Part 1
There are three forms of enabling: good, bad, and purposeful. What the world is experiencing now is a level of purposeful and ruinously bad enabling that’s affecting every aspect of society — all to its detriment.
Societal behavior has reached a point wherein rudeness, criticalness, meanness, egomaniacal grandstanding, the spreading of false stories and narratives, wild conspiracies, and sham propaganda are now considered entertainment and “news.” People are enabling the continuance of this antagonistic behavior through social media “likes” and emojis, buying subscriptions to influencer podcasts, purchasing tickets to inciting events, donating to outrageous “personalities,” and even voting, marching, and demonstrating for it.
This enabling phenomenon is occurring via two specific avenues: human interaction and AI relationships. The enabling brought about by human interaction is the subject of this article. AI relationships and enabling will be covered in Part 2. Part 3 will cover positive enabling.
To be clear, the act of enabling has always been an intrinsic aspect of the human psychological landscape. As a means of dealing with the vast array of personalities and the challenges they bring, humans have struggled to maintain equilibrium in their everyday lives as a means of survival. Usually seen as putting up with or tolerating things, enabling has more far-reaching implications.
The American Psychological Association (APA) defines enabling as “a process whereby someone (the enabler) contributes to continued maladaptive or pathological behavior (e.g., child abuse, substance abuse) in another person. The enabler is typically an intimate partner or good friend who passively permits or unwittingly encourages this behavior in the other person; often, the enabler is aware of the destructiveness of the person’s behavior but feels powerless to prevent it.”
From personal relationships to nationwide events, enabled people and groups are being protected from the consequences of their actions. Problematic behaviors are being covered up, excuses made, confrontations avoided, problems endured, and the severity of issues and behaviors minimized, denied, or dismissed. For many people, this is done out of:
- love and concern for another person or group,
- the fear of conflict and harm,
- feeling guilt or shame,
or
- the lust to control people and situations for personal gain.
The APA definition of enabling is focused on negative enabling, also known as “dysfunctional support,” wherein a person’s actions are protected or shielded by the enabler who believes they’re helping the person or situation. The outcome is that the problematic behavior continues and is most likely exacerbated, which prevents personal growth. The result is protecting someone from the consequences of their actions, most often at the enabler’s expense.
Negative enabling is often linked to codependency, addiction, abuse, and chronic irresponsibility. Common behaviors of negative enabling include:
- Cleaning up after people — paying bills, covering for missed work, or handling debts so the person avoids facing consequences.
- Making excuses — justifying poor decisions, avoiding accountability, or downplaying problems.
- Providing resources without conditions — giving money, supplies, or opportunities without encouraging responsibility.
- Avoiding confrontation — staying out of arguments or ignoring harmful patterns to maintain harmony.
- Shielding — protecting someone from job loss, injury, or emotional harm to prevent them from being disappointed, depressed, or even hitting rock bottom.
In short, negative enabling is counterproductive, self-sabotaging, creates a dependency dynamic in a relationship, and erodes trust and emotional development for both the enabler and enabled. It doesn’t matter if the enabled is an individual or a group. Size doesn’t matter.
The emotional strain for the enabled and the enabler can become dangerously debilitating. According to the Psychology Today article “10 Reasons Why Some People Can’t Help Enabling,” attempts to stop an enabling dynamic can result in the enabled individual becoming intensely resistant and even combative.
“When you summon up the courage to say no to that person, they may become reactive and retaliatory. They may confront you with threats, rage, shame, or blame. They’ll seek to make you feel guilty or ashamed — anything to instill doubt. They may challenge your logic, question your love, and fall into dark moods — all forms of control to get you to reverse your decision.”
Enabled people, in order to keep the current dynamic in place, will also negotiate. An agreed upon arrangement, though, will only last for a short period of time before things slide back into the prior setup. The result is that things could end up being even worse for everyone, especially the enabler and those who are peripheral to the arrangement, e.g., family members, friends, neighbors, and co-workers.
Negative enabling is found in every facet of daily life and is evident in every field of endeavor. The result is the corruption of morals, values, principles, and ethics for the enabled and enablers. And for both parties, they develop a skewed sense of emotional well-being, as well as psychological and ego instability/fragility.
For the person or group purposely enabling others, control is the primary motivation. This kind of manipulation uses temptation, fear, guilt, regret, and shame to create emotional, psychological, work, financial, and religious dependencies — the same operating dynamic employed in cults.
Negative enabling has infiltrated every aspect of American society. The scale of its influence is enormous, and technology is a key player wherein an “anything goes” attitude prevails. One very concerning fact is that an increasing number of people — especially younger people — are opting to trade their human relationships for a relationship with a digital personality. Why? Because human relationships are emotionally messy, complicated, unpredictable, and take too much work.
