Friday, March 15, 2013

Righteous Indignation?

Adamantia: An annoying number of people seem to believe that the spirit of more liberal social practices is a 'loosening up' not just of the body but also of the mind. Yet the willingness to do anything does not necessarily equate to the willingness to think anything. The body runs free while the mind remains caged, locked into a singular worldview. The way these people behave reeks of conformity. What liberalism is this that sees no other mindset than its own? It seeks to oppress, not challenge opposing thought and in doing so acts against the principles it preaches.

Reflectia: But they think and promote this in good faith, to varying degrees of consciousness. Does that not mitigate? Or perhaps 'mitigate' is the wrong word - it implies they commit a crime, albeit informed by good intent. But perhaps that disqualifies it from being a true crime altogether. Whereupon we lose the jurisdiction to judge it.

Adamantia: But perhaps we assume a simplicity of mind on their part. Can we accuse other minds, nay souls, of failing to consider what we consider even now? What then is the rationale for this hubris? Regardless, do they think that we will so easily bend against principle or 'natural inclination' to peer pressure? Us, steel tested in fire is not easily intimidated and we should take pride in this brand of stubbornness born from courage not foolhardiness. One may drink or dance to relax - we have no objection to people seeking pleasure or solace from life in their own ways - but I take issue with juvenile exercise of social impetus hoping to bind all in a way which serves only to make oneself feel good about the unity of the community in a single set of social norms and nothing more. In the same vein I look down on those who, in a naked hunger for approval, bend willingly to the crowd.

Reflectia: It is true that we may not assume a simplicity of mind among all men. That would be deepest hubris. And speaking of hubris, it may be too prideful to think of ourselves as steel. We have been tested, but perhaps not by the hottest flames. Yet it is right that steel not yield to lesser fires than had forged it - we can allow ourselves that much pride. It is interesting that we mention social impetus. At the risk of recognizing ourselves as hypocrites, do we not deploy the same sort of social compulsion to achieve our own short-term ends? We act this way toward people we swore to die for, no less.

Adamantia: A fair point. Let us dwell on that hypocrisy-induced shame, lest we commit it once again. I admit, the mere thought of this dishonor makes me lose stomach for righteous anger. Perhaps no indignation can be righteous.

Reflectia: But are we still to have an opinion on social pressure? How do we make a stand against this conformity we are perhaps rightly opposed to without making a judgment against the unwitting oppressors? Maybe it is better and more courageous to judge oneself and others harshly and equally. But can we expect either ourselves or others to be able to live up to such standards? Are such unenforceable standards worth pursuing? Yet if the alternative is to stand-by and let the oppression roll over others and oneself, how can that be just?  

Adamantia: We know not!

1 comment:

Demel said...