In defense of anger

Anger is often seen as an extremely negative emotion : and something that needs to be banished to the ends of your being and kept locked away.

Needless to say there are many forms of anger : and various levels of it : as it is with all emotions : but is anger really that bad : and should it be 'controlled' - rather - are you better off 're-channeling it'

See, being angry with something or someone makes you sit and think - and think hard. Often, anger brings out the realities of a situation we at times sugar coat and powder up because we don't want to be 'negative' : blinding us to realities. Often, to be passionate is to get angry about it too : you can't really truly be passionate without 'losing it' - I have often found the two are intricately linked...

Now... lets get this clear... The 'being angry' I am referring to is NOT the hand waving, furniture bashing, filth uttering kind : that's when you are NOT in control of your emotions and do not know how to vent it. However, trying to 'purge' anger and be more 'calm' I think also makes you impersonal and non-committal. 'It's ok either way' type mentality saps any passion for anything : and I have often wondered whether it actually erodes performance overall : as you are not emotionally invested in it.

Being angry at something I have often seen fuels a fire no other emotion can. Being sad about something and getting angry about something are two very different ways of approaching. Think about it ? If people were not angry about poverty and inequality, if people were not angry about hunger and malnutrition, if people were not angry about the lack of rights for citizens, if people were not angry about injustice : would we have acted ?

Being angry about the status quo galvanizes a movement against it. Harnessing the anger and directing it towards a positive outcome, rather than making it fuel a fire of destruction is the key.

What do you think ?