Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Fading Moral Clarity and Our Burgeoning Fear Society
“…a society that does not protect the right of dissent…will inevitably turn into a fear society that endangers everybody.” – The Case For Democracy: The Power Of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny And Terror, Natan Sharansky, Page 40
A few days ago I commented that I had a post formulating in my head about low-trust society and the Anti-Intellectual Era in America. Well, this is what those thoughts have morphed into.
Before Christmas, I started listening to Child 44 again (previous listen was in 2016) and was struck by a passage in the opening chapters that I used in a post at that time:
“Enemies of the Party were not merely saboteurs, spies, and wreckers of industry, but doubters of the Party line, doubters of the society which awaited them.” – Child 44, Page 26
I use that again here to reiterate what I said there:
To call me a doubter of The Narrative (or, as above, the Party line) on any given day would be an understatement. I freely admit that I am an outright denier of each and every narrative pushed on us – no matter how carefully cultivated or raw, hot-off-the-presses the storyline is – until it has weathered at least 48 hours of scrutiny in the open marketplace of actual thinkers. Based on demonstrable past performance, I have no faith in either the ability or the intention of the major media outlets to provide an honest and accurate assessment of anything that happens in this world. Therefore, I default to Narrative Denier status until a story is exposed to proper scrutiny.
Given the events we have just witnessed to commemorate the anniversary of a completely avoidable riot (if only Pelosi and McConnell had taken their oversight and leadership duties seriously), outside of a Global Warming / Climate Change debate, I have never been more intellectually comfortable in my denier status. (I do, however, suspect discomfort in other areas to be imposed on me and people like me – by definition, enemies of the Party – as we move on down the path we seem to have chosen.)
While I did not consume any coverage of the events, some exposure was unavoidable and what seeped through did not disappoint. The purposeful, deliberate (almost robotic) recitation and repetition of crafted narrative talking points, long ago discredited “known facts”, and pure demagogic horse[crap] from the president to that idiot Liz Cheney to countless pretend journalists on media of all types was all so embarrassingly shallow. If such a substantial portion of We the People didn’t buy into it, it would be high comedy for the ages. Sadly, it is not.
Anyway, I have now finished Child 44. Along with the two sequels, I highly recommend it as the Soviet Era-based murder thriller it is. But what drew my attention as much as the story was the little peeks inside a low trust society along the way and how those aspects of society drove behaviors in the lives of the characters. That reminded me of another novel, written more contemporaneous with that timeframe, that had this same effect on me: The Case of Comrade Tulayev by Victor Serge. (I have harvested posts from that one also.) So, while I intended to dive into some of that material, it struck me this morning that the real context I was after would come from the Natan Sharansky work quoted at the top of this post. So I hereby call an audible…
The guiding light that Sharansky provides is the concept of moral clarity…a properly grounded reference point from which to observe and operate within a society, for the betterment of that society. His wisdom on the subject came from his “exposure to the black-and-white world of the Soviet Union [that] provided him with a unique laboratory to discover the line between good and evil” and he acknowledged: “In a free world, with its varying shades of gray…finding moral clarity…becomes far more difficult.” As we see today, the intentionally gratuitous fog applied to every news cycle complicates that search for many Americans. He also clarifies the evil in this by explaining the difference between “a world of fear and a world of freedom”:
“In the former, the primary challenge is finding the inner strength to confront evil. In the latter, the primary challenge is finding the moral clarity to see evil.” – Page XXII
While my notes from the book tend to focus on a point of view of attempting the great difficulty of transitioning from a fear-based society to a freedom-based society, I believe my coopting of his language for my agenda is valid to warn of the ease with which a free society that voluntarily accepts the growing levels of anti-intellectualism that we have witnessed over the last decade or more can transition the other direction. If we…as in We the People…cannot even summon the will to see the evil in the blatant propaganda and demagoguery fed to us with our January 6 soma then such an intellectually weakened populace will have no chance of confronting it when the more advanced tyranny sets in.
