Can empathy and morality share the same weaknesses, just in different ways?

INTRODUCTION
Hello, reader. I just read a friend’s article. It was actually about nutrition, but what caught my attention was something completely different — morality and empathy, and how we perceive both of them.
​
About a year ago, I wrote about the opposition between discipline and motivation. This time I’m looking at a similar kind of tension, but from another angle — morality vs empathy.

​WHY I STARTED THINKING ABOUT THIS
​My friend’s political views are rather left-leaning, while mine are the opposite. In his article, however, he strongly criticised empathy and emphasized morality.

This reminded me of a pattern I often notice on the other side: in right-wing political spaces, empathy is frequently treated as something weak or “soft,” a trait that a “real man” or a “strong person” should not be guided by.
​
Very rarely do I see these two things being balanced within one person.
​
On the left, I often observe the opposite tendency: empathy becomes a default value, while morality is pushed into the background. Sometimes it feels like having the “correct” opinions is enough, and the question of morality is considered resolved.

​CANCEL CULTURE AND CROWD PSYCHOLOGY
It is important for me to write about this because I have encountered the cancel culture phenomenon many times — from both the left and the right (I have mentioned this in an earlier article).

It often manifests as pages, groups, profiles, or projects being attacked, or people being pushed out through the use of algorithmic amplification and social pressure. Sometimes coordinated campaigns are even formed against someone’s social standing.
​This is not just financial damage — it is the destruction of social perception, relationships, and reputation.
​
Cancel culture often resembles the logic of lynch mobs. Moral triggers are activated, facts are reinterpreted, and a person suddenly becomes framed as an “enemy.” The crowd then believes that removing them is a morally justified act.

​THE MAIN INSIGHT
It is possible to manipulate not only moral outrage.
It is also possible to manipulate empathy.

In this context, my friend pointed out another mechanism: if the right tends to mobilize moral outrage more often, then the left may more often mobilize empathy.

Empathy can be escalated on one side and shut down on the other, until people emotionally justify destructive actions against those who are no longer seen as deserving empathy.
​
For example: if the right says that certain behavior is immoral and calls for action against “immoral people,” then the left may say that certain groups do not deserve empathy, and this can also escalate people toward “cleansing” what is perceived as evil.

​Morality feels more like a structural worldview — a framework for understanding what is acceptable and unacceptable.
Empathy, on the other hand, is a direct emotional response — something driven by feelings, the “heart.”
When people struggle to maintain a broader analytical perspective, these sudden emotional waves can become highly destructive.
​
It seems to me that the manipulation of empathy is especially widespread in today’s world. Perhaps this is why it can sometimes appear more dangerous than moral manipulation — not because its consequences are necessarily greater, but because it more often bypasses conscious analysis and acts directly through emotional reaction.

​TANK AND LASER
In short, quoting my friend: “empathy is popular, morality is not.”
I honestly didn’t realise this. I thought we were talking about different things, but in essence we were describing the same phenomenon from different angles.
​
Morality is like a tank — slow, heavy, and inert. Sometimes it keeps moving in the same direction even when the world around it has already changed.
Empathy is more like a laser pulse. It reacts quickly, sharply, and strongly. Most of the time it looks like care or help. But when directed the wrong way, it can become a weapon.
Sometimes a single emotional wave, a collective burst of outrage, or a social media storm is enough to destroy a reputation, a community, or a person’s social life.

CONCLUSION
​That is why today I think it is important to talk not only about corrupted morality, but also about corrupted empathy.
Perhaps the real opposition is not “morality vs empathy.”
Perhaps the danger begins when one exists without the other.

Article that inspired these reflections: The Paradox of Modern Freedom