Civilization’s Requisite Brutality

 

If you will, imagine a sparsely-populated, anarchic region somewhat akin to the early days of the Wild West. Although decent folk live among the rabble, the Rule of Law is hardly respected. People settle disputes not with respect to objective justice or decency but instead resolve most arguments by shooting first.

Now imagine the decent folk of the region, appalled by what they see around them, decide that they will fight the chaos by refraining from participating in it. They choose to “go high” instead of low, using reason and setting positive, dignified examples for their neighbors to demonstrate the behavior and principles upon which they hope to establish a better society. After all, would not participating in the violence around them legitimize the use of arbitrary force? How could they expect anyone to believe that they would prefer a less violent society when they employ violence themselves? Might not they become the very enemies they so loathe if they adopt the outlaws’ tactics and start shooting people themselves?

How successful do you think these decent, moral, reasonable people would be at civilizing their surroundings?

If you see parallels between this society and how leftists often handle foreign policy or criminal justice, you’re correct, for neither rogue states nor individuals change their behavior unless they’re forced to. Negotiation, rehabilitation, offers to join the community, and verbal persuasion have limits.

However, the more pertinent parallel I’m drawing is that of modern political rhetoric and some conservatives’ refusal to adapt to reality accordingly.

Indeed, when I read or hear many of their complaints about Trump, they’re correct in many of their premises. The ability to produce funny memes, quick quips, vacuous catchy slogans, or mock one’s opponents into submission have nothing whatsoever to do with the correctness of one’s views. Societies in which most of us form our opinions based on measured, civil, debates and discussions while soberly weighing the options before us are healthier than those in which the best one-liners win the day. Class is better than crudeness. The president should set positive examples for us and our children.

Nevertheless, as correct as that may be, when we emphasize such idealistic principles while ignoring the principles of reality, power, and human nature, our perspective becomes distorted, our solutions ineffectual, and those who pay no regard whatsoever to any sense of decency, reason, and decorum will prevail over us.

We respect the foundations of civil society, as well we should. However, we often forget that reason, justice, and other ideals can only be enforced when those who adhere to them have more influence and power than those who don’t. In general, people don’t start behaving because they’re rationally convinced they should, have classy examples to follow, or miracles amazingly change their hearts. Instead, they respond to incentives, determining whether they’ll engage in “right” or “wrong” behavior based on whether or not they believe they’ll benefit.

Much to the chagrin of both my more measured conservative allies and myself, when it comes to setting the terms of decency and decorum in political debate, we don’t have that kind of power. Instead, Saturday Night Live plays an instrumental role in destroying the political careers of Republicans from Gerald Ford to Sarah Palin in ways that the reasoned voices of Jonah Goldberg or Charles Krauthammer have never harmed Democrats. Nonsensical quips like “the eighties called” become the only parts of debates that anyone remembers. Conservative views are shouted or beaten out of universities. Mockery, demonization, accusations of mental illness (homophobia, Islamophobia, xenophobia, etc.), snide insinuations, condescension, and virtually every other logical fallacy dominate our political and cultural discourse.

Thus, although the rhetorical environment in which we find ourselves mirrors that of the aforementioned Wild West, many of us act as if there’s a rational judge or sheriff upon whom we can call when our opponents run afoul of the “law” of reasoned discourse. We fail to recognize how judges and sheriffs attained any power out West in the first place — they got better at gunplay than the villains.

Individual morality depends on individual choices, but societal morality depends on a complex web of laws and unwritten norms. The efficacy of societal rules depends on the ability of those who support such rules to enforce them through either legal or societal sanction. If you can’t make people hurt for doing something wrong (even if it’s just their feelings), people are going to keep doing it, especially if they perceive they’ll benefit.

And judging from how easily Romney became a “vulture capitalist” in the minds of most voters, leftists have good reason to believe that continuing with their nonsense will serve them well. Moreover, until Trump the most they had to fear from “going low” was a few Republicans saying variations of “they really shouldn’t say that” for a day or two before moving on to more reasoned discourse. Some attacks worked, some didn’t, but until recently they never suffered effective counterattacks.

Our calls to civil discourse have proven as effective as gun buyback programs or outlawing war, yet many of us act either as if leftist repeated attacks have no effect, or that Moral Appeal #12,342 will be the one that finally does the trick and gets Democrats to address us as fellow human beings and make arguments other than “hate” and “people are going to die.”

Unfortunately, there is no longer enough of a sense of public decorum for “please stop saying that” to instill any sort of shame or fear in the hearts of our opponents whatsoever. They’ve no reasons to stop, so we’ve got to give them some.

