It's Not "Othering," "Divisive," "Controlling," or "Polarizing" To Take A Firm, Boundaried Stand Against Oppression

My Response To Charles Eisenstein's "Greatness After The Bulldozer" Polemic

*I tried to post this as a comment on Charles Eisenstein’s Greatness After The Bulldozer essay here on Substack, but it was apparently too long. So I’m posting part of it in the comments section and part of it here. For those of you who don’t know my history with Charles, you can read many endorsements of his work in my books The Fear Cure, The Anatomy of a Calling, and The Daily Flame. You can also read about how we split up ideologically here and how his publisher North Atlantic Books responded to my challenge to his integrity here. You can read another rebuttal I wrote to a Charles Eisenstein Substack essay here. You’re also welcome to skip all this and carry on reading about boundaries, narcissism, mental health, mind body medicine, and spiritual bypassing on the rest of this Substack (although what I’m writing about here is also all that…)

Charles, and I say this as someone who cares about you, then and now, it's time to stop pontificating. Get off the fence, risk upsetting some of the people who like you, and take a stand. In times like this, you can't be both a MAGA apologist and a human rights advocate. You just can't. There's only one right side of history here. And from what I can tell, you're on the side of fascism, power-hungry billionaires, racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, classism, ableism, and science-denying, anti-medical, public health destroying MAHA. Why? Why have you lost your way? Is it because your Ascent of Humanity argument, which was brilliant, by the way, just wasn't deep enough to survive 2020, when we needed to limit some individualistic freedoms in order to protect public health?

I won't disclose anything from your personal history, out of respect for our private relationship. But is there not something from your past that makes you absolutely apoplectic any time someone tries to set boundaries that protect other people but limit your personal freedom? Are you just not willing to say "There's a flaw in my argument so let me amend it and mature it?" Did you have to double down on your anti-authority, rebellious, "Don't tell me what to do" contrarian beliefs, just to stay consistent, even when you're dead wrong?

Or do you really believe your own spin? Do you really still believe what you used to believe?

I'm not saying I don't agree with you around the corrupt institutions. You know I left my job as a doctor in the conventional health care system because I could not go one day longer cooperating with a corrupt system that gave lip service to patient wellbeing while ultimately being at the mercy of the financial bottom line. Many other institutions are corrupt. But we don't heal corrupt systems by destroying them categorically any more than we heal trauma by nuking our own hurt parts.

I have made many mistakes as an influencer, dear Charles. It's humbling to grow up in the public eye, to have everybody watching as you bare your soul in front of total strangers.

Growing up as an influencer requires so much humility. Do you know how many times I've had to eat humble pie, to admit I was wrong, to accept public feedback, to get called out and swallow my pride, to acknowledge my own shadow? If you don't know, just read my introduction to the revised 2020 edition of Mind Over Medicine, in which I came out about why I felt the need to rewrite the book- because I got some key points wrong and I missed other key points I just didn't know needed to be in there. Even now, if I had the chance to rewrite that book, I'd change it yet again. Because our work should evolve as our knowledge evolves, as our healing evolves, as our culture changes, as we see our blind spots revealed and feel the healthy shame and remorse about how we might have inadvertently harmed people we influence- because of our own inevitable foibles.

Why couldn't you have just written a revised edition of The Ascent Of Humanity, rather than collapsing your values in order to double down on your argument? You couldn't have possibly known how that key message would stand up to times like 2020? How could you have? Nobody can fault you for writing a book before a pandemic that didn't stand up to the necessary global cooperation that might need to limit some individualistic freedoms in order to protect the collective needs and safety?

Did we get it right during the pandemic? Absolutely not! We made all kinds of mistakes, because nobody knew what was best and it was "fly by the seat of your pants" decision making by people who tried to rehearse pandemic preparedness but still didn't know what to do.

But you did not help those who were trying to help us all find our way. You interfered. People got hurt because of you.

I know what it was like for you. I was on that daily text thread with you as you slid into right wing conspiracies. You almost took me, my ER doc friend Ed, and my psychiatrist partner Jeff down that rabbit hole with you-because we trusted you and wanted to stay open to your "both-sideism." Then after we stopped texting, I still spoke to you privately on the phone. You wondered whether you should just quit pontificating in public. I said yes. You should. You didn't listen to me, which was your choice and your right.

I defended you when the Conspirituality podcast guys called you out. I got you a chance to stand up for yourself on that show. Your appearances made me cringe. Everything you said just reinforced their point and made me give up supporting you. It was a terrible loss for me because I cared about you. I know it wasn't about me- I've done too much therapy on myself to be that narcissistic- but it felt like a betrayal of everything I thought we both stood for. And I'm sure it felt like a betrayal to you when I called you out publicly and North Atlantic books backed up my public call out. I'm sorry if I hurt you that way. I really am. I just can't stand by silently and watch you support a fascist administration as it enacts a hostile takeover of my country while you stand by still trying to play both sides.

I hope you realize by this point that nobody will respect you if you try to straddle the fences in times like this. You won't be oppressive and hateful enough for the oppressors and you won't protect human rights enough for those who care about equal human rights, Constitutional protections for all, and active resistance against hate. You might have milk toast acceptance from centrists who have conflict avoidant parts or parts that demonize activism and healthy protest and spiritualize both-sideisms. You might feel like the guru for those who had scary conflict in childhood and just want everyone to stop "polarizing" and be "all One." I have peace-making parts too who hate it when everyone is fighting and fear a second Civil War in our country.

