Everyday we’re being
asked told to believe obvious fallacies in government, science, and society, and I’m feeling macroaggressed. These lies are intentional. Political and social lies all told repeatedly and designed to make us doubt reality and appeal to some earthly authority for clarity. The liars are defended, apologized for, accepted as candidates for the highest office in the world in some cases, and looked to for guidance in others because of current shared interests.
Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch were only chatting about the grandkids during their chance encounter.
(Nothing dubious about the husband of the Democrat presidential nominee meeting with the head of the department investigating the wife for criminal negligence.)
Islam has nothing to do with Jihadism.
(That’s like Hindi or something.)
Hillary’s personal server was just [insert whatever innocuous excuse currently being ridden].
(Not for avoiding accountability.)
Trump is a successful businessman who doesn’t take crap from the media.
(Not an attention-seeking, pretentious blowhard.)
Men can become women and women can become men.
(Men and women are the same anyways. [sarcasm font])
Cultural appropriation is a microaggression.
(Not a celebration of a culture.)
Police officers are inherently racist.
Unborn babies are not people.
(Pay no attention to that science behind the curtain.)
The US is a democracy and pluralities are the will of the people.
(Because groups of people are always smarter than individuals. [sarcasm font])
If these lies, ranging from obnoxious to enraging, are indeed intended to make us doubt our personal understanding of reality, truth, and acceptable behavior, then where do we go for such things? There is much power to be gained in setting the parameters of acceptability. And the list of pearl-clutching microaggressions grows every day.
Hearing and reading the thoughts and opinions of others made in good faith is something I enjoy because it forces me to consider the strengths and weaknesses of my own. “In good faith” is the key here. And it’s something you ought to decide for yourself without abdicating your responsibility of discernment to another.
That having been said, I left out the most painful lie:
The rule of law is equally applied and justice is blind.
(Just because we’re not recommending charges for Hillary, doesn’t mean we wouldn’t recommend charges for others.)
Do any of the other lies matter if we can’t count on equal protection under the law? No, because truth will be relative.
We have officially looked the other way as a crony of the ruling class blatantly broke the law and will not only go uncharged, but also continue her campaign unapologetically. Others are already asking for the same leniency she was given. This is the sort of corruption and collusion that brought us Bernie and Trump not to mention exactly what George Washington warned about in his farewell address.
But hey! Look over here! The news cycle keeps on keepin’ on. Huge stories easily bury boring stories, and who else is tired of hearing about her “damn emails”? The rash of shootings of and by the police will rightly dominate the waves, and we’ll see who, if anyone, is part of the same protected class as Hillary Clinton. Because now we have proof that it exists when it was, at best, tongue-in-cheek before. Will the officers involved in shooting black men will be punished to the full extent of the law? Will the murderers or attempted murderers who shot officers in Dallas, Tennessee, Missouri, and Georgia will be punished to the full extent of the law? The answers to those questions seem pretty cut and dried, right? But what role will the court of public opinion play in those decisions? Who is above the law, who is below it, and who gets to decide? Therein lies the problem with nations of men and not laws.
Trust your judgement, folks. There are many yarns to be spun.