Most serious confrontations in life are not political, they are existential. One can agree with someone's political stance but disagree in a fundamental way with how they came to that position. It is a question of attitude, of moral configuration. My husband and I had plenty of grievances, but it all boiled down to a fundamental difference in the way we perceived life, the context within which we defined ourselves and our world. For that, there was no reconciliation or resolution, there was only separation or surrender.
📖 Azar Nafisi
In her book "Things I've Been Silent About," Azar Nafisi highlights that the most significant conflicts we face are often existential rather than political. This distinction emphasizes that while people may share political views, their underlying attitudes and moral frameworks can be profoundly different. Such differences can lead to deep divides that cannot be reconciled through mere agreement on political issues.
Nafisi reflects on her marriage, noting that even though she and her husband had various grievances, the core issue was a fundamental divergence in their perceptions of life. This realization suggests that the essential struggles in relationships often stem from how individuals define themselves and their world. In such cases, resolution is not possible, leading to choices between separation and surrender.
