The gap between ideal and reality is rarely bridged and one of the biggest self-delusions is the suggestion that anti-bullying policy is effective. In fact, we live in a society where bullying is not even recognized, consequently, the suggestion it is effectively opposed is a pleasant myth.

Bullies want to show that they have power and that they are superior and they do that by exerting control any way they can. In the school yard they can be overtly aggressive but in the work place bullying is frequently a very subtle and pervasive process. Ever heard of ostracization? Do you know what it is? Have you ever known anybody to have been penalized for sparking ostracizing behaviour?

Like psycopaths who are experts at manipulating emotions and insecurities, bullies intimidate by belittling, humiliating, mistreating and mocking. Ostracization is merely the tool which provides the opportunity to fulfill every single degrading process all at the same time.

Not surprisingly, victims of this abuse are known to strike back when their simmering anger hits the boiling point and the tyrants who are responsible for the bullying which sparked the fuse, are never exosed. Indeed, they are aided and abetted by insecure co-workers who comply to their domineering demands.

Is it a huge surprise that the routine and constant provocations of ignorant bullies invariably spark violence? Indeed, I strongly suspect that it is difficult to suggest that bullying is not ultimately responsible for the next, violent incident in the workplace, but do not expect instant insight anytime soon because as long as bullying is not even recognized, it is impossible to identify, let alone, oppose it.

The biggest bullies in the workplace are those who routinely and without fail, spark ostracizing behaviour, and these tyrants go unpunished because they are vile, disgusting psycopaths who sow their evil seeds and hide under the desk when they manage to push the wrong button once too often.

If we paused to recognize the predictable, long-fused powderkeg which is never explained because zombie pundits in the media shake their heads in bewiderment whenever a target of bullying ultimately explodes, we would perhaps be in a position to better appreciate the need for effective, anti-bullying policy.

What sparks ostracizing behaviour in the workplace? Who enables this conduct? Who tends to be its target? These are the questions that need to be answered to be in a position to oppose bullying, because when it becomes a sick, inside joke to derive satisfaction from provoking and angering people, expect violence.

Anti-bullying campaigns invariably fail because the desire to inflict misfortune upon others cannot be eradicated by wishful thinking. The most practical way to oppose bullying is to encourage anti-bullying conduct in a routine, consistent and persistent manner.

The obvious culprit that is responsible for encouraging and sustaining bullying is intolerance, and the obvious antidote is to teach people to be tolerant. As Andrew Carnegie indicated, ďthe tolerant person is the one who holds his mind open for new facts, new knowledge and new viepoints on all subjects. I hazard to guess that this definition classifies most of us as being intolerant. Observe too, before we get too far into the analysis of this subject, how closely related are tolerance and tactfulness. And also how both are definitely related to mental attitude. Try as you may, there is no escape of consideration of the subject of mental attitude. It crops up everywhere, in every human relationship.

Before leaving this subject, I wish to renumerate afew of the specific handicaps which men set up for themselves through their intolerance.

1. It makes enemies of those who would like to be friends.
2. It stops the growth of the mind by limiting the search for knowledge.
3. It discourages imagination.
4. It prohibits self-discipline.
5. It prevents accuracy in thinking and reasoning.

Added to all these, it also damages the character through unseen and unknown ways which limit the use of the spiritual forces which are available to open minds."

Finally, frankness in manner and speech is the other important trait that dissuades bullying tactics and Andrew Carnegie made that crystal clear in the following terms:

"Everyone mistrusts the man who resorts to subterfuge instead of dealing frankly with his daily associates. Iíve known men who were so slippery that you could not pin them down to a direct, clear cut statement on any subjects. And I have never yet seen a man of this type who could be depended upon. This sort of man does not come right out and lie but he does what amounts to exactly the same thing. By deliberately withholding important facts from those who have the right to know the facts. This habit is a form of dishonesty, which, if indulged in for very long will undermine the soundest character.

Men of sound character always have the courage to speak and deal directly with people. And they follow this habit even though it may at times be to their personal disadvantage. Men who resort to subterfuge to deceive others seldom have much confidence in themselves." In the long run, people who think are deceiving others are merely deceiving themselves.

In the final analysis, there is a litmus test we can all use to identify bullies. Simply put, expect respect, and if you are not getting it, you are being bullied.






Enable Quality Research.