I admit moral clarity can be difficult in this environment…finding it will likely be a personal journey for most. But I will say that if you think you see it in Biden, Pelosi, Cheney, Fauci, and/or anywhere in the modern beltway politico-media complex, you are not even close. And if you think you have staked out safe ground in the anti-Trump / Never Trump zone…well, you are a fool.
I will go further and state that, for those who understand American-style liberty as intended (yes, I’m just arrogant enough to claim that), those listed above are agents for evil…a particularly aggressive cancer that is now consuming our society. And the country “is divided between those who are prepared to confront evil and those who are willing to appease it.” (Page 17) Sharansky further delineates the players we see today into true believers, dissidents, and doublethinkers. It is this last group…those who “no longer believe in [the narrative of the day], but are afraid to accept the risks of dissent”…that interests me today:
“Doublethinkers live in constant tension from the gap between their thoughts and words. They always avoid saying what is not permitted but also try to avoid saying what they do not believe. But fear societies generally do not leave [the] doublethinkers such a luxury. They demand from their “cogs” constant expressions of loyalty. [In the various institutions of society], doublethinkers must parrot the ideology of the regime and hide their true beliefs. This constant self-censorship can be such an inseparable part of a doublethinker’s existence that it becomes so habitual that the tension between thoughts and words is almost no longer felt.” – Page 45
(I assure you that many on factory floors and in cubicle farms and in office buildings across this land are dealing with this constant tension today. The fear is not GULAG level stuff but threats to livelihoods and pensions and homes and families are real and are growing. But I digress.)
I posit that doublethinkers are required to supplement the numbers of true believers. This would explain the need for the sustained efforts to nurture various collective psychoses and delusional hysterias against anything not sufficiently progressive for today’s burgeoning tyrants…no matter how inane and easily debunked the charge. Once properly trained and conditioned, permanent power is easily within grasp:
“…to an outside observer, a fear society’s doublethinkers are indistinguishable from its true believers; … Therefore, to an outside observer, a fear society will consist of only two groups, true believers and dissidents. And if the punishment for dissent is high enough, the fear society will have no dissidents either.” – Page 46
The fear industry – dialed up to eleven since election eve 2016 – is a well calculated and focused strategy. It is wearing down the American spirit (where it still exists) and conditioning the masses. The January 6 charade we just witnessed was a rather grotesque and opportunistic crescendo intended to reinforce the conditioned reflex to join (or parrot) the narrative. Fear is working. And when fear rules, “democracy” will finally run as clean and efficiently as Nancy and Joe desire.
Into the abyss…
Published in General
“Paranoia strikes deep
into your life it will creep
It starts when you’re always afraid
Step out of line, the man come and take you away”
From “For What it’s Worth” by Buffalo Springfield
I believe I used this a few months back but it’s just as relevant to Philo’s point. The song was a favorite of the Left back in the 60’s but we Conservatives would be wise to heed these words today.
I remember a paragraph in a book written by a woman who first lived in Eastern Europe under the “glorious days of the Russian Revolution,” then the Nazis, then after the war ended, and the family moved to the West.
During the Russian Communism period of her life, she repeated to her mother what a success the great Lenin and Stalin had brought to the people, a people who now had full bellies and ever increasing prosperity. One proof of this was how each family was allowed a sugar ration. While back in the dark days of the Csar, only the nobility had ever tasted sugar.
Her mother snorted in reply. “We had so much sugar our parents took it away from us, so we would eat healthier vegetables and meat. Now we only get a small ration, and I no longer worry about it taking up too big a part of your diet.”
So the daughter was enthused about how her mum had a better understanding of the sugar issue then her teacher did. The next time the subject of sugar came up in school, she proudly set about to educate her teacher, as to how things had not been that bad under the Csar.
Things did not go well for her mother after that. She had to attend local re-education classes and exhibit enthusiasm for all things relating to the Party, or else things would get much much worse.
Over sugar! Over her own experiences that formed her past history. Things are getting to be like that here.
