Indifference is a Gateway to Nuanced and Open Conversations
Everyone shut up!
As a recovering leftist ideologue, I was just so tired of everyone from both sides of the aisle. Sure, I was still listening to a lot of Intellectual Dark Web podcasts and have read Virtue Hoarders: The Case against the Professional Managerial Class by Catherine Liu twice, but I couldn’t shake the fact that I was running extremely low on empathy.
There was so much I wanted to say and ask and clarify and debate about — especially with my friends who are still saying the same dogmatic ideologies we learned from university. But just the thought of opening my mouth made me anxious and want to take a four-hour nap.
Once I stopped consuming and made it a point to literally touch grass every day, the frustration, disgust, and anger started to dissipate, and what came next was an extended period of passivity. At first, I thought it was cynicism, but after stripping it down, what was left was actually indifference.
But is indifference a negative space to be in?
Indifference is often seen as a negative trait associated with a lack of care, empathy, and concern. We tend to condemn people who show indifference. Conversely, in today’s culture, we value those who are passionate and engaged.
From a philosophical perspective, indifference is seen as a failure to recognize the value of other beings or things. Emmanuel Levinas, a French philosopher, argued that ethics begins with the face-to-face encounter with the Other, which creates a responsibility to care for their well-being. For Levinas, the ethical relation is based on the recognition of the otherness of the Other, which means that we cannot reduce them to objects or concepts. Indifference, then, is a denial of the Other’s value and a failure to acknowledge their existence as something unique and irreplaceable.
Similarly, Martin Heidegger saw indifference as a form of forgetfulness or neglect of Being itself. Heidegger argued that our everyday existence is marked by a state of forgetfulness or “fallenness,” where we lose sight of the essential meaning and purpose of our lives. So then, indifference is a manifestation of this fallenness — a refusal to confront the deeper questions of existence and a willingness to settle for superficiality and distraction.
In our culture, we often associate indifference with apathy, cynicism, and selfishness. We value those who are passionate and compassionate, and we see indifference as a sign of moral weakness or even violence (to my postmodern loving friends).
This cultural attitude is explicitly reflected in popular media. In Breaking Bad, Walter White’s increasing indifference to the suffering of others, especially Jesse Pinkman, is seen as a sign of his moral decline and corruption.
Where the Nuance Lies
There are cultural phenomena that challenge the negative view of indifference. The Japanese concept of mokusatsu, which literally means “to kill with silence,” is an example of this. In the context of international diplomacy, mokusatsu is the deliberate refusal to respond to a statement or offer, which can be seen as a way of expressing disapproval or disagreement without resorting to overt conflict. While mokusatsu can be seen as a form of indifference, it is also valued in Japanese culture as a way of preserving harmony and avoiding unnecessary conflict.
Similarly, the Danish concept of hygge underscores the value of coziness, comfort, and respite, which can be seen as a form of indifference to the demands of productivity and efficiency. In contrast to the American culture of “hustle,” which values constant striving and achievement, hygge celebrates the simple pleasures of life and the importance of human connection and well-being.
So the nuance in this conversation is intent.
In my case, the deliberate refusal to engage with the world can be a way of preserving my inner life. Is it selfish? Perhaps. But in hindsight, what I needed was to be away from constant distraction and the superficiality of posturing and virtue signaling.
Navigating (and Surviving) Postmodernism
In a postmodern society, I can see how indifference challenges dominant narratives and opens up more rational ways of thinking and being.
One of the key arguments for the value of indifference comes from Michel Foucault. In his book “The Birth of Biopolitics,” he suggests that indifference can be a form of resistance against ruling power structures. He writes:
“Indifference is not a beginning or an end. It is not a philosophical attitude. It is not a form of cynicism. It is a political choice. It is the choice of being oneself rather than being as the others are.”
The potential of indifference as a way of asserting individuality and resisting social pressures — especially when conformity to a certain narrative is demanded. Indifference can be a way of maintaining a sense of self in the face of homogeny.
Social scientist Zygmunt Bauman also argues that indifference can be a form of reaction to the complexities and uncertainties of contemporary society. He writes:
“Indifference is not the opposite of commitment. It is a precondition for it. Only when we are indifferent to the future can we turn our attention to the present and take action.”
His perspective underscores the importance of cultivating a certain level of detachment and openness to different possibilities in order to respond effectively to the challenges of a rapidly changing world. Indifference can be a way of avoiding the paralysis of analysis or self-rumination so that we can take real action for real-world problems.
In the same breath, philosopher Jean Baudrillard suggests that indifference questions the dominant discourses and symbols of society. He said, “Indifference is the most radical negation of the symbolic order. It is the way of dissolving the sign into indifference.”
Essentially, he’s positing that there is a radical facet of indifference because it opens up new spaces for alternative meanings and interpretations (something that the current leftist ideology is lacking). What if indifference is a way to break free from the limitations of politically correct language and culture?
Real Activism vs Wokeness
Over the past five years, “woke culture” has gained (some founded) criticism for promoting a culture of hyper-sensitivity and intolerance of dissenting opinions. As a result, some people (including myself, at some point) have turned to indifference as a way of counteracting the stress of “wokeness.”
Indifference, in this context, can be seen as a refusal to engage with the intense emotional and ideological demands of this culture. Most normal people who have empathy and do care and want change also wanted to step back from the incessant outrage and moral posturing that plagues much of contemporary political discourse. It’s essentially all emotion that’s blocking us from applying critical thinking.
Indifference, in a way, challenges binary thinking and tribalism that can limit our ability to engage in constructive dialogue and make progress on complex social issues.
I do realize that indifference is not a solution to the challenges of “woke culture.”
I’m also aware that indifference can be a form of privilege, a way of maintaining the status quo and avoiding the discomfort and risks that come with challenging systemic problems.
Indifference may be a temporary and necessary coping mechanism, but it is not a sustainable or transformative approach to social change. I do realize all this.
But for now, I intend to keep my peace.
