push for harsher punishments and more prisons, while Democrats lean toward leniency but often without robust preventive measures.

The Five-Stage Theory of Civilization offers a developmental lens to move beyond this stalemate. By recognizing that societies evolve through emotional and structural stages, we can identify why punishment alone fails—and how prevention and empathy can create safer, healthier communities.

Stages of Response

Stage 1–2: Fear and Denial
At primitive levels, societies react with fear and shame. Offenders are labeled “lunatics” or “vermin,” and the instinct is to lock them away. The U.S. remains stuck here: over one-third of inmates have a diagnosed mental illness, yet prisons serve as de facto psychiatric hospitals. Punishment protects only temporarily, while root causes—untreated trauma, psychosis, and access to weapons—remain.

Stage 3: Anxiety and Morality
Societies begin to debate ethics: Is it fair to execute someone with psychosis? Should treatment outweigh punishment? Yet anxiety often produces inconsistent policies—mental health courts in some places, solitary confinement in others. This moral stage is important but not sufficient.

Stage 4: Responsibility and Prevention
At Stage 4, societies embrace accountability while building preventive frameworks. This means community-based treatment, mental health courts, re-entry programs, and sensible gun regulations. Responsibility is paired with boundaries: offenders are accountable, but support systems reduce relapse.

Stage 5: Empathy and Collaboration
The most mature stage emphasizes prevention, healing, and collaboration. Crime is treated as a public health issue. Investments are made in trauma prevention, universal mental health care, and restorative justice. Empathy is not “softness” but a practical safety strategy.

Lessons from Abroad

The Netherlands: Once a high-incarceration country, the Netherlands shifted toward rehabilitation and community prevention. Crime rates dropped so significantly that several prisons were closed in the 2010s. Strict gun laws and integrated mental health care played key roles.

Nordic Countries: Norway, Sweden, and Finland run prisons that look more like rehabilitation centers. Norway’s Halden Prison, for example, offers therapy, education, and outdoor activity. The guiding principle: “Better neighbors.” As most inmates eventually return to society, the focus is on preparing them to reintegrate. Norway’s recidivism rate is around 20%, compared to 70% in the U.S.

These models show that societies can be safe without relying on harsh punishment.

Trauma as the Root Cause

Many violent crimes by the mentally ill are not random but rooted in trauma. Childhood abuse, neglect, or intergenerational trauma can arrest emotional development, leaving individuals stuck in primitive emotions like rage or shame. Without intervention, these unresolved wounds can later explode in violence.

Thus, true prevention requires investing in trauma-informed care: parental support, early childhood therapy, community resilience, and poverty reduction. Addressing trauma is as essential as regulating guns or expanding psychiatric services.

Why the U.S. Remains Stuck

Despite evidence, the U.S. resists Stage 5 maturity due to:

• Political polarization—crime as a campaign weapon.

• A cultural emphasis on rugged individualism.

• A permissive gun culture unique among wealthy nations.

• Stigma surrounding mental illness.

Yet history shows that change is possible. Just as the Netherlands transitioned from overcrowded prisons to prison closures, America can move from punishment toward prevention.

Conclusion: Toward a Mature Solution

The Five-Stage Theory highlights that punishment alone is a Stage 1–2 response—a primitive cycle of fear and denial. America must rise toward Stage 4 responsibility and Stage 5 empathy, where prevention, trauma care, and rehabilitation are central.

Safety without empathy is an illusion. By integrating mental health treatment, regulating weapons, supporting families, and embracing restorative justice, the U.S. can move beyond endless debates toward true public safety.

The Netherlands and Nordic countries already prove that it is possible. The question is whether America will choose maturity over fear.

References

• Bureau of Justice Statistics (2021). Indicators of Mental Health Problems Reported by Prisoners and Jail Inmates, 2011–12. Washington, D.C.

• Pratt, J., & Eriksson, A. (2013). Contrasts in Punishment: An Explanation of Anglophone Excess and Nordic Exceptionalism. Routledge.

• van Swaaningen, R. (2013). “Punishment in the Netherlands: Moving Backwards.” In A. Snacken & S. Daems (Eds.), European Penology?. Hart Publishing.

