Stigmatizing The “Virtuous”

Donald Trump knows EXACTLY what he’s doing.

The relatively powerful have always been (and always will be) in a position to stigmatize the relatively weak.

Throughout most of America’s history, the relatively powerful have inherited their status and its associated privilege simply by being born native, white, ethnic northern European, healthy, heterosexual, economically productive, urban or suburban, and Christian (especially Protestant) men. 

As such, they have had the ability to stigmatize immigrants, people of color, the ethnically “exotic,” the sick or disabled, the homosexual, the poor, the rural, and those of non-Christian or non-religious belief systems.

The power to stigmatize goes beyond the power of shaming and has the ability to lock the stigmatized out of political, economic, and cultural relevance such that their children inherit the same privilege that they themselves inherited.

As American demographics increasingly marginalize this once ascendant group they are now beginning to experience the stigmatization and shaming for PRECISELY THOSE CHARACTERISTICS that have historically been considered virtues such as “whiteness,” masculinity, financial success, and their religious faith.

Early indicators suggest that this loss of dominance, this stigmatization of “virtue,” and the possibility of losing their political, economic, and cultural power terrifies them.

By way of example (rightly or wrongly), homophobia has been said to be based in a man’s fear that another man will treat HIM as HE treats women. One can easily extend that to the fear that blacks will treat him as whites have treated them, the fear that atheists will treat him as Christians have treated them, etc.

Donald Trump was not the first to identify this situation and seize the personal opportunity it presents to one who can be the voice of those once all powerful yet increasingly stigmatized people.

But he has been brilliant at judging the potential political, economic, and cultural power that these frightened people still possess in their decline as well as how to exploit it for his own personal political, economic, and cultural power.

He has also been the most irresponsible in the pursuit of this dark power in that he is willing to consider the destruction of the Republican Party, deeply wound America’s constitutional system of government, and damage systems that, for all their faults, have - since WWII - prevented a third world war and a global economic collapse.

Asking the Right Question

Asking the Right Question

18 I said in my heart with regard to human beings that God is testing them to show that they are but animals. 19 For the fate of humans and the fate of animals is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and humans have no advantage over the animals; for all is vanity. 20 All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again.

-Ecclesiastes 3:18-20 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

“Is there a God,” is not the right question.

“Does anything we say or do ultimately matter and, if so, why?" is the right question.

Whether we ask as individuals, as societies, or as cultures spread throughout the globe and the entirety of human history, does anything we live and work and fight and die for, at the end of the cosmic day, when time and space come to an end in the heat death of the universe, will it matter that the Holocaust occurred? Or that doomed first responders entered the Twin Towers, despite the risks, in the attempt to rescue civilians? Or that I enjoy classical music, politics, religion, and - most of all - arguments?

In the end, doesn’t it all add up to nothing?

There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy. All the rest – whether or not the world has three dimensions, whether the mind has nine or twelve categories – comes afterwards. These are games; one must first answer.

-Albert Camus, “The Myth of Sisyphus”

I say it DOES ultimately matter and I use the word “God” (specifically, “God in Christ”) to answer the second part of the question regarding WHY it matters

Perhaps it can be answered adequately in other ways that do not use the “G” word - but that’s a SECONDARY issue.

And I’ll happily (even gratefully) entertain THAT secondary issue with someone who adequately addresses the PRIMARY issue.

As I see it, we BELIEVE our thoughts, feelings, speech, and actions ultimately matter.

They either DO actually matter or they merely APPEAR to actually matter.

Maybe that’s a false choice. Maybe SOME ultimately matter and SOME do not. [If so, why?]

Maybe they matter but they do not ULTIMATELY matter. [But if they don’t ULTIMATELY matter, why should they matter AT ALL?]

If they DON’T ultimately matter, then our experience of them as appearing to matter is easily explained: complex biological systems such as ourselves survive via blind, evolutionary selection because “appearing to matter” gives those who have that capacity to be - on average - more successful at passing their genetic inheritance on to the next human generation than those lacking that capacity..

If that’s the case, all of human history and biography - in fact OUR OWN autobiography - is, despite appearance, nothing more than part of the software operating our biological system in the same way that instincts operate the biological system of a rabbit.

It has no significance beyond that.

But at least, thanks to evolutionary biology, we understand why. :-)

But if our thoughts, feelings, speech, and actions DO ultimately matter, then from where does that “mattering” come?

Possibly values (things that “matter”) can be bootstrapped into being in a completely naturalistic system but, until I see the argument, it seems to me that naturalism can only explain why things APPEAR to ultimately matter - not why they actually DO ultimately matter.

So it seems that if one believes the human experience across the ages ACTUALLY matters (that is, it is ACTUALLY and positively meaningful, valuable, and purposeful) than that “mattering” MUST originate from something transcending naturalism.

