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?
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.