• Pratt, J. (2008). “Scandinavian Exceptionalism in an Era of Penal Excess: The Nature and Roots of Scandinavian Penal Policy.” British Journal of Criminology, 48(2), 119–137.

• Kim, R. Y. (2021). The Five Stages of Civilization: From an Integrated Psychological and Psychoanalytic Perspective, Vol. II: Socio-Cultural Development. Living Free Publishing Company.

The post From Punishment to Prevention: A Five-Stage Approach to Crime and Mental Illness appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

Introduction

Conflicts between the federal government and individual states are a longstanding feature of American history. But what if we could view these not just as legal battles or policy disagreements, but as emotional and developmental struggles as well?

Using my Five-Stage Conflict Resolution Model, we can analyze these recurring tensions as expressions of collective psychological maturity, or lack thereof. Just like individuals, governments and societies operate through emotional stages that shape their responses to disagreement, progressing from fear-based control to integrated, values-based cooperation.

Let’s explore how this model helps us understand—and potentially resolve—some of the most pressing federal–state conflicts in today’s America.

The Five Stages of Conflict Resolution

Case Studies: Where We Stall—and Where We Grow

🔹 Education Policy: Common Core vs. Local Control

Conflict: States resist national education standards imposed by the federal government.
Current Peak Stage: Stage 3–4
Some states adapt federal frameworks to suit local values—a sign of mutual respect and growing awareness. But resistance framed in terms of identity or tradition shows lingering Stage 2 narcissism.

🔹 COVID-19 Health Mandates

Conflict: Federal mask/vaccine mandates vs. state declarations of medical freedom.
Current Peak Stage: Stage 2–3
In many states, rejection of federal health advice was driven by fear or defiance (Stage 1). Later, some bipartisan cooperation on vaccine rollout reflected Stage 3 ethics—but often lacked systemic trust.

🔹 Gun Control Laws

Conflict: Federal background check laws vs. state-level protections for gun rights.
Current Peak Stage: Stage 2–3
This remains a polarized battleground. Stage 2 rhetoric dominates (“freedom vs. tyranny”), while a few states experiment with nuanced solutions (e.g., red flag laws) signaling Stage 3 moral concern and practical flexibility.

🔹 Abortion and Reproductive Rights

Conflict: Post-Dobbs, states enact full bans or protections; federal proposals face legal gridlock.
Current Peak Stage: Stage 2
This is an emotionally charged example of competitive narcissism. Both sides claim moral superiority while largely dismissing the psychological or lived realities of the other. Dialogue is minimal; vilification is high.

🔹 Environmental Regulation vs. Resource Development

Conflict: States want economic gain from drilling/mining; feds push conservation.
Current Peak Stage: Stage 3–4
Some cooperative arrangements show growth toward democratic compromise, but short-term economic fears and ideological rigidity still obstruct deeper ecological integration.

Why the Peak Stage Matters

Each issue’s “peak developmental stage” tells us where the conversation stalls:

• At Stage 2, debates polarize into moralistic stand-offs with no mutual recognition.
• At Stage 3, public awareness and ethical concern foster partial cooperation.
• Only at Stage 4–5 do we see durable, inclusive solutions that respect both autonomy and unity, identity and interdependence.

What Stage 5 Could Look Like

Imagine if we approached these issues from Stage 5—the integrative level:

• Education would reflect both national benchmarks and cultural diversity.
• Pandemic responses would balance liberty with science and community care.
• Gun policy would respect rights while prioritizing trauma prevention and healing.
• Abortion law would account for both conscience and psychological context.
• Environmental rules would unite long-term stewardship with local dignity and prosperity.

🧠 Stage 5 doesn’t erase conflict—it reframes it as a creative tension between values, not a war between enemies.

Conclusion: Conflict as a Mirror

Federal–state conflict is not just about government overreach or states’ rights. It is a mirror of our collective emotional development. When we ask, “Why can’t we solve this?” we must also ask, “What stage are we operating from?”

Until our public discourse moves beyond fear, self-righteousness, and rigidity, sustainable solutions will remain out of reach. But with emotional insight and developmental courage, we can rise to a level where policy becomes not just about power—but about shared purpose.

💬 Reflection Question for Readers

What emotional stage do you think your local or national leaders are operating from? And what stage are you personally drawn to when facing political disagreement?

