Let me explain what I mean:
radical acceptance: ever think about how your coworkers are morons, your elderly parents have declined beyond recognition and actively work against you and seem to live to ruin every single one of your days, your boss is an insufferable, exploitative ass, your uncle has lung cancer but keeps smoking a pack a day, your teenager daughter is doing drugs because is trendy, just like you did when you were her age? You cannot change how any of those actors in your life behave, people are free to do whatever they want, even to do stupid crap like that. Trying to change any of those actors is futile and guarantees your mental health decreases overtime and they resent you for caring about them. The better but not ideal solution? Radical acceptance. They are what they are, don’t try to change them, accept them how they are. Let them fail.
This was suggested to me while talking about relatives with dementia and other mental illnesses, but I don’t know if I’m stretching the definition too much.
Spineless conformist: if there are things I cannot control nor change, like climate change, lack of a public healthcare system in America, fptp, maga… why even try? I’d be both radical accepting reality while being a spineless conformist.
Where’s do you draw the line?
I think the difference can be found in the Serenity prayer, known by alcoholics around the world.
God Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
A spineless conformist would live by “If you can’t beat them, join them.”
I know I can’t change the mind of everyone who bleeds MAGA, but I can vote in every election to oppose them, and continue to speak up when I hear hate speech or misinformation.
I think this is the right take. At the end of the day you just can’t change some people’s minds.
Arguably, you can’t change anyone’s minds, they have to change them themselves. You can try to lay the groundwork for them to make that change, but we all know what they say about leading a horse to water.
Like OP’s example of the uncle with lung cancer. The dude already has lung cancer, and is continuing to smoke, what more could you really say or do to convince him to stop? They’re already facing probably one of the biggest possible consequences of their actions and they’re still not stopping.
Sure, you could focus all of your energy into trying to browbeat them into stopping, but do you really think that’s going to get anywhere? Your time and energy are probably better spent convincing someone else to quit or not to start instead.
When faced with an issue, I classify it according to one or more of these “buckets”:
Bucket #1: Not actually a problem at all (usually just unnecessary drama).
Bucket #2: A genuine problem, but not my problem (none of my business).
Bucket #3: A genuine problem, but I can’t do anything about it (it is not within my sphere of influence, or is beyond my capability to solve).
Bucket #4: A real problem that I can do something about (basically everything that isn’t in one of the other buckets).
If an issue may be categorized into buckets 1, 2, or 3, I don’t waste time or energy on it. If it’s in bucket 4, I get to work on it. I think this approach has saved me much stress.
What’s spineless about not trying to change things you truly can’t change? Wouldn’t it be delusional to keep trying despite knowing it’ll make no difference? I think the important thing here is to distinguish between things you truly have no power over and things you can’t fix yourself but can still play a role in alleviating - or at the very least, behaving in a way that you’re not contributing to making them worse.
I think my personal worldview has some similarities to what you’re describing as radical acceptance. I don’t believe in free will, so no matter how much of a prick someone is being, I don’t blame them personally for it. I don’t act as if they’re choosing to be that way and could just as well choose to act differently. In my view, they can’t help themselves. They couldn’t have done otherwise. Of course, they’re not immune to outside influences, and I’m not saying they lack the capability to act differently in the future - it’s never people’s future behavior we get frustrated about however, it’s their current and past behavior.
That, I simply accept as them being the malfunctioning biological robots that they are, and if anything, I’m deeply interested in how they behave. Like a car running without engine oil, I want to see how far it’ll get and what eventually happens. I do, however, move out of its path. While I might not blame someone for being insufferable, I also, for no free will of my own, don’t want to be anywhere near such a person.
You draw the line where you want to draw the line and you live with the consequences
I think it’s not drawing the line but rather choosing your battles based on what is realistic for you.
Right so the main trap that happens is you never allow yourself any stillness (call it whatever you want: rest, calm, acceptance) because there’s always something of urgent importance you think you should be doing.
But that’s a classic recipe for burnout, and what happens is people crash super hard and then they’re not only doing nothing for the problem that stressed them out in the first place, but everything else in their life suffers as well.
You can’t carry the weight of needing to take care of your aging parents and work a demanding job and dedicate your life to climate activism and anti genocide activism and voting reform and human trafficking and animal abuse and and and and and…
You just can’t. The same way you just can’t deadlift a thousand pounds. Accepting that fact doesn’t make you spineless, it just means you know how much your spine can take before it snaps.
In short: radical acceptance is taking time to read a novel and spend time with your kids even if the world is ending. It’s not an endorsement of ending the world, it’s accepting your limitations and deciding that life is worth living regardless
