Evangelicals publicly refusing to take responsibility for their own beliefs should come as no newsworthy surprise, seeing as how their entire system of beliefs hangs altogether on not taking responsibility for their own lives. Whether it’s a demonic influence accepting blame for all their misgivings or the intelligent design of the ultimate daddy complex accepting credit for whenever they don’t mindfully or mindlessly fuck things up, it’s all nothing more than a defensive masquerade for ego to socially conceal itself as a mere servant, powerless to forces beyond its control. Which somehow encompasses self-control to boot.
But a concern which is emblematic of their narrow perspective though far broader in reach, is the nasty habit that is singularly the adhesive which has always held American culture together, the notion that neither words or actions must necessitate any attraction for consequences, or that consequences must only be met for those unable or unwilling to always objectively flatter the always subjective ego. Beyond the limitless confines of fantasy however, pluralism without mutuality is otherwise regarded in any other context as Dissociative identity disorder.
Indeed, what was on public display at the Capital earlier this month was nothing more than the Marxist theory of cultural hegemony in action, perpetrated obliviously by thirsty consumers. Likelihoods of an inside job aside, the many sitting politicians now claiming that they have never before challenged the whims of the President over fears for their personal safety are logically suspect, unless we are to take them as so pathetic as to feel threatened physically by an overweight dinosaur of a cartoon. More likely did these politicians feel threatened by elements from among their own constituency, which would mean admitting their own failures to rein in unsanctioned extremism, or challenging their own roles in cultivating that extremism. When the lone attribute shared by each and every ego-case is the abject inability ever to challenge itself. And to that end, the reality behind politicians never taking the opportunity to punch Trump’s lights out themselves privately or publicly really comes down to their own, individual egos refusing to acknowledge their own, individual wrongness legally or ethically. They simply will not accept the distinct reality that they have committed a wrong by any means, that their judgement was ever flawed or that ramifications for rendered harms could or should ever be traceable in such a way as to conflict with meaninglessly obligated flattery required for the continued duration of their own, individual egos.
We see that same illogical tendency for self-preservation through accountability avoidance on show in those voices still blaming the violence of the Capital on antifa, rather than on any persons sharing their own political allegiances. We see it in reactions to national news stories with the voices unwilling to accept the hard realities confirming and reconfirming how powers of law enforcement and military are no less susceptible toward corruptible influence than other powers, rather than all the more so. Opponents to anarchy generally believe that expansive authorities of statism might ever be trusted to act from a place of morality, contrary to the corrupting nature of power, yet modern anarchists themselves reflect that same blind faith in like-minded ego minding nothing but its better angels, by believing that an annulment of state-sponsored coercion would leave citizens autonomously alone enough to be free of violence, with no consideration given for who might then be liable for dealing with pedophiles, etc. In that same naive spirit, if censoring supremacists from online gated communities is somehow a lacking of equal rights, then when should these supremacists be prevented from disrupting the actual rights of others? After blood is spilled? Even in the most personal regards, when you spend 5 dollars on a comic book, rather than on baby food for the single mother down the street, you masquerade the creature comforts of your own ego as powerless servitude to forces beyond your self-control, thereby inferring you are somehow incapable of self-determination unless that self-determination flatters you or requires nothing of you.
Even on those excruciatingly rare circumstances where any American is not directly to blame for the suffering of others, when holding a capacity for lessening the suffering of others why would they ever choose not to do so? Should either words or actions under any circumstance ever necessitate an attraction for consequences, they are one and all fucked. Or at least their egos will be. Considering the pervasiveness of egocentric diva mentality’s declarations for doing what thou wilt being the whole of the law, and the popularly psychopathic, one-sided adages of might making right and ends justifying the means, this culture is overloaded with reassurances that if the egoism from villains of fantasy or reality warrant sympathetic origin stories, then you can do no wrong. So where exactly does the wrong arrive from?