Thursday, February 27, 2020

Voices Inside My Head (#15 -- Stuff Your Moral Authority Edition)

"Outrage is intoxicating, and like most intoxicants, it makes people stupid..." -- Kevin D. Williamson, The Smallest Minority: Independent Thinking in the Age of Mob Politics

Other than social diseases, there are few things worse in this galaxy than a liberal on his moral high horse.

Primarily, this is because liberals have a strange and often-contradictory relationship with "morality", and because the assumption of a moral high ground -- despite having done nothing to earn it -- is their fundamental position on all subjects. It is almost as if that by assuming they (or their arguments) are morally superior that they become unassailable.

To a liberal, Morality, like Matter, has various states, and which state it takes at any given time depends on which state they need for it to exist in to win an argument this very moment.

Five minutes later, Morality is turned upside down, again, as the subject changes.

These multiple states are:

1. "Morality Does Not Exist" -- it is a subjective "superstructure" of arbitrary rules, produced by the dead (who have no power or freedom of action) and imposed upon the living (who have both) which is intended to "oppress" someone. Like when Morality states it is both a bad idea and a sin to fuck a farm animal. If the liberal decides he wants to achieve coitus with a goat, this is his "Human Right" and your "Conventional Morality" is his buzzkill. This makes your point of view invalid.

2. "Morality Is Never Set In Stone" -- since societies evolve and change over time, that which is immoral today will be morally correct tomorrow, or vice-versa. This is taken axiomatically and hypocritically, and oddly enough, as one of those rules that IS paradoxically "set in stone". The liberal, however, sees himself as "ahead of the curve" and "progressive" in all things, and so is convinced that the immorality he indulges in today will be normalized by social change, EVENTUALLY (sans evidence) --  you're only fighting a reactionary battle against that which is an historical inevitability, so shut the fuck up, and skip it altogether.

3. "Morality Is Whatever Those In Control of the Social Institutions Say It Is" -- in other words, if the "right people" in "prominent positions" say it is moral, then moral it is.  Ask what defines the "right people" and "prominent positions" and the answer to both questions is...other liberals who have ensconced themselves in positions of authority, legally, politically, socially and academically. The issue of whether they may not be the best and the brightest or even empirically and demonstrably wrong is brushed off as being unimportant; the fact that the "right people in prominent positions" can exert influence is all the moral authority that is needed.

Because when they begin this moral tapdance they affect that snooty fucking attitude that makes you want to hit them with a 2x4: the sneer, the condescension, the menstrual fury, the mental constipation of the hypocrite who, on the one hand, is very much aware of his hypocrisy, and on the other, is reduced to the ignoramus spitting industrial-strength platitudes on subjects he knows nothing about, seriously induces rage. These are not very intelligent people: they are parrots, trained to repeat nonsense , ad nauseum, ad infinitum, until it pushes anything resembling independent thought from their tiny minds, and continuing long after they have either been proven factually incorrect (see: Global Warming), the effects of their obvious stupidity have become manifest (see: Global Warming), or demonstrated by experience to have been completely fabricated (See: Global Warming).

It is instructive that I've used Global Warming here three times as examples because the purpose of this missive is to respond to a couple of the fake moral stances taken in the name of Global Warming Climate Change Why it Doesn't Snow Anymore Communism in the Guise of Global Altruism.

Before I get to the absolute pile of horseshit that fell out of Bernie Sanders' mouth in the other night's debates, I want to regale you with the story of perhaps one of the worst conversations I've ever had with a rabid (and crazy) environMENTAList some years ago regarding her (it's always a "her") beliefs regarding why we're all gonna die of really bad sunburns.

If I'm not mistaken, this circumstance should have -- according to her -- already have happened at least 15 times in the last decade.

I rarely attend cocktail parties, and for good reason. I find most people to be mentally deranged, woefully un- or mis-informed on just about everything, and these circumstances do not improve just because they've put on their "good" clothes, are getting drunk and eating finger food that typically has more pretense than taste. If it weren't for the fact that I sometimes have to attend these things for business or a familial obligation, I would most likely spend more time at home attempting to achieve a voluntary vegetative state.

Which would be a more-productive use of my time.