If this lens helped you reframe a complex issue, feel free to share it with your network or comment with your thoughts. Together, we can evolve not just our policies—but our shared emotional intelligence.

The post Why Federal–State Conflicts Reflect Our Emotional Maturity: A Five-Stage Lens appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

A study (Dargis & Koenigs, 2018) confirmed the early claim of the existence of two types of psychopathy finding that the high-NA subgroup of psychopathic offenders scored higher on Negative Affect scales and reported significantly greater emotional and physical abuse, as well as emotional neglect, compared to the low-NA subgroup. The low-NA subgroup, on the other hand, scored significantly higher on the Positive Affect scale than the comparison group.

The post Two Types of Criminal Minds appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

Empathy is often regarded as one of the most valuable qualities a person can possess. It plays a crucial role in nurturing and healing relationships, bridging gaps, and fostering understanding among individuals. However, it’s essential to clarify what empathy is not to truly comprehend this complex and often misunderstood human trait.

In a previous blog post, we explored the significance of empathy, particularly mature empathy, which represents the highest level of compassion. It involves understanding others’ emotions from their perspectives, even in challenging situations, such as those involving victims, perpetrators, or individuals struggling with mental health issues like depression and suicidality.

In this article, we will delve deeper into what mature empathy is not, shedding light on common misconceptions and clarifying the distinctions between genuine empathy and other emotions or actions that may resemble it but fall short.

Empathy is Not Merely Identifying Emotions

One common misconception about empathy is that it’s merely the act of identifying or recognizing someone else’s emotions. While recognizing emotions is a part of empathy, it is just the beginning. Empathy goes beyond acknowledging feelings; it involves understanding them deeply and from the other person’s perspective. It requires putting oneself in another’s shoes and trying to comprehend the emotional experience from their point of view.

For example, if a friend is going through a tough time, empathy is not just saying, “I see that you’re sad.” True empathy involves asking questions, listening actively, and making an effort to understand why your friend is feeling the way they do.

Empathy is Not About Trying to Please

Another misconception is that empathy involves trying to please or appease someone who is going through a difficult situation. While it’s natural to want to comfort and support those we care about, true empathy is not about showering them with gifts or material things in an attempt to make them feel better.

For instance, if a colleague is struggling with a personal issue, empathy is not giving them an expensive gift to cheer them up. Instead, it involves offering your presence, a listening ear, and emotional support.

Empathy is Not Giving Unsolicited Advice

Empathy is often mistaken for giving well-intended advice or lecturing out of concern. While providing guidance can be helpful in certain situations, true empathy does not involve offering unsolicited advice without first understanding the person’s feelings and perspective.

Imagine a family member is facing a challenging decision. Empathy is not immediately offering a list of reasons why they should choose a particular option. Instead, it involves asking questions to understand their thoughts and feelings before providing advice, if they seek it.

Empathy is Not Sympathy

Empathy and sympathy are often used interchangeably, but they are distinct emotions. Sympathy involves feeling for someone who is in a similar situation or experiencing pain. Empathy, on the other hand, means understanding someone else’s emotions from their perspective, regardless of whether you’ve been in a similar situation or not.

For example, if a coworker loses a loved one, empathy is not saying, “I know how you feel; I lost someone close to me too.” Empathy is about acknowledging their grief and trying to understand the unique emotions they are going through, even if you haven’t experienced the same loss.

Empathy is Not Indifference

Lastly, empathy is not indifference. It does not mean disregarding someone’s right to experience their emotions, even if those emotions involve danger, misery, depression, loneliness, or lack of safety and security. Empathy involves respecting a person’s feelings and experiences while offering support and understanding.

For instance, if a friend decides to pursue a risky adventure, empathy is not discouraging them by highlighting all the potential dangers. It involves respecting their choice while expressing concern and offering assistance if needed.

Conclusion

Empathy is a complex and multifaceted emotion that plays a pivotal role in human relationships. Understanding what empathy is not can be just as crucial as understanding what it is. By dispelling common misconceptions and clarifying the true nature of empathy, we can cultivate more meaningful and compassionate connections with others, fostering a deeper understanding of their experiences and emotions.

 empathyislove.com 

The post What Mature Empathy Is Not: Debunking Common Misconceptions appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

According to Ghada Alsharif, Staff Reporter at Tronto Star, as of August 30, 2022, the fifth and sixth women have been allegedly killed by an intimate partner or family member in Toronto this year.