I was knocked off Twitter for six months, not for my jibes at Gates or Fauci, but for a casual mention of my having been vax injured by the swine flu injection in 1976.
Our individualism must be relegated to that part of history where “only nobility ever tasted sugar.” Or we might find we have some re-education classes, or worse, to attend.
I’d say that a practical example of that observation is the outsized reaction to the latest variant of the Covid virus. As evidence mounts that it’s not particularly deadly, our hospitals and ICU’s are being inundated with people who, having tested positive, fear that the end is near. This is a fear driven by government officials who’ve grown comfortable running their states via executive order (**cough** J.B. Pritzker) and furthered by a sychophantic media. Into the abyss, indeed.
This relates nicely to my comment on Dr. Bastiat’s Come Join Us thread about how easy it is for the Left to come to power and retain it; and, conversely, how difficult it is to convert someone to conservatism (freedom). Fear and intimidation work. They work because it is in our nature to take the path of least resistance in all our relationships. It’s why we call it “confronting” someone with the truth. You don’t “confront” someone with a falsehood — that’s easy, like a warm knife through butter — “No, that dress doesn’t make you look fat.” “Sure, you and your homosexual partner can be married — husband and husband.” “Why, yes darling, if you ‘feel’ like a woman, you must be one!”
Here’s what I said about the unlikelihood of converting the actor Dinklage to conservatism (or, as I like to say, “truth.”):
I’m convinced the reason courage is an endangered virtue here in the “home of the brave” is the rise of secularism. Religion (especially Judaism and Christianity) is the school of (real) virtue. It causes you to think about what you’re willing to die for. It impels you to loyalty to a higher good (moral clarity, as you say). Without it, we revert to a state of nature — from “home of the brave” willing to sacrifice for the good, the true, and the beautiful — to “might makes right” where the most ruthless rise to the top. I’d say we’re very close to the latter now.
To convert someone to conservatism (moral clarity) requires first a religious conversion, preferably to Christianity — preferably to Catholicism, which is the fullness of revealed truth. But, I would say that.
Exactly. (See earlier post.)
Agreed…although I also see that rise as being abetted by the softening and “watering down” of the alternative. As someone who has spent a majority of my Sunday visits in a United Methodist pew, I have witnessed some of the worst of it. But, as to not divert from the topic at hand, I will also refrain from my thoughts on some of the specifics in your last paragraph.
I think another part of story is the breakdown of community (See Coming Apart). Courage is hard as isolated individuals (as we have increasingly become in recent decades)…the virtue is nurtured and reinforced within groups with common interests and among groups with overlapping memberships. Religious groups are part of this equation.
Thanks.
When I started my “reversion” (I’d call it a conversion, but I was raised by adherent Catholics), I began at a United Methodist church nearby. Lovely people (truly), but watered down religion, as you say.
And, don’t get me wrong, the Catholic church is in a sorry state currently, thanks to very poor leadership and the insidious infusion of globalism, ecumenism, environmentalism, and, generally, leftism from the top. But, it’s a gem waiting to be uncovered for those willing to dig.
Those with moral clarity:
This is the complete opposite of Antifa and BLM and all of their dead dogma and destruction in 2020. This is the complete opposite of shallow gimmicks like hiring contractors to paint BLM on the streets in front of Trump Tower and the White House. This is the complete opposite of idiots like Liz Cheney. This is courage based on real moral clarity.
NOTICE: This Member post has been promoted to the Main Feed. Content may have been edited / corrected from the original without attribution by Ricochet.
(Somewhere along the line it seems we – or I – stopped getting notifications about promotions. For what it’s worth, that is/was an important feature to at least one of us.)
The movie Child 44 is good, too. And scary plausible.
From the IMDB description: The plot is about an idealistic pro-Stalin security officer who decides to investigate a series of child murders in a country where supposedly this sort of crime doesn’t exist. The state would not hear of the existence of a child murderer let alone a serial killer. He gets demoted and exiled but decides, with just the help of his wife, to continue pursuing the case.