I call that “something” God in Christ (for reasons beyond the scope of this essay) but I’m certainly willing to entertain discussions regarding other “somethings.”

But if one DOESN’T believe that human experience ACTUALLY matters, but only APPEARS to matter, then one CANNOT EVEN MEANINGFULLY POSE THE QUESTION.

Because the question, as well as ANY POSSIBLE answer to the question, along with all other elements of the human experience, does not ultimately matter.

References

THE MYTH OF SISYPHUS (Spark Notes)

Albert Camus and the Myth of Sisyphus (Svenja Schrahé | 2011; Albert Camus Society)

Time to Decide: What Does It Mean to be an American Christian?

For those concerned by the drift of my recent posts, no. I am not unhinged. 

(But thank you for asking. :-) )

Still, Facebook friends who tire of anti-Trump rants may wish to bail on me, at least between now and November.

For I will continue to trash Donald Trump and his CORE supporters (as compared to his confused peripheral supporter who support him DESPITE his racism rather than BECAUSE of it) because, apart from his horrific foreign and domestic policy proposals (if they even rise to coherent policies), I first and foremost consider him a grave threat to America's Constitution.

I am also going to work and contribute, to the very limited best of my ability, to have Hillary Clinton elected to the office of President of the United States.

I DO THAT ON HER MERITS.

Had the Republicans nominated anyone OTHER than Trump - even Ted Cruz - I would have considered THEM on their merits before deciding between them and Hillary. (I suspect the consideration time would have been relatively brief, but it would have occurred.) 

BUT THE TRUMP threat is separate from and goes well beyond any question of relative qualification between him and ANY of the candidates, Republican or Democrat, who ran for the office.

I WILL DO ANYTHING LEGAL to prevent him from being elected. In fact, I advise folks NOT to disrupt his rallies or physically menace or assault his supporters AS THAT WILL HELP ELECT HIM.

IF he's elected, I will hold my breath and give him the benefit of the doubt (as that's the only option I have).

But if he actually begins ACTING on the crazy shit he's saying, it's time for me, at least, to consider active, non-violent, civil disobedience and non-cooperation.

It will become time to immerse myself in the Bible and the central core of 4,000 years of Judeo-Christian tradition and teaching.

Why Give a Damn?

In a world where all human meaning, value, and purpose - as well as all biological life itself - ends in death, do the events in my life (or any life at all) ultimately matter to the extent that I should responsibly attempt to influence them?

In short, should I - should ANYONE - give a damn about anything?

And, if so, why?

It seems that whatever one’s philosophical or theological commitments might be, well formulated or not, people of all times and cultures act AS IF they matter.

That being the case, either the events of life DO matter or they DO NOT matter and we must live with the NECESSARY DELUSION that they DO matter.

We must live with the delusion because believing that our lives matter is merely part of the operating system of a self-evolving, self-organizing network of systems controlling a biological machine, which survives and passes on its subtly and randomly mutated genetic sequence to its next generation machine.

All to no apparent or ultimate end.

A good shorthand definition of knowledge is that knowledge is JUSTIFIED, TRUE, BELIEF.

If I say I KNOW that the earth orbits the sun, I’m implying that I BELIEVE the earth orbits the sun, it is TRUE that the earth orbits the sun, and I have a sound JUSTIFICATION for believing the earth orbits the sun.

The justification that I REALLY know what I claim to know because God revealed to me in a dream or I came to the belief through a delightful encounter with a certain species of mushrooms does not pass the “justification” criteria.

So, is our near-universal, common, BELIEF in the significance (or, more rarely, insignificance) of life JUSTIFIED through either deductive or inductive reason and evidence?

Can it rise to the level of KNOWLEDGE?

Ruminating... does it matter?

Simple Definition of ruminate
: to think carefully and deeply about something
of an animal : to bring up and chew again what has already been chewed and swallowed

NOT suicidal. :-) Just chewing cud, theologically speaking. :-) 

Does my life - my beliefs, my speech, my actions, my relationships, my work, etc. - matter?

Does anyone’s life - whether as individuals, families, organizations, institutions, nations - matter?

Does life itself - from primitive life on earth and any other life-capable planets - matter?

Does the universe - the totality of time and space - matter?

If any or all of these can be said to matter, to whom do they matter?

And then - regarding the one to whom it matters - does it matter that it matters to them?
And if it DOES matter that it matters to them, does THAT matter?

[Hey, I spent three years of my life and a significant amount of money learning how to ask the right questions so… it matters. To me anyway. But, do *I* matter? And so it goes. :-) ]

Definition of RUMINATE (Merriam-Webster)