In 2020, a Toronto neurosurgeon murdered his physician wife, who requested divorce after years of separate life during marriage.

In 2008, Jodi Arias in the U.S. butchered her ex-boyfriend to get revenge on their breakup. His body was found with 27 stab wounds and a headshot. 

Though we do not know the details of the childhood backgrounds of the perpetrators above, If you feel intense fear of separation or breakup with your intimate lovers, you can suspect your original fear of being separated or abandoned by your primary caregiver, such as your mother, when you were an infant, especially before you were one year old.

Many psychoanalytic scholars speculate that the experience of unwanted or premature separation of infants by their primary caregivers amounts to the experience of life and death in the adults enough to murder themselves and their partner since they still carry the painful subconscious memory into adulthood.

The post When you feel like hurting your ex-lover upon breakup or divorce… appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

Most children who need extra discipline at home or school may benefit from a more advanced approach, such as empathic understanding with boundary setting by parents and disciplinarians, as it has been employed as the most effective tool in psychotherapy in dealing with clients with emotional injury.

With the proposed 5-stage model introduced by Kim (2021a), possible revisions for Baumrind’s dimensions can be considered. For example, the addition of firm boundaries to demandingness and the replacement of responsiveness with the emotional spectrum, facets of projective identification, sympathy, and empathy are suggested, depending on the parent’s or the authority’s level of emotional capacity or readiness to support.

In many families, children feel misunderstood, unfairly treated, and emotionally neglected, but parents have not acknowledged their pain for various reasons.

The parents or authorities must first use empathy in communication to understand the child’s emotions behind their behaviors.

This parenting style can be the best for helping children who may have been trauma survivors.

For example, children who need extra discipline at home or school are those who display acting-out behaviors.

The best approach parents or educational institutions can take to help them will be an empathic approach with appropriate boundary setting.

It is the empathic parenting of Stage 5 supported by the authoritative parenting of Stage 4 according to my 5 Stage theory (Kim, 2021a).

The success of this approach can be witnessed in various Stage 5 countries’ education systems, such as those in Nordic countries.

References

Kim, R. (2021A). The five stages of civilization: An integrated psychological and psychoanalytic perspective: A personality development. Living Free Publishing Co.

Kim, R. (2022). New Parenting Approach for Generations Y, Z, and Alpha. Living Free Publishing Co.

The post Empathic Parenting needs to replace the ineffective conventional parenting approaches in dealing with emotionally challenging children.  appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

Photo by Katie Godowski from Pexels

It has been deplorable watching so many Ukrainians suffering from this indescribable tragedy and pain out of nowhere. How can we understand Russia’s cruel act of invasion into Ukraine from a psychological perspective?

If we understand the psychology of the development in our society and culture, we may find where the problem came from and what is the best approach to the situation from a psychological perspective.

First, the current situation in Ukraine may be an inevitable result of the breakdown of dialogue between Russian leaders and Western leaders.

It resembles the deadlock situation between couples or parent and child when the communications break down due to the difference in the emotional or socio-cultural conditions.

I have mentioned in my book, The five stages of civilization, Vol. II A Socio-cultural development (Roland kim, 2021B), that our society and culture follow a similar development pattern as individual emotional or personality development.

From the socio-cultural developmental perspective, Russia has been living in the competitive stage of 2 domestically while in Stage 1 of the authoritarian state in their international political affairs. Regarding international politics, Putin as a leader may have represented the sentiment and emotions of the older authoritarian generation at Stage 1.  

On the other hand, the Western world, including the British and the U.S. leadership, represents the individualistic, libertarian socio-cultural stage at Stage 4 domestically while a competitive stance at Stage 2 in international affairs. When they were threatened of their security from 9/11, however, the U.S. had regressed toward an authoritarian state under the leadership that matched the citizens’ sentiment at the time. Putin used it as his excuse for his invasion, so in my speculation, the Western leadership may also be partly responsible for this type of development. Putin’s rationalization is to remove the neo-Nazi leadership, while the U.S. was to find the weapon of mass destruction.

