slug.com slug.com

1 3

Journal 202023, The Tyranny of Social Condemnation.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban were brought to the negotiating table by a dragging their leader by the ear. That was first excoriated by another.

The power of conviction in the court of social justice is far more powerful than the courts of law.

But most of the courts of law have at their core a code of standards. Even American tort law is somewhat Napoleonic – especially now that a vast unaccountable Federal bureaucracy controls our daily lives, utterly without recourse for its citizens.

There exists no set of standards for social law, so everyone is free in the most tyrannical of governments to exercise coercion, to lie, defraud and generally make life miserable for anyone one wishes to convict, for any reason at all. And the conviction will stand, as long as no one stands up for the accused.

Will people stand up against false accusation of someone else? Generally they will not. Most of us want to see ourselves as not hypocrites. We will not openly criticize anyone for a different belief than ours.

But we will still judge. And eventually we will convict someone socially, by distancing, cutting off communication, and gossiping behind their back. Most victims of this condemnation will never know why. Even though most of us believe ourselves to be “good” people, most also fail to understand that “All that is necessary for evil to prevail, is for good people to do nothing.” - Carleton Smith.

Even more dangerous are those of weak moral character. They are easily convinced of the need to condemn. “A good man is a very dangerous man who has it under voluntary control. A passive man is not a good man.” - Dr. Jordan Peterson.

Will the condemned stand up for themselves with a rational defense? Generally not. Most will attack instead - the weakest of all defenses. And even if a rational defense is managed, will it be respected? Generally not.

There exist among humans those who feel everyone should be under control, such as by government, the church, the local homeowners association, the police, or whatever. To them no one will voluntarily restrain themselves to civility, so everyone should be forced. This is not a majority among humans, so they must coerce others into the belief in compliance.

There are also those who feel they have a right to do anything they please, as long as they are not caught. These small minority tend to justify the first , and in American politics, tend to be the leaders of the first . Most of us understand that when we act without civility, we also suffer the same by others doing the same to us. So we behave with civility in the hopes that others will too.

And a few others behave with civility not as a matter of self preservation, but of principle. We are the least trusted by any type. Ironically we are also the most trustworthy, because we believe in personal integrity as a matter of our very self definition.

So why are we so mistrusted? Those of us who define ourselves by our decency very often find ourselves viciously accused, with the kind of venom not even aimed at the openly uncivil.

Could it be that so much of the population acts grudgingly with civility, and presumes that everyone else does too? That would make us presumptive liars of the worst kind, or at best delusional, that we must consider ourselves above common morality.

Such a person would deserve no recourse to harsh public censure, and summary punishment in any form conceivable. Just attempting to defend one’s self rationally would then be considered compounding a crime of unimaginable arrogance.

If it ever occurs to the self-appointed judge and condemner that they could be mistaken, perhaps it is dismissed as weakness.

The true weakness of character is failing to confront. Failing to fairly give the condemned a chance to actually be respectfully heard. And weakest of all to condemn behind the back of the condemned.

TimTuolomne 9 Dec 24
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

5

This post was edited when first posted. The word “mother” was removed, even though its meaning was truly “mother,” as in the female parent. It was not intended, nor could the context be reasonably construed as profanity. When this site becomes a politically correct censored site, we are in big trouble. "Journal 202023, The Tyranny of Social Condemnation."

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:165163
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.