There’s nothing quite like dealing with someone who says one thing and means another. Here two of our writers take sides in the pass-aggro debate, and shed a little light on what happens when we bottle our emotions. See for yourself whether this subtextual behaviour is effective, or better left for the recycling bin.
Economic globalization has allowed governments, corporations, and other major powers to be more passive-aggressive. Throughout history, bloody wars have been fought over scarce resources, but such wanton killing is no longer necessary in the modern global economy, where the dollar is mightier than the sword. The relationship between Canada and the US is a case in point.
The American military industrial complex doesn`t need to invade pesky resource rich Canada. Instead the White House can just act all brooding, ignore NAFTA rulings, raise duties on Canadian goods and not even have to call up the Pentagon for help. This is certainly preferable to an aggressive America trying to bring democracy to Canada with stealth bombers, ICBMs or, God forbid, nuclear weapons. The same goes for Western dominance over the developing world. Brutally violent colonial rule is no longer needed when the same profit can be reaped through subtly invasive economic means. Gandhi would be proud. Hopefully these trends will continue and governments, as well as people, can work out their differences in a non-confrontational manner, thus limiting overt conflict and maximizing visible peace.
Eli Kizner-Priest
Passive-aggressive behaviour usually arises when someone is faced with an unfavourable task. A brew of hostility begins to swell within the individual, leading to petty acts which passively sabotage the task. Behaviours such as procrastination or intended forgetfulness may seem like viable solutions in avoiding the task. However, passive aggression does more harm to the culprit than to the victims. True, the pass-agro offender may end up worming out of the task, but he or she (yes, women can be just as incompetent. We’re all equal,) will soon be labeled some unflattering things. Not a very becoming consequence when a simple “no” would have prevented the dreary outcome.
Understandably, it is often difficult to say no. However, it remains an option, while a crowd pleasing “yes” that leads to the “loss” of an important fax or “forgetting” to feed Petey the parrot can cause more severe repercussions for the passive aggressor, socially and professionally. So, when you’re faced with an unpleasant task, just say no. If kids say no to drugs, and my girlfriend says no to sex, then you can say no to parrot-sitting Petey for the weekend.
Steve Hsu