As I pointed out in my prior publication, most violent attacks happen under authoritarian leadership, whether international or interpersonal, as in the case of domestic violence. The violence often occurs, mainly when the two parties cannot communicate to exchange their respective emotional or socio-cultural perspective due to their difficulty expressing their pent-up emotions of fear and anger rationally, as it may be possible in the later developmental stages.

Russia, in Authoritarian tradition, might have felt insecure about its survival when their former ally or a part of its family has been leaving them toward the Western and NATO side in the name of seeking democracy and freedom.

At least among the leaders, the Russians may have felt that their long-term ally or family has betrayed the mother country. As President Putin stated in his address, he may have thought of his invasion as his desperate survival measure and to protect the part of the Russian family who is in danger of genocide. Many people in the authoritarian-dependent state at stage 1 feel fear of survival, as I have witnessed through years of work as a psychologist and researcher.

While the Western countries feel that they have been in a territorial game with their rivals, the Russians may have felt desperate to defend their survival. It may be like a paranoid state that President Putin has been in regarding international affairs.

When Ukraine tried to join NATO, Putin may have felt rejected by the Ukrainians, their longtime family, and ally. Despite its effort to get more support from the Western and NATO countries, Ukraine will not get the support they desire except the weapons and equipment which will not be enough to beat the military giant like Russia which has superiority in air, missile, and nuclear power. Therefore, the Ukrainians may have to figure out a way to reduce the casualties and damages through their own creative solution.

Regardless of the result of this war, however, the overall development of the international community will be delayed unless the Western leaders show a more empathetic approach to have a dialogue or deal with the Russian leadership. If the Western leaders try to use this opportunity to build more power to bolster their side, it will extend another power game that will not end soon while the Ukrainians as a scapegoat country undergo further damage.

The Russian president Putin may have felt there had been no one to share his perspective with among the Western leaders. When President Biden stated, “Dictators must pay a price,” he did not recognize and accept that dictatorship or an authoritarian leadership is a kind of political system that many families, cultures, and societies have adopted and operated under, even among the Americans. The system is not out of one leader’s conscious decision without the supportive feedback from its family, society, or culture. When Donald Trump was the U.S. President, Putin might have felt accepted by a Western leader who understood his sentiment and perspective.

Therefore, for the better of our future domestic and international community, we need to develop a more inclusive approach to those leaders and the countries in a different political and socio-cultural stage. The police in the U.S. started to intervene only 30 years ago regarding domestic violence. However, in international affairs, it is more challenging for any country to play the role of police with any justification for intervention unless it is justifiable through genuine concern out of empathy.

The sentiment of the Russian leadership is beyond their control, as is that of the Russian citizens who have accepted him as their leader for many years. They will learn more through their own experiences toward their better political future; however, the change can be best achieved if it comes from within among themselves. For this reason, a more critical role for rival leaders should be a more inclusive, culturally-informed, and empathetic one.

As Ukraine has moved away from Russia toward NATO for more freedom and independence, Russia will feel betrayed as just the way any authoritarian parents at Stage 1 will feel when their adult children move away from them for more freedom and independence. It is natural for us humans to evolve or develop toward more freedom and individual happiness as we grow up; however, the best result of the independence movement can be achieved only with parental blessing and without any intervention by other potential rivals.

When the U.S. declared independence from Great Britain, Thomas Paine (1969) shared his conviction that the homeland will not hurt their freedom movement. He said, in his Common Sense, “[b]ut Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame upon her conduct. Even brutes do not devour their young, nor savages make war upon their families” (p. 38). An interesting hypothesis is that at the moment if the U.S. movement toward independence was assisted by any outsiders with who the mother country was in rival, it is unknown how the mother country might have reacted to the movement.By Roland Kim

Ukraine needs to acknowledge that she owes her parent country as their security blanket while going through their incubational period and that Russia had been part of their family for a long before they became ready to seek freedom and democracy. Internationally, Russia as an authoritarian culture at Stage 1 may still think of Ukraine as its family. The Western leaders using only sanctions, instead of an attempt to understand its psychology through dialogue at an equal level with the Russian leaders from an empathetic stance, may make the Russian leaders feel further isolated and resort more to the desperate measure to prove their point. Russia is different from Western societies in its emotional and socio-cultural stages.