And that means instead of winning the fight we should be having, we’ve got to win the fight we’re actually having. That means better memes, insults, and witty quips. It means hounding Maxine Waters and Bernie Sanders for their over-the-top statements like they hounded Palin, letting go only of our offensive only after their reputations have suffered enough for them not to want to do it again.

Some might find it contradictory to foster a return to civilized discourse through insults, but is the alternative any less incoherent? If our current level of discourse is as corrosive as my moralist allies claim, then how can we allow it to continue unabated by our adversaries? Should we not put a stop to it? And how are we going to ever put a stop to it if we refuse to do anything effective to counter it? If our societal norms managed to corrode so drastically as to lead us today’s rhetorical toilet under the classy conservative leadership of the Bushes, Romney, Ryan, and Frist, on what basis can we conclude that more conservative class and nobility will lead to anything other than even more corrosion?

If juvenile rhetoric important enough for us to refrain from whatever its advantages, then it’s important enough for us to ensure that our adversaries put an end to it as well. If it’s not important enough for us to actually stop leftists from doing it and thus accruing advantages from it, then it’s not important enough for us to stop ourselves from doing it to our own detriment.

We’re fortunate enough to live in a society that’s relatively free from violence, but that security developed only because good men sometimes get downright brutal. In order to secure peace both at home and abroad, on our behalf our soldiers and policemen have been willing to engage our enemies on their violent terms. We’re able to follow the rules of law and war because we have so many weapons to enforce codes of decency.

But today, political discourse is anarchy. We’ve no universally enforceable moral code to which we can effectively hold our opponents, and except under the most egregious of violations, no press to cry “you’ve gone too far” when our opponents accuse us of being evil personified. We like to think of ourselves as the righteous forces of morality upholding traditional values of decency when we’re actually just getting beaten to a pulp as we impotently watch those values further degrade.

Much like the leftists who rely exclusively on rehabilitation with dictators and coddle street criminals, all too often politically we’re oblivious to reality and assume that good faith nobility will inspire its reciprocity, forgetting that as negotiation works only from a position of strength, what we see as moral will be interpreted as merely weak. Our eagerness to refrain from impolite rhetoric only fosters its growth.

Our supporters are getting beaten with regularity and our congressional representatives shot as our political opponents continue to call us the racist, evil, violent, misogynist forces of oppression and hate. Yet many of us still wet our beds at the thought of doing something that might actually get them to stop. As our levels of political vitriol continue to increase, we have only ourselves and our misplaced concepts of nobility to blame.

Published in Elections
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 52 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Von Snrub Inactive
    Von Snrub
    @VonSnrub

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    Long before Trump, many Republican voters insisted that our side needed to be combative, assertive, and bold. None of that requires juvenility or vengeful retaliation.

    It does require rejecting the fantasy of bipartisanship, matter-of-factly identifying liars and scoundrels, and proposing legislation that is more republican than democratic.

    But where does that get you, vengeful retaliation is what’s required going forward. Louis Lerner used that vast power of the IRS to curtail the growth of conservative organizations. How has she been punished? She hasn’t. Yet according to the media and such conservative “luminaries” as Charles Krauthammer, we are currently living in a Russian Puppet state. Sorry, but we let everything go because we demand no satisfaction. She should be in prison. Donald Trump Jr. did nothing.

    The second sentiment that I fully endorse on this thread is the end of qualifying statements. I’m not a racists but… I’m not blah blah blah but… !@#$#!$ that! You believe the things you think through history, intellectual debate, and scholarship. They feel things. Look at Jordan Peterson for a good way forward. Apologizes for nothing and is looking to fight.

    • #31
  2. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Von Snrub (View Comment):
    Louis Lerner used that vast power of the IRS to curtail the growth of conservative organizations. How has she been punished? She hasn’t. [….] She should be in prison.

    She should, along with Hillary Clinton and other prominent Democrats who have blatantly committed felonies in recent years. It is repugnant that Republicans tolerate so much while speaking as if prominent Democrats are genteel colleagues.

    But enforcing laws is not vengeance. Speaking controversial truths is not cruelty.

    Harsh justice does not involve retaliation. Harsh honesty does not involve slander. Schadenfreude is poisonous. Warriors can be blunt and brutal without becoming unjust.

    • #32
  3. Von Snrub Inactive
    Von Snrub
    @VonSnrub

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):

    Von Snrub (View Comment):
    Louis Lerner used that vast power of the IRS to curtail the growth of conservative organizations. How has she been punished? She hasn’t. [….] She should be in prison.

