Since we are in the thick of an election cycle, culminating in the elections just around the corner. We are bombarded with rhetoric flying in every direction and candidates making names for themselves by stirring up turmoil. As potential voters we eye what is happening, in confusion, anger, and perplexed by behavior, which at any other time, would be verboten. Yet it seems, people on both sides of the political aisle, make concessions about behavior if there is a chance their candidate will win and they will retain some measure of “rightness” or “power” in this pit of a society which thrives on direct control or at least the perception of influence. The problem with a pit is, if it’s deep enough the light never seems to touch the bottom shrouding everything in darkness, and this is a lot like truth, never penetrating the irascible darkness which threatens to consume us when we embrace the unassailable notion, dictating our conscious perception is all we need to determine truth, and not an objective truth given to us only by God. Personally, I’ve watched candidates and strained to comprehend the pitiful digs and insults they give to one another, the blatant lying achieved through either their list of achievements or vilifying the other candidate’s record on key issues or just life in general. I’ve seen grown men and women resorting to childish behavior because they can taste the authority, it’s at their fingertips and they will do almost anything, from insults to actions of lawlessness. They do this, all the while never realizing they lose a little each time they sink to achieve this goal. Like taking one more step away from goodness, in the hopes they won’t ever get to far to come back easily if needed. A politician motto, leaning over the line isn’t stepping over the line. However, a little bit of confidence is seemingly eroded by my own estimates, every time this happens. As a culture and modern society, we find ourselves willing to bargain everything for little or nothing in return. People want answers, people want their candidate to follow their rhetoric, and people want to know why their candidate didn’t do everything they wanted as if the candidate they voted for works directly for them. Aside from the general outlook of politicians at the moment (corrupt, lying, opportunists, rhetoric ninjas, public servants), I can’t imagine why anyone would want to face a life of scrutiny, threatening to burn one’s career down at the whiff of impropriety. The rhetoric in our culture today is taking a hypocrisy of all things and elevating this poor subjectivity of life to a new level. So, rhetorically speaking, my questions will never be answered, because I’m relying on a set of subjective principles to seek truth, and without the objective truth, without God, as Dostoevsky stated, “Everything is permissible”. This is where we are headed with our rhetoric and the demand to cling to hypocrisy. The removal of God in daily life, so we can embrace the permissibility of whatever we desire, hedonism like the days of Rome, and this all begins with people taking control who desire supremacy.
The desire of control is a very real thing, we’ve broken it down to stories of corrupt people who were caught, or platitudes which resemble something of a pitiful notion of wisdom to exemplify the removal of power from those perceived as despots. This is why, as a society, we’ve created a rule of law. The law is meant for everyone, but especially for those seeking elevation to corrupt, to hurt another by means of physical detriment, and to diminish the rights of others. There is the control which comes from stealing, and currently theft is a big business, when it comes to cyber related crimes. There is the influence of suggestion, a company can suggest something to consumers, and the influence they wield when their product is marketable is measured by the dollars and cents flowing in and out of commerce each day. At the end of all the scenarios is how this ambition and influence is regulated, from acceptance within standards like a company selling a product but a product which is safe, to incarceration of those individuals who desired to control everything at the cost of pain to others. Every single person seeking ambition is bound at one point or another to an undeniable truth, there are persons at the end of the line determining what the influence means and how it is used. Those people are politicians, duly elected officials, appointed to positions of influence with a constituency willing to fire them at the very next election if their exhibition of authority is lacking. On its surface, this is a fair process, designed to empower the republic with democratic processes, thusly allowing the people of society to hold the ace card, true dominion.
The clout people yield is immense, by direct or indirect means, the people of our society control the direction our society is driven. A relatively new concept as it pertains to the history of the world, especially when there are still nations who seek a rule either through means of an aristocracy or a diluted socialistic endeavors. At any rate, there will always be people who desire what other people have to be their own, and in this ambitious effort, many people will suffer. The most common people we’ve seen attempt this lofty goal would be Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot. People who spread and ideology so damning and detrimental to life, the result being genocidal regimes with wide ranging abuses bent on the destruction of personal freedom. The corruption of situation is real, and we all face it daily in the choices we make and the people we interact with. The real focus isn’t about what influence we wield, but what we’re willing to give to another in a pursuit of truth.
The reality about ruling is, truth is power. I once had a friend tell me I was a know it all, I won’t lie, it hurt a little, I was taken aback and immediately went on the defensive about her assertion. I fully believed I was being helpful, but her perception didn’t find help, it found arrogance and ambition. Subtly, she saw the need for me to control the conversation with her, the need to have the command of the conversation at my will rather than all of the participants as it should be. When she could tell her words struck a nerve, she asked me if I was upset at what she just said. I of course lied and said, “No, I’m fine”, but as the conversations began to erode and disintegrate, I asked why she said what she did. She said, she felt I needed to know, perhaps I could tone down the need to appear all knowing. Again, her words sliced at me, and I was beginning to feel an anger well up in me. I told her, I didn’t agree with what she had to say, and her indifference indicated to me, what I had to say in defense was not worth her time. Swallowing my pride, I told her, her words hurt and I didn’t like feeling that way. She then said something to me, that although we take as a platitude, I’m sure we experience a feeling like this all the time. She said, “The truth hurts”, those three words changed everything. The desire for control of a conversation led to an objective perception a truth will hurt if we allow our desire for control to get in the way. This is all I mean, look back at those times when your desire to control a situation was made apparent to you, and your personal rhetoric attempted to stop what was being accused, but in the end you couldn’t deny the truth and its mark on the destruction of your rhetoric. This destruction assumes to rip out of you what was never meant to be there in the first place. The truth reflects the brightest of lights on those who’ve sat in darkness, and the longer they allowed darkness to consume them, the more painful it is when they walk in the light. Can’t you remember a time when walking out of a darkly lit movie theater or restaurant, caused your eyes to seer with pain until you could adjust to the blinding brightness of your changing paradigm (i.e. dark theater to sunny parking lot)?