Anyways, without regard to how the conversation started (because, really, who gives a fuck?), this buck-toothed, vegan Pixie Stick full of a batch of estrogen long past it's sell-by date, harangued me with a barrage of boilerplate environMENTAList claptrap that should have made the Guinness Book for "Longest Diatribe of Complete Fucktard Ever Recorded Over Canapes". It was the usual nonsense: the planet is warming because of plastic, we're all going to die, we're going to run out of food, air, water, and everything else.

Or, perhaps we're all really going to die from the seemingly-inexhaustible supply of super-heated air produced by know-nothing libtards with overactive mouths?

In any case, she eventually came to the Nazi portion of the "Environmentalism for Dummies" Power Point Presentation, and said that there were too many people on the planet, and it would be a good idea if we let a lot of them die so as to save "the rest".

It goes without saying that "the rest" meant "people like her".

Now, what one needs to consider when dealing with this sort of anal wart is who they are. For the most part, they are financially-secure, pampered, well-educated indoctrinated upper-middle-class idiots who are easily manipulated into feeling deep, irrational guilt about the circumstances surrounding their wealth, comfort and privileges.

They are primarily white and female, although white beta males are well-represented in their ranks. These white beta males profess belief in enironMENTALism as a strategy for getting laid, in much the same way they profess affinity for feminists.

The way to get into these female's pants is to simply tell them what they want to hear, praise them lavishly for doing stupid shit that serves no purpose except to make then feel better about themselves, and just tell them they're always right, even when they're cosmically incorrect. This is the perfect mating strategy for the typically passive-aggressive, ambiguously gay, man-purse-bearing crowd, anyway.

They are driven by three impulses:

The first, as already stated, is that they feel irrationally guilty. About everything. But especially by the fact that they understand, on some subconscious level they may not be able to explain, that whatever benefits they may have enjoyed, whatever status they currently cling to, whatever rewards they have reaped from life, they don't truly deserve them. Mainly because they didn't WORK for them. They accrued to them by the efforts of others, usually Mommy and Daddy (but mostly Daddy, because Mommy was too busy downing Percocets and fucking the Pool Boy while Papa attended a convention in Peoria).

The second is that society typically has no use for them and because the roles "conventional society" has suggested for them do not appeal, because that same conventional society does not value what they believe makes them "special" (this is a serious mental disorder; believing you are guilty of every sin and simultaneously believing you are better than everyone else). Becoming a teacher, a nurse, an electrician, plumber, or other downscale Proletariat profession does not appeal to people who believe that a degree in Gender Studies, Holistic Skateboarding, Moroccan Cuisine or Cambodian Mating Rituals indicates higher cognitive function and moral superiority. The fact that "conventional society" has less use for these dubious skills and achievements means that it has even less need of people like this than it does for head lice and hemorrhoids.

So this type lives in a constant state of friction with society, which does not recognize their self-bestowed superiority, can get along quite well without considering the things they find interesting, and which does not pay or reward endeavors it considers wastes of time and resources. They come to hate people, viscerally, and believe that in order to reduce this friction (and hence their mental suffering) the people whom they hate need to be controlled.

They need to learn their place; they must be made to understand that they are inferior; they must be made to understand that their right to exist, even to procreate, must be controlled by people who hate them and assert assumed (but never-demonstrated) moral and intellectual superiority over them "for their own good".

Which brings us to the third impulse: simple revenge. They want to get even with everyone who has put them into this strange state of discontent -- the people who have made them feel guilty (their parents and peers), the people who have refused to recognize their superiority among the mediocre (the average Joe in the street), and the people who will not give them what they believe they are entitled/accustomed to (Wall Street, Big_____, or Classically-Liberal government which does not hand out 4 weeks vacation and six-figure paychecks to Lesbian Interpretive Dance majors).

The same formula works for the non-college-educated, non-gated-community child of non-privilege, too -- society has no use for them, because they do nothing useful, believe in mystical entitlements to everything that belongs to someone else, and feel guilty about knowing they either haven't earned that welfare check, or have wasted whatever potential or opportunity they may have had because they chose a lifestyle of criminal behavior, serial bastardy, self-destructive behavior, and usually all three.

It's always someone else's fault, therefore, someone else should have to pay.

And the deeper and more-bitter your resentment, the more extreme and radical (and increasingly half-assed) your political opinions and affiliations become. This is the basis for the Modern left: a collection of misfits no one in their right mind has a use for, motivated by a self-hatred that they wish to turn outwards, so as to protect themselves from having to ever admit personal responsibility and failure, or to avoid taking personal action that might change the trajectory of their lives, POSITIVELY.