    She should, along with Hillary Clinton and other prominent Democrats who have blatantly committed felonies in recent years. It is repugnant that Republicans tolerate so much while speaking as if prominent Democrats are gentile colleagues.

    But enforcing laws is not vengeance. Speaking controversial truths is not cruelty.

    Harsh justice does not involve retaliation. Harsh honesty does not involve slander. Schadenfreude is poisonous. Warriors can be blunt and brutal without becoming unjust.

    Can you site these people who have substantial success changing the narrative? I’m willing to listen I just don’t believe our path forward can be free or should be free of some spiteful tactics.

    • #33
  4. profdlp Inactive
    profdlp
    @profdlp

    Remember Romney’s Candy Crowley moment regarding Libya in the debate?  He lost the election right there.  Whether it was because he was stunned that someone could tell such a blatant lie like that and have the moderator of a presidential debate back him up, or was just too polite to call her on it, he blew it.  To those on the left, it merely confirmed their idiotic belief that Obama was not a liar and that the press was fair.  To those on the right, it exposed Romney as a weakling.  (And if he wasn’t willing to fight for himself, he sure wasn’t very likely to fight for us, either.)  If he’d have had Trump’s attack instincts he’d be in his second term right now.

    (And to what I am sure comes as a surprise to some of you, I’d rather we were in Romney’s second term and not Trump’s first.)

    • #34
  5. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    profdlp (View Comment):
    Remember Romney’s Candy Crowley moment regarding Libya in the debate? He lost the election right there. Whether it was because he was stunned that someone could tell such a blatant lie like that and have the moderator of a presidential debate back him up, or was just too polite to call her on it, he blew it. To those on the left, it merely confirmed their idiotic belief that Obama was not a liar and that the press was fair. To those on the right, it exposed Romney as a weakling. (And if he wasn’t willing to fight for himself, he sure wasn’t very likely to fight for us, either.) If he’d have had Trump’s attack instincts he’d be in his second term right now.

    (And to what I am sure comes as a surprise to some of you, I’d rather we were in Romney’s second term and not Trump’s first.)

    Oh, Romney had Trumps attack instincts. He just didn’t choose to use them against anyone but Trump

    • #35
  6. Von Snrub Inactive
    Von Snrub
    @VonSnrub

    cdor (View Comment):

    profdlp (View Comment):
    Remember Romney’s Candy Crowley moment regarding Libya in the debate? He lost the election right there. Whether it was because he was stunned that someone could tell such a blatant lie like that and have the moderator of a presidential debate back him up, or was just too polite to call her on it, he blew it. To those on the left, it merely confirmed their idiotic belief that Obama was not a liar and that the press was fair. To those on the right, it exposed Romney as a weakling. (And if he wasn’t willing to fight for himself, he sure wasn’t very likely to fight for us, either.) If he’d have had Trump’s attack instincts he’d be in his second term right now.

    (And to what I am sure comes as a surprise to some of you, I’d rather we were in Romney’s second term and not Trump’s first.)

    Oh, Romney had Trumps attack instincts. He just didn’t choose to use them against anyone but Trump

    Aint that the truth

    • #36
  7. Martel Inactive
    Martel
    @Martel

    cdor (View Comment):

    profdlp (View Comment):
    Remember Romney’s Candy Crowley moment regarding Libya in the debate? He lost the election right there. Whether it was because he was stunned that someone could tell such a blatant lie like that and have the moderator of a presidential debate back him up, or was just too polite to call her on it, he blew it. To those on the left, it merely confirmed their idiotic belief that Obama was not a liar and that the press was fair. To those on the right, it exposed Romney as a weakling. (And if he wasn’t willing to fight for himself, he sure wasn’t very likely to fight for us, either.) If he’d have had Trump’s attack instincts he’d be in his second term right now.

    (And to what I am sure comes as a surprise to some of you, I’d rather we were in Romney’s second term and not Trump’s first.)

    Oh, Romney had Trumps attack instincts. He just didn’t choose to use them against anyone but Trump

    He used them against other Republicans in the primary, too.  We’ve got the instincts.  We’re just afraid to hit anyone we know might hit back, namely Democrats.

    • #37
  8. Kimberly Engle Inactive
    Kimberly Engle
    @KimberlyEngle

    For what does it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul.

    What you are advocating here seems to be logical on the surface.  But it is a trap.  If you go down this road, it will change you into something you won’t like.

    I am a Christian.  Many of the Ricochet members profess to be as well.  That means you follow Christ.  He didn’t believe it was necessary to gain power by going into the gutter.

    Neither do I.