History and therapy have equally proven that empathy, not punishments or sanctions, will make one readily change the way they see the world. It is expected that most authoritarian nations operate on a policy out of fear for survival, and competitive, narcissistic countries operate out of anger and greed-based imperialistic policy, as I pointed out in my book, The Five Stages Civilization (Kim, 2021B). According to the emotional and socio-cultural development theory, for any country initiating war or violence-prone individuals, fear at Stage 1 is the main driving force than anger and greed at stage 2 or anxiety and guilt concern at stage 3. Like domestic volence in a deadlock marriage, most war may be initiated by fear-based authoritarians when their survival is threatened; however, as in the case of the marriage with communication breakdown, its excuse is to defend against unempathetic selfish partners/countries at Stage 2. Therefore, the authoritarian’ motivation for a violent attack may not effectively be thwarted by the interest-oriented policy using financial sanctions.

Whether in individual matters or international politics, a dialogue based on
Understanding through empathy than through power or logical consequences (sanctions) will motivate any voluntary change. Under President Zelensky’s leadership, Ukraine seemed to have started its counter-dependent, competitive stage at 2, going defiant and separating from its parent country, which may have been felt as a threat to the authoritarian regime under President Putin. 
Therefore, Ukraine’s request for joining NATO may have provoked the Russian leadership to show less sympathy but more fear and insecurity to justify the increase of its attack. It is a classic case of the deadlocked relationship between the authoritarian partner at Stage 1 and the competitive, counter-dependent partner at Stage 2 as in the deadlock marriage.

The Russian leaders accused that Western leaders might have listened but never heard the complaints made by Russia for a long time. In other words, as in many cases of the domestic mass shooting in the U.S., the pent-up hostility from traumas experienced may have been escalating for a while before its eventual explosion.  Sadly, the consequence-based sanctions or punishment may not turn the minds of those at the explosive state as we have experienced through many domestic shootings. Among the Western, Ukrainian, and Russian leaders, if at least one party can start to show empathy to rebuild trust to deescalate or neutralize the hostility as is explained in my trauma-hostility diagram (Kim, 2021A, p. 160), it may facilitate to get them out of the deadlocked situation to start a more successful dialogue to reach a prompt solution to prevent further collateral damages in the process.

References

Kim, R. (2021A). The five stages of civilization: An integrated psychological and psychoanalytic perspective: A personality development. Living Free Publishing Co.

Kim, R. (2021B). The five stages of civilization: An integrated psychological and psychoanalytic perspective: A socio-cultural development. Living Free Publishing Co.

Paine, T. (1969). Common sense, human rights, and other essential writings of Thomas Paine with an introduction by Sidney Hook. A Meridian Book.

Post navigation

Next post:An interview on the psychology of mass shootings in America with Roland Kim

Related Posts

The post Understanding the Psychology of Russian Invasion of Ukraine through Object Relations Perspective appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.

I have attempted to integrate various psychoanalytic and psychological theories to find the universal emotional and socio-cultural development theory. This book may fill the gap in the theories of human development introduced by Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory and Clare Graves’s Spiral Dynamics that have been criticized for lacking mainstream academic support due to the absence of academic rigor for the complexity of the model, narrow confinement in spiritual or business orientation. Realizing its astonishing similarity to Beck and Cowan’s (1996) spiral color spectrum of management leadership, I can consider Stage 1 of my model to match with the people of beige, purple, red, and blue, Stage 2 with orange, Stage 3 with green, Stage 4 with yellow and Stage 5 with Turquoise in Beck and Cowan’s system.

Kim, R. (2021a). The Five Stages of Civilization: From an Integrated Psychological and Psychoanalytic Perspective, Vol. 1 Personality Development. Living Free Publishing Co.

Kim, R. (2021b). The Five Stages of Civilization: From an Integrated Psychological and Psychoanalytic Perspective, Vol. 1l. Socio-cultural Development. Living Free Publishing Co.

The post My 5 Stage theory of civilization and its relevance to the past theories of human development appeared first on PsychoEdu Global Media.