It is a movement of losers who are aware, just barely, that they are losers, who turn their loserdom into a ersatz-moral crusade that justifies getting even with everyone else.

Which brings us back to the pronouncement that in order for the world to be "saved", people need to be sacrificed, aborted or prevented from being created at all (from a problem which largely does not exist, that is currently beyond human understanding and control, and that no one can explain how it could ever be solved, if it did exist, by simply handing more money and authority to government and "Science").

Just WHO among the Sinners will need to be sacrificed so that the Saints may prevail?

As always, the answer from the self-selected Saints is "not me", because they "do their part" by separating their garbage, biking to work, driving a hybrid, only eating "organic" "locally-sourced", 'farm-to-table" food, and "raising awareness". Note they don't put their money where their mouths are -- they won't live without electricity (otherwise, owning a Prius is simply impossible and pointless), they don't realize their recyclables are simply buried in landfills or shipped overseas (to be dumped in rivers) because no one can make money on recycling, they don't seem to care that for all the organic kale, arugula and tofu they consume, it all still comes wrapped in plastic and someone drove it to the market.

The Kale Fairy didn't carpet bomb the farmer's market overnight, you know.

But the point that sticks in my craw the most, is that it is assumed that I should die in order to validate their feelings of impeccable virtue. In all of this, the power of individual decision-making is removed, particularly if you are one of those deemed incapable of making the "proper" decision (defined by those who "control the culture") in the first place.

You will have no say or choice in how the "problem" of Global Warming will be defined.

You will have no say or choice in how the "problem" of Global Warming is examined.

You will have no say or choice in how the "problem" of Global Warming will be mitigated or solved.

Because those decisions have already been made FOR you, by your "betters".

Because they hate you and have made it their job to get rid of you. Because "morality".

To which my response is this:

If you truly wish for me to espouse your point of view so that you can have your way (and become "part of the (Final) solution" instead of "part of the problem") then lead by example. You first, Fuckhead.

Leave your condo behind and go live in a tent in the wilderness, constructed of all-natural, ethical, bio-degradable materials. Stop wearing anything except that which you can make for yourself, including the fabric that you will need. Grow your own food. Stop using plastics, electricity, cosmetics, medications, all forms of non-human-powered transportation, turn your heat and air conditioning off. Split wood, not atoms. Stop using the Internet. Dispose of your cellphone, which is dependent on fossil fuels and mined metals that "rape" the Earth. Plant two trees for every one you cut down to serve your needs and then spend your own time, labor and effort to husband them.

Give up television. Stop drinking imported wines, teas and coffees. Don't have children, since there are already too many people here. Use your superior intellect and useful Queer Theory skills to survive in a world where industry is abolished, energy is no longer generated, and where billions of people you despise but count upon have disappeared.  Pay the exorbitant taxes you wish to impose on others yourselves. Live under a regime of the oppressive policies, rationing, an government diktats on your own for a while.

Jump off bridges to rid this planet of excess people and their disgusting carbon footprints. Shoot yourselves in the head to set the proper example. Hang yourselves from any convenient tree to show your dedication to the cause. Show me you mean business by stabbing your entire family in the heart before plunging the knife into your own chest. Do them collectively, like you insist others be forced into the Collective.

Only then will you have done something useful. Only then will you have the moral authority to dictate to others.

You first, Bernie, you old motherfucker. Keeping you alive much longer is simply a waste of resources in the future you have planned for us all, especially the rationed health care.

I won't hold my breath (maybe you should).

Until you do, shut the fuck up.


Death's Approach said...

Have you ever considered maybe writing a Socratic dialogue featuring Socrates debating a liberal on the topic of morality? I believe you may want to try it sometime. It is just a suggestion. People have written Socratic dialogues, for example with Socrates debating Karl Marx on his idea of Communism, and with Socrates debating an abortionist on the topic of abortion. These, of course, are enormously long, but you could probably make something of a shorter nature. I, and many others I am sure, would love to see how Socrates would respond (with logic) to being called a racist, sexist, homophobic, etc, etc.

Matthew Noto said...

I did something very similar to this some years ago, re: Obama...