But I also know that if I have to choose between hiding the immigrants to spare them from torture camps and complying with a fascist agenda that might make me choose between protecting my privilege or risking my own life to save someone else's, I would not pause to say "Hang on, let's find a compromise here because there's good people on both sides of this hostile takeover."

I know you don't like my righteous parts, and I suspect I'll activate some of your other readers who get triggered by righteousness as well. I know you prefer contrarian criminals who thumb their noses at authority or think they're above the law, and yes, I have some parts that don't like those parts in you too. But there's a difference between doing what's right and being smug and self-righteous. There's a difference between taking a firm stand against dictators who are destroying democracy and harming the most innocent and vulnerable among us and being "polarizing."

As Amanda Suutari said in her comment, it's not "othering" to take a side. Silence is violence. Those who do not speak out against oppressors are accomplices to the oppression. It's not "spiritual" to fail to protect the vulnerable. As a cis, hetero, white male influencer, this is your chance to leverage your immense power and privilege to take a firm, unequivocal stand. Your failure to do so just speaks to your spiritual bypassing conflict avoidance, from my point of view.

I thought I was done speaking out against the messages you spread, but I know you have a good heart inside you somewhere. And I know you once trusted and respected me. So I'm just asking you to take a breath, listen to what some of us are saying, and consider whether maybe we have a point. People would forgive you, Charles, if you come out and own your blind spots. You're allowed to change your position, as many people with power and privilege do when they realize they're wrong.

But it would require sacrificing some of your fame, giving up some of your likeability, calling out some of the power brokers who have given you loads of attention since the pandemic, giving up some of the privilege that comes from being in Donald Trump and RFK, Jr's inner circle, and maybe taking a break from public life for a time of inner reflection, humble trauma healing, focusing on your family, getting into therapy, taking a look at your power-hungry, attention-seeking parts like I've had to do, and finding the courage to finally say something in public that isn't a wishy-washy "Let's all play nice in the sandbox" platitude.

Every day I wake up and feel the shock and terror of what the Trump administration is doing to the most vulnerable, while the 1% of the 1% of the 1% make out like it's Christmas. I think back to the Charles Eisenstein of the Occupy Wall Street days. And I think "What happened to you?" I love you Charles, but I am disappointed in you. You can do better. You are a good person. You have a good heart. I know your intentions are good. But please- back down. Don't go down with the fascist ship just because you're afraid to say your argument in Ascent has some flaws. Rewrite it, dear Charles. We care enough to read how far you've come.

Just quit trying to convince us you haven't screwed up massively since you doubled down on your "Don't control me" tantrum. Some of us are not buying it. And if you ever want to earn our respect again, you're going to have to reexamine your core arguments about control and othering.

It's not controlling to set boundaries or expect others to respect clear boundaries. It's not othering to take a firm, clear, lovingly fierce stand against oppression. Boundaries are not oppressive, but oppression is. Boundaries are not controlling; they're intended to protect people from coercive control and undue influence. Boundarylessness is not spiritual Oneness; it's enmeshment. It's intrusive. I had to learn that the hard way- through 12 years of hard therapy.

But yes, boundaries mean you don't get to do exactly what you want to do, every time one of your parts has the impulse to do something that might hurt others. I get that some trauma survivors who had intrusive or controlling caregivers can make that mistake. But we can't live communally with any sort of order without rules, guidelines, and group agreements that keep us all safe enough.

You can't enjoy the benefits of community while being a lone wolf who thinks you can do whatever you want with zero boundaries. This community wants you back, Charles. I can see everyone wrestling with the betrayal so many of us feel as we watch you go to the dark side. Come back home, Charles. Your fans would welcome you back, but only if you say "I fucked up." Own it. Don't deflect, detract, or defend yourself. Humans are allowed to make mistakes. But we can't heal unless those who perpetrate harm take responsibility for the vulnerable people they're guilty of harming.

If you want to protect immigrants, stand against MAGA. If you want to protect children and the sick, stand against MAHA. If you want to stand up for the working class, stand against billionaires. If you want to stand up for what I know you used to care about, do the right thing now. You know you're not in the right here. It's obvious from all your inner conflict about it in your writing. You're talking yourself in circles, the way I know you to do when you feel confused. But don't make it worse by continuing to try to justify your unwise choices. We're not buying it, those of us who actually care about human rights.

I'll close with one more reminder that I care about you as a person. I wouldn't waste a whole Sunday writing this if I didn't genuinely care. I'm sad we don't see eye to eye anymore. But unlike the me of 2013, I care more about standing up for what I really care about than I care about your approval.

My uncle Larry, a Methodist minister who marked with MLK and his cronies back in the day and has been a card carrying ACLU member his whole adult life told me that his high school ideologies class teacher taught him that when both extreme left and right political powers become allies, they can share power and financial benefits, even if it means throwing their ideologies out the window. But how such people sleep at night baffles me.

At the end of the day, I orient my compass and sleep at night by revolving my public actions around the Paul Farmer, MD quote:

“The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all that is wrong with the world.”