Rhetoric, is our attempt to avoid this light, all the while presenting a paradigm which seems innocent even truthful. It is an attempt to simplify the complex, to explain the unexplainable as a matter of course. Take for instance the argument of abortion. For people on the pro-abortion side of the fence, they utilize an ideology and rhetoric of choice as a means for measure in the destruction of life. As the voice their rhetoric about choice, they demand capitulation of those posed with the rhetorical question of choice. If you are not with them, then you are against them, and then all bets are off on behavior and even violence as we’ve seen over the last few years. Their need for influence to give a perception of choice becomes simplified to one word, and without asking, people follow because deceptively it seems right. However, objectively, one question should be asked, “Where is the line with choice?” Where is it safe to assume the rhetoric won’t go? For instance, objectively speaking, all life is precious and shall be conserved and protected at all costs. This is reflective in the vast majority of laws on one level or another, but not in the debate for life over one’s choices. Their choice was distinctly exhibited in the actions to create life and subsequently the truth of their decision became evident. Objectivity, for some, is replaced with a desire to attain an influence of sorts over perception of rightness. Those who wish to attain this influence, have in their own way, become a politician, an interpreter of right and wrong for others. Those who desire the objective truth, love as it were, find an emptiness in the control or desire of control and wish it not for the destruction of will, but instead for the preservation of life which in its own natural way embraces will.
In some fields, testing the working apparatus to see its strength or capabilities is necessary for those individuals relying on the strength of the tool. For instance, industries utilizing gas pipes will need to know the strength of the pipe transporting the gas for pressure collapse. This will ensure they put the right sized pipe in the ground for the expected payload. The truth of putting more than was expected at a higher pressure would ensure, catastrophe leading to circumstances of death and destruction. The truth about rhetoric is the same way. If rhetoric seems right to anyone, then test it to its extreme, if it stands up to your test, find someone else’s test and determine if it can handle the scrutiny. The argument with abortion, usually falls apart with these tests against a foundation of objective morality. Without the context of morality placed upon the paradigm of choice, we see it open at imperceptive angles. Angles which if taken to their full extent, give a society pleasure, choice, and opportunity to destroy anyone or anything which threatens to usurp their position. So testing an argument can go both ways, and in this instance, we see older people who can no longer care for themselves become just a choice, people of both physical and mental diminishments become a choice, and eventually people who just disagree with our truths can become just another choice as we choose to eliminate them altogether. None of this would be possible with an embrace of a moral truth to life though, which is where the argument for choice falls apart, at least for reasonable people. When embracing a rhetoric designed for selfish pursuit of goal, we become unmoved at the notion of our pursuits, unless they become attached to us, in the inadvertent movement of subjective goals. If you’re saying to yourself at this point, “yeah, I guess that could happen, but it probably wouldn’t” think back to a time during the mid to late 20th century and realize, it has happened, and I would bet most of those people never thought it would happen to them.
Rhetorically speaking, the unnecessary need to answer such an obvious question becomes an endeavor of ludicrous proportions. The point and purpose of my writing is one, for my own purpose of thinking out those issues I struggle with, two, to point our such obvious attempts by our society to bend truth to fit the desires of the ambitious, and three, to pull out those weeds of derision in our own lives so we can be examples of truth to those we are around every day. Point two, the purpose for my words today, present a truth, we may not always be comfortable with. Take a second and think about all the items you’ve purchased since last December, and then try to make an argument against your need for material influence in your life, I think you may get half-way into it and realize, all you’re doing is justifying what is a pursuit of material need. I’ve done this very exercise, and realized, although I wasn’t motivated simply by the need to have items, I still collected like there was no tomorrow, perhaps because I was bored with life, but I think it had more to do with my own delusion of truth. I was deluding myself into thinking, I wasn’t really materially focused, but the truth was I was/still am somewhat, and this truth is a bitter pill to swallow. The truth is, it hurts when I think about how and what I could have done with the money I’ve earned over the years, I could have used it for something or someone who was in greater need than myself, but I didn’t. I pursued a clout of conscious choice to affect ends of my own desire, and when I was done, I was no more fulfilled than when I started.
If you are confronted with the truth, attack it head on, be willing to accept the fact, God isn’t worried about your embarrassment, and instead, God needs your yield, your capitulation to the truth. Embrace your embarrassment as one of those painful lessons in life. Don’t worry about maintaining the pitiful control you desire, because your belief in God means more. When someone desires to explain complication with simplicity, be cautious even when it sound right. Things are complex, because they are complex, rarely can a complex issue be properly satisfied with a simple answer, unless the answer is the objective truth. For instance, all life is important, thusly all life shall be protected, abortion on this very principle is deemed as wrong, no matter what the implication of choice is perceived as being. Your choices in life are pretty simple, right or wrong, good or bad, moral or immoral, and everything else works itself out based on the principle understanding of your choices. I hope you’re laying a foundation of truth in your life, and when it comes to the really hard decisions, rest in the fact, God holds you up, not you holding him up, so relax and rely on the objective truths set forth in life by the One True God. May God bless you and your family!!!
God is good, all the time, and all the time, God is good!!!