In this scenario, the people involved in this unhealthy relationship are more likely to end up on the floor, each having been tripped. Both defeated, but deeming themselves victorious. Which brings me to a fundamental aspect of this argument: assuming that the sucker does what he considers right
by principle and, therefore, he is tripped by the rogue, what does he actually lose (besides balance, of course)?
The other day (or many days ago) I read a sentence whose author I can’t remember. But it’s not mine and, if I remembered, you can trust it: I put his name here even if he was one of those authors that we’re ashamed to mention. The phrase says that “the world is made up of executioners who see themselves as victims and are envious of other executioners”. It may even be a very cruel generalization, but it seemed to me to be quite accurate, as well as useful in this text. Replace victims and executioners with suckers and rogues and, voilà, watch the magic happen.
I could now act as an arrogant intellectual and say that it is possible to break with the mimetic relationship. Quote Girard. Talking about cycles of violence. Or whatever. But it’s the beginning of the year and, I don’t know about you, but I’m already tired and not willing to play around with cryptic messages. So I’ll just say that my plan for 2021 is to trust. It’s cultivating a kind of intentional naivety. If I’m going to look like a sucker along the way, so be it. I prefer the deep sleep of the naive to the tormented insomnia of the smart ones.
Back to top button