When faced with a bullying situation, different places will approach it in different ways. A conservative will attack the person who is being bullied, stating that they are responsible for what happens to them and that they are weak, disturbed or dangerous to society. A liberal will confront the bully, in some cases claiming that he is a narcissist or a sociopath. A Christian will look at how to guide both to a better place. Sometimes the situation is quite clear-cut. At other times it isn't. We see some in liberalism seeing the Western man as the universal source of evil, but there have been severe wrongs done by people who were not a part of the Western civilization. Sometimes the little guy is the good guy and sometimes he isn't. The correct solution is not to take the side of either one against the other, but to guide both toward better thinking and better behavior. Can, for example, white people and black people get along? They do all the time. However whenever people mix someone is likely to wrong someone else. We see this done both ways. Sometimes the aggressor comes from a more “elite” position and sometimes he doesn't. There are many men who either get together with women from lower socioeconomic positions and treat them badly or have sex with them and saddle them with children for whom they fail to provide. However I also knew of a man descended from a bad background who married a woman descended from English royalty and treated her terribly. I do not see a correlation between power and goodness. Both the big guy and the little guy can be good or bad. So of course when someone mistreats one of their own, they may want to do something bad in return to their group. If a black man is violent to a white woman, other white people would use that to claim that black people are bad and that they should be attacked. If an international marriage goes bad, that can start off social conflict. So now we have many Russian women married to American men, and if the American men choose to be idiots and treat them badly then Russian men would likely have something to say on the matter, even though of course many of them are much worse. With the black people in America, there are some who are descended from slaves and others who are immigrants or descendants of immigrants. Generally the immigrants are well-to-do and patriotic, whereas many of those who are descended from slaves are neither. That is because the first group has chosen to be in America and the other hasn't. If you have come on your own will to a country, then you have made that choice, and you will do what you can to both defend that choice and to make it a success. Whereas if you have not chosen to be in a country, then you feel like a victim and often bear ill will toward the place. When families immigrate, the adults are generally likely to be patriotic. The kids however may or may not be, as their opinion has not been consulted on the matter. Both for the children of immigrants – and for the people descended from slaves – the correct solution is to give them the choice that they believe they have been denied. Say, You are free to go elsewhere; if you choose to stay then be a good citizen. Now back on the original subject of bullying, the correct solution is to have interest in the well-being of both parties as well as their improvement. It is to guide both toward better conduct and better character. The same should of course be the case with everyone else, whether or not they have been involved in a bullying situation. The correct solution is to have interest in the well-being and the improvement of everyone. Make a better world for the people and better people for the world.
Trump offers advice for how to deal with bullies: “I learned it in high school, you've got to hit a bully really hard. You need to screw them back fifteen times harder. When somebody screws you, screw them back in spades." I actually follow this great advice in real life, which is the effective way to stop bullying. The Christian approach to turn the other cheek would lead to more bullying.
The approach of "turn the other cheek" means allowing only two strikes to be administered before responding in whatever way necessary.
Categorising i/e the left do x and the right do y and the Christians do z is totally the wrong way to look at bullying. It is a matter of individual self-defence. There is no way a rule or policy should control ones wish to deal with a bully. I was left-wing, I am now right of center... regardless, throughout my life, I see bullys as trespassers into my private physical and mental being, as such, they must be challenged appropriately. That said, the leftie liberals, in the UK, have run the show for decades and ruined, corrupted, proper standards of behaviour. Example: In the UK it was/is a general policy of schools in controlling bullying to MOVE the victim. So, if Jimmy keeps thumping Johnny and others and Johnys Mum speaks to the school head requesting action... the action was/is always to move Johnny to another class, leaving bully boy Jimmy in situ. This is turning logic on its head. When challenged, the Head of the school would say the crassest, inane statement..... "well, you know that Jimmy is also a victim"???!! This is an absolute mental impairment. Any person with an ounce of sense and a sense of justice knows that the BULLY should be disciplined, moved or suspended from school until he mends his ways. It is this wishy-washy crap leftie way of doing things that have ruined Britain.
