The Psychology of Cruelty, the Internet, and the Slow Death of Human Compassion
by David Orman, davidorman.com
Something is seriously wrong with the way we treat one another these days.
I am not talking about political disagreements, differences in religious beliefs, or opposing philosophies. Those have always existed. Probably always will. I am talking about something much deeper and dramatically more disturbing.
I am talking about the apparent disappearance of basic human compassion. In other words, being heartless.
Leaving aside political ideology and preferences, when Charlie Kirk was murdered, people were actually celebrating. When President Trump survived an assassination attempt, some expressed disappointment that the shooter had missed. More recently, when Russell Brand was convicted of serious sexual offenses, social media was filled with reactions, including people treating the entire situation as entertainment.
There is a difference between demanding justice and the heartless taking of pleasure in another person’s suffering. Somewhere along the way, that distinction seems to have become blurred. Or eliminate.
What if we reversed the situation for a moment. Someone on the other side of the aisle. What if it had been Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, or someone whose political beliefs you actually supported? Would you still be laughing? Would you be throwing a party? Or would you suddenly be outraged by the very behavior you are celebrating today?
If not, why now?
That is a question worth asking ourselves.
Because if our capacity for compassion depends upon someone’s politics, beliefs, or popularity, then perhaps we need to examine what compassion really means and where along the road did so many lose it.
The Psychology Behind Being Heartless
Psychology offers several explanations for the heartless behavior we are witnessing.
One is dehumanization. When we stop seeing someone as a fellow human being and instead see only a political label, an ideology, or an enemy, it becomes easier to justify cruelty toward them.
Another is moral disengagement. We convince ourselves that our behavior is acceptable because the other person somehow deserves it.
Then there is a term called schadenfreude, the pleasure derived from someone else’s misfortune. Although this tendency is not new, social media has given it an enormous audience. It is akin to giving a drug to an addict.
People who would never openly celebrate someone’s suffering in person will enthusiastically do so from behind a keyboard, in hiding, where courage or integrity are not needed nor found.
The internet creates emotional distance. A numbing of sorts. We don’t see the grieving spouse in agony, the frightened children, or the devastated family. We see a headline, a photograph, or a political symbol. A non-human if you will.
And increasingly, that seems to be enough for some.
The Internet Has Made Cruelty Contagious
Social media rewards emotional extremes.
Outrage attracts attention. Mockery earns reactions. Cruelty can generate thousands of likes and shares. All done in courageless hiding.
Before long, people become more interested in gaining fake approval from their own group than examining whether their behavior reflects their actual values or has any integrity whatsoever.
We begin confusing tribal loyalty with morality.
And when enough people participate, cruelty starts to feel normal.
Heartless From A Traditional Chinese Medicine Perspective
Traditional Chinese Medicine provides another interesting way of examining this problem.
In Chinese medicine, the Heart is considered the residence of the Shen, often described as the spirit or consciousness. A balanced Shen is traditionally associated with clarity, emotional stability, and appropriate human connection. The Shen is where love, compassion, and the higher emotions originate. It is where we provide the energy for manifesting and creating.
The Liver, meanwhile, is associated with the smooth movement of Qi and the regulation of emotional expression. Anger, resentment, and frustration are often discussed in relation to disturbances of Liver Qi.
When the Qi (or energy) is stuck, disease – be it physical, psychological, or spiritual – is always the end result. Always.
From this traditional perspective, a society consumed by hostility might be viewed as one struggling with emotional imbalance and a loss of harmony. Their emotions “own” their mind.
This is a philosophical interpretation rather than a medical diagnosis, but it raises an important question.
What happens to a culture when anger becomes more valued than compassion?
Have We Forgotten What Character Means?
You do not have to like someone to recognize their humanity.
You do not have to agree with their politics to condemn (or help prevent) violence against them.
You can demand accountability, support victims, and believe that wrongdoing deserves consequences without celebrating human suffering. “Do unto others. . . . “
These are not contradictions. They are signs of emotional maturity.
Real compassion is not reserved for people who think like us.
In fact, its greatest test may be how we respond to people we strongly dislike.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of today’s heartlessness is not simply that cruelty exists. Cruelty is a disease that has existed as long as humanity has existed. It is how comfortable we have become displaying it publicly and the disturbing numbers that support it.
The real test of character is not how we treat those we love or agree with. It is how we treat those we dislike, disagree with, or consider our opponents.
And perhaps, before posting another laughing emoji or celebrating someone’s tragedy, we should ask ourselves one simple question:
What kind of human being am I becoming?