    • #38
  9. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Kimberly Engle (View Comment):
    For what does it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul.

    What you are advocating here seems to be logical on the surface. But it is a trap. If you go down this road, it will change you into something you won’t like.

    I am a Christian. Many of the Ricochet members profess to be as well. That means you follow Christ. He didn’t believe it was necessary to gain power by going into the gutter.

    Neither do I.

    I respect your position @kimberlyengle and certainly wouldn’t want you to go against your own conscience and nature. But we each gotta do what we gotta do. One complaint some of us have is the Republicans who are very high road characters when dealing with our opposition (leftists) but don’t hesitant to wallow in the mire while stabbing fellow Republicans in the back. I am sure you are consistant in your treatment of all people, however.

    • #39
  10. Phil Turmel Inactive
    Phil Turmel
    @PhilTurmel

    James Lileks (View Comment):
    The problem is that most on the left side of the political equation don’t recognize the incivility on their own side, or, if they do, they see it as the excessively enthusiastic actions of a well-intentioned minority. Whereas they think that the majority of the right is crazy. Daft. Stupid. Evil. They already think we act like you are encouraging us to do, and should we take your advice, we will confirm everything and persuade no one.

    I don’t agree.  If we deliver our message in an incivil fashion, and get some low-information-voters’ attention, they won’t be noticing the incivil delivery — they’re used to that — they’ll be noticing a message that doesn’t normally get through to them.  The only lefties who’ll react as you suggest are the true believers who are already paying attention.  Those true believers are exploding in infantile fury these days because Trump is reaching the LIVs that the left depends on.

    Calling Planned Parenthood and its lefty allies baby killers may be incivil, but it breaks through the lefty newspeak to hit people with a truth obvious to any who’ve looked at an ultrasound.

    Calling AntiFa and BLM and their lefty allies terrorists may be uncivil, but those activists are using actual violence to suppress conservative voices.  They are terrorists, and civility towards them and their allies is undeserved.

    Calling Social Justice Warriors special snowflakes may be demeaning, but those folk are using blacklisting, doxxing, and economic warfare to suppress conservative voices and persecute traditional religious believers.  They’ll get no civility from me.

    • #40
  11. Kevin Schulte Member
    Kevin Schulte
    @KevinSchulte

    Kimberly Engle (View Comment):
    For what does it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul.

    What you are advocating here seems to be logical on the surface. But it is a trap. If you go down this road, it will change you into something you won’t like.

    I am a Christian. Many of the Ricochet members profess to be as well. That means you follow Christ. He didn’t believe it was necessary to gain power by going into the gutter.

    Neither do I.

    I agree with you on the merits concerning personal conduct of a Christian. However we would never have fought the revolutionary war with strict adherence to principles like this. Just a thought. There are two Kingdoms. God’s and man’s.

    Also Christians are only responsible for there own conduct. We are also a small minority in the nation and a slightly larger minority in the Republican party. My sensibilities are not going to get offended if non Christians that want the same constitutional Gov that I want fight fire with fire, as long as they do it legally. Politics is a secular activity to determine what kind of secular Gov we will have. The aggressor (dems) set’s the terms.

    • #41
  12. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    James Lileks (View Comment):
    I still believe that you have to convert the middle,

    I’m not so sure the middle is into conversion.  Those that are really in the middle are more spectators, and this is where it matters which side is having the most fun.  They want to go along with the fun.   But they won’t be converted.

    This would be a good hypothesis for the  folks at Yale’s Cultural Cognitition laboratory to test.

    • #42
  13. Martel Inactive
    Martel
    @Martel

    Kimberly Engle (View Comment):
    For what does it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul.

    What you are advocating here seems to be logical on the surface. But it is a trap. If you go down this road, it will change you into something you won’t like.

    I am a Christian. Many of the Ricochet members profess to be as well. That means you follow Christ. He didn’t believe it was necessary to gain power by going into the gutter.

    Neither do I.

    Christ was gentle to those in pain or who had sincere questions for him.

    But for those opposed to Him, who tried to trick or Him?  In such cases He thoroughly humiliated them.  He overtly compared the Pharisees unfavorably next to society’s supposed dredges, gave no quarter or compromise, and even ran around like a wild man overturning tables with a whip.

    I find it hard to believe that the God of Joshua advocates surrendering our religious freedom and the lives of the unborn on the altar of niceness.  Nor do I believe that He who came not to bring peace but a sword wants us to hold back from hurting people’s feelings when doing so is necessary to preserve the lives of freedom and prosperity for those who come after us.

