Tuesday, June 17, 2008

When Reason Fails (series)

(IV) "Fulfil my needs ..."

Those of us who cling to facts still stubbornly believe in right and wrong. Not the subjective morality of 'one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter,' but the objective kind - the true and false that can be measured along given standards, for instance thou shalt not kill unarmed civilians.

Others, who have dispensed with reality have not just thrown out epistemology - philosophy's study of human knowledge - but, for good measure - have abolished the field of ethics as well. This is done by the sheer fact of their rejection: whatever spin is put on it, in a reality vacuum there simply is no right or wrong, true or false. (...)

Those who cling to objective right and wrong have the occasional satisfaction of having done the right thing in the face of overwhelming impopularity, adversity, unpleasant side-effects, or cost to themselves.

The not so fortunate must resort to psychological tricks to squeeze the tiniest trickle of happiness out of live. Their refuge is the multiplication of personal feel-good factors or the cultivation of self-esteem. Agony aunts in desperation counsel to try and see life as the enemy; act against the inner compass - be lazy or run amok; avoid bench-marking; go it alone, or join a victim-group (everyone else does); pretend, escape, indulge in the blessings of postmodern life (the past was not that great either); learn to enjoy solving problems that matter, like bad-hair days. Most of all their clients desire to be loved and admired for nothing, "for who they are" - the collection of physical cells stripped of convictions.

American politicians may resort to commissioning investigations into other branches of surrogate ethics: the diplomatic popularity contest; the 44-page report “The Decline in America’s Reputation: Why?” issued this week by the House’s Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs for instance.(...) There's nothing like a good, old, Victorian reality check for building up solid self-esteem! (...)

(III) "Morbid Obama Intoxication"

The collective swoon over B. Barak Hussein Muhammed Obama is getting corrosive. If Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) (see parts I and II) was a public health hazard, we ain't seen nothing yet. The Morbid Obama Intoxication (MOI) beats BDS on all fronts.

(...) The American Left is traditionally steeped in pragmatism (...) a Romanticist version of relativism. Extrovert action and passion are valued over introvert reflexion and reason. Pragmatism is essentially amoral. (...) pragmatism is rather dishonestly presented as the opposite of what it aims to achieve. It seemingly is the practical over theory, portends to position the individual in a central role, ostensibly respects reason and facts, while its very principle constitutes an assault on logic (everything is in flux), gives a central role to feelings and passions (subjectivism), denies reality (nothing is absolute), and reduces the individual to an atom of the collective. (...)

A picture of mystical group-think is emerging from the Obama campaign which looks ominously familiar (...) it gets more hazardous when pragmatism is coupled to dogma and subjective passions spiral out of control. This is the winning ticket that made National Socialism such a lethal ideology: they strengthen one another. One can see how that works: our aim justifies the means because we say so. Dogmatism couples blind belief to an already brutal concept. It beckons: stop thinking, follow me and I'll give you what you want so passionately!

If we turn our attention to the Obama campaign we hear one mantra: Change, Action, Belief. The latter represents the dogmatic side: blind faith, not in the Obama ideas (he doesn't have any) but in his method, while Change through Action suggests Will to Power: the dogmatic approach to a subjective aim that justifies the pragmatist means.

(...) if you think that's tacky, compare that to this load of Postmodern 'spirituality,' according to which Obama is both the infallible Pope and the celestial Leader rolled into One:
"Barack Obama isn't really one of us. Not in the normal way, anyway. (...) The appeal, the pull, the ethereal and magical thing that seems to enthrall millions of people from all over the world, that keeps opening up and firing into new channels of the culture normally completely unaffected by politics? No, it's not merely his youthful vigor, or handsomeness, or even inspiring rhetoric. (...) They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul. The unusual thing is, true Lightworkers almost never appear on such a brutal, spiritually demeaning stage as national politics. This is why Obama is so rare."
(...) >>>

(II) "The Left's Narrative"

(...) Front Page Magazine author Ben Johnson has another compilation, "The Left's Fairy Tale," a shortlist of the main delusions the Dems and the Leftist world at large have convinced themselves of. Both articles are the subject of book which is co-authored by David Horowitz: "The Party of Defeat."

The 'narrative' of that fairy tale reads as follows:
“President Select” George W. Bush stole the 2000 election after his daddy’s Supreme Court justices stopped the Florida election boards from counting all the votes. When he got into office, he did not make terrorism a top priority but immediately began dividing the nation along political lines (...) The Surge has failed, and our best option is to redeploy within six months, even if genocide follows. >>>
Blogger-psychologist Dr Sanity has explained the mechanism of projection like this: if you think of yourself as a nice, peaceful person (which all Leftists do since they are the party of 'ethics'), while actually you are full of wrath and hatred (this would be a typical blog dedicated to hatred), the psychological devise of projection as by miracle turns your opponent into someone who is full of wrath and hatred, the origin of BDS.

(I) "Bush Derangement Syndrome"

Seldom has a president had so much opposition and bad press from the outset as George W. Bush. He never stood a chance against the onslaught of parlor tricks and other theatricals that the postmodern shop of rhetorical attributes has to offer. It was full throttle from day one: for just an example read "The Party of Defeat Top Five Lies About Iraq," by Ben Johnson on Front Page ... read it all! (...) they didn't need an excuse, but the truth is, he wasn't a member of the Democratic Party, but a Republican ... and in Their White House! (...) The same psychological mechanism that causes all rational faculties to break down is responsible for the exact opposite, in the case of B. Barack Hussein Obama. Not only is there no healthy scrutiny into the man's past or present At All, the adoration (in which he shares!) is reaching truly disquieting levels. More tomorrow, when introducing the equally morbid Obama Derangement Syndrome. >>>

- Filed on Articles in "The Political Pathology Page" -

No comments: