When you receive help, do you perceive it as a transactional burden or as a gift?
How do you support the people, ideas, and art you admire? Do you feel disappointed when they go against your views, or do you willingly allow them the freedom to grow and evolve into whatever they might become, despite potential disagreements?
https://youtu.be/Ueyw7nSI6jc
Last year, during a Haven Phrase Maze exploration around the prompt “The Money Changed Everything,” we discussed what makes a gift a gift. We asked whether, once given, the giver of a true gift can have any justifiable feelings about what is done with it. Or if a hope or expectation turns a gift into a conditional transaction. For example, when we give someone a present, we might expect them to use it in a particular way (and not to sell it on, exchange it, or give it to someone else, for an acceptable time at least).
What impact does this obligation have on the receiver? How does this relate to our engagement with artists, public figures, and one another?
Conditional vs Unconditional Support
Are we conditional patrons, offering support only when we agree with the other person? Or are we unconditional patrons, standing by them because we believe in their how and why, even when we disagree with the substance of their particular "what"?
This is on my mind because of a comment I received on a recent YouTube video. Someone explained why they disagreed with something I had said, which is fair enough. But I was struck by the intended sucker punch at the end of the comment...
“Unsubscribed.”
That word was like a weapon; it felt like an attempt at punishment and behaviour modification. It focused on the surface rather than the source.
I know that subscribing isn't a gift, but I couldn't help but wonder if a similar mechanism exists in the distinction between conditional and unconditional gift-giving.
This is why I don’t tend to ask people directly to subscribe to my podcast, videos, or social media. I want it to be a choice, not a favour or transaction. I leave it for people to come and go as they like, with no pressure either way. If the time comes for us to go separate ways, that's fine. It happens. We don't owe one another anything. We've just had a nice ride along together for a bit.
Unconditional Patronage and Disagreement
Do we tie our support for people to WHAT they think or HOW and WHY they reach their conclusions?
Think about the creators, artists, or figures you follow and admire. Do you find yourself withdrawing support when they say or do something you disagree with? What would it look like to support them unconditionally, focusing on their how and why rather than a particular what?
Over the years, I have come to support people whose WAY of thinking I respect and value. Most people I follow express views I disagree with occasionally (in some cases, a lot), but I sincerely appreciate the how and why behind their ideas. The process inspires me as much as, if not more than, the outcome. It's only if their values (the drive of their why) change that I tend to consider whether or not I want to continue supporting them. It can happen.
There is a flip-side to this coin...
“Subscribed”
It can feel validating when someone agrees with something I say and tells me they are subscribing or following me because of it. However, there is a subtle pull that can occur here. The connection between the statement they agreed with and their choice to subscribe creates a conditional presence. I might feel the pressure: "To keep them happy, I better keep saying similar things." This can lead to a slippery slope toward mediocrity, self-censorship, and audience capture - forces we see in abundance today.
When we engage like this with people, we subtly encourage them to appeal to the crowd, avoid risks, and conform to expectations (to appease followers and provoke adversaries) rather than exploring new possibilities and navigating the...