    When my own dignity is at stake I strive to turn the other cheek, but when my God of Truth is under assault I feel no such compunction.

    In parallel, it is written that for he who spills man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.  Would it not follow that those who thrive on slander might not be exempt from slander?  How can we follow His mandate to be merciful when we’ve no power to refrain from using?  How can we be peacemakers when our weakness inspires attack?  I’m instructed to love my enemies, but should I not follow Christ’s other example of making those who mock His Truth come across as utter fools?  I forgive my adversaries and pray for them, but I will not let them wreck this great blessing of a nation without a fight.

    • #43
  14. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Kimberly Engle (View Comment):
    …..

    I am a Christian. Many of the Ricochet members profess to be as well. That means you follow Christ. He didn’t believe it was necessary to gain power by going into the gutter.

    Neither do I.

    Jesus didn’t say much about power one way or another, except perhaps to say such things won’t get you through the eye of the needle. I don’t remember Him talking about the gutter or politics.

    • #44
  15. Martel Inactive
    Martel
    @Martel

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Kimberly Engle (View Comment):
    …..

    I am a Christian. Many of the Ricochet members profess to be as well. That means you follow Christ. He didn’t believe it was necessary to gain power by going into the gutter.

    Neither do I.

    Jesus didn’t say much about power one way or another, except perhaps to say such things won’t get you through the eye of the needle. I don’t remember Him talking about the gutter or politics.

    Also, whether or not “going into the gutter” is the Christian course of action isn’t the question of the moment.  We’re already in the gutter whether we like it or not.  Whether it’s because of our weakness or our nobility, we let the Left drag us into it by allowing them to set the frame of debate by gutter standards.

    The question is how do we get out of the gutter, and the only way we’ll ever figure that out is to first admit we’re in it.

    • #45
  16. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Great, great post, Martel. Thank you for writing this.

    Lileks shows us how the NT reflexively respond. He’s worried about converting the left instead of messaging strength to the middle. The middle is where our focus should be and it is Trump’s clear strategy to pummel the leftists in full view for the middle to take note.

    • #46
  17. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    I only have time for just this post this morning, but I want to thank Susan Quinn for linking to this post. She has a new post on the main page: http://ricochet.com/442973/its-time-to-fight-back/.

    One thing I want to add is that we need to clearly identify the media as the bigger problem in the country. Dennis Prager recently tweeted that the media is a much bigger real danger to us than is Russia. I love Dennis’s clarity on these issues.

    • #47
  18. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Larry Koler (View Comment):
    I only have time for just this post this morning, but I want to thank Susan Quinn for linking to this post. She has a new post on the main page: http://ricochet.com/442973/its-time-to-fight-back/.

    One thing I want to add is that we need to clearly identify the media as the bigger problem in the country. Dennis Prager recently tweeted that the media is a much bigger real danger to us than is Russia. I love Dennis’s clarity on these issues.

    Listening to him now. He quoted @soopermexican as someone who has written criticizing the tweet.

    http://therightscoop.com/dennis-prager-tweet-on-media-defines-the-line-between-crazy-and-sane/

    • #48
  19. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Larry Koler (View Comment):
    He’s worried about converting the left instead of messaging strength to the middle.

    He talked about converting the middle, not the left.  Not that I agree with that,  of course.

    • #49
  20. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Larry Koler (View Comment):
    I only have time for just this post this morning, but I want to thank Susan Quinn for linking to this post. She has a new post on the main page: http://ricochet.com/442973/its-time-to-fight-back/.

    One thing I want to add is that we need to clearly identify the media as the bigger problem in the country. Dennis Prager recently tweeted that the media is a much bigger real danger to us than is Russia. I love Dennis’s clarity on these issues.

    Listening to him now. He quoted @soopermexican as someone who has written criticizing the tweet.

    http://therightscoop.com/dennis-prager-tweet-on-media-defines-the-line-between-crazy-and-sane/

    Well this is the battle line, isn’t it?

    • #50
  21. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Larry Koler (View Comment):
    He’s worried about converting the left instead of messaging strength to the middle.

    He talked about converting the middle, not the left. Not that I agree with that, of course.

    His first concern was to worry about the left. We shouldn’t care what they say or do. We should always be aware of the lurkers in public debates. That’s what I try to focus on here at ricochet, too. Reagan spoke to the main audience and learned to ignore the hecklers – for the most part. Trump focuses on both. Doubly effective but not many can do it.

    • #51
  22. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Trump knows that you have to fight and to do it in public.

    I love the NT complaint that boils down to: the only support that Trump has is the voters.

    • #52
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.