For some (technically unfathomable) reason I am getting lots of (mostly favourable) comments on a post I entered in a long defunct blog of my own that I had had a go at before joining RedStateEclectic.
Funny to read a post that is five years old. My writing may have been a wee bit more laddish then; also, I may have a lesser urge to be reproachful toward the unenlightened (really?). At any rate, in large measure I remain in agreement with my former self.
As of writing these lines, Germany's most frequented DE>EN - EN>DE
on-line-dictionary reveals uncertainty as to the meaning of the term
Is this a case of the confused finding it difficult to sort out their confusion? I suspect so. I harbour the presumption that muddled thinking is essential to upholding what a vast number of people in Germany consider their dearest believes. The ever-present intimidation of "political correctness" both expresses and enforces "intellectual" commitments concocted from inconsistency, cowardice and opportunism.
Let me give you an example of how doublethink serves to fend off the moral overload people are constantly exposed to these days:
Recently, a senior civil servant told me that he had applied for a new job. He regarded himself the best candidate for the position but was almost certain he would not be considered because the second best applicant would likely be favoured on the grounds of being a woman. He thought this unjust. When I challenged him to protest the probable decision, he switched to a different position, underwriting the need for positive discrimination (affirmative action) on behalf of women.
The implications of the underlying theory which he espoused startled me: The first assumption was that there is a uniform view as to the station women deserve in our time. The second assumption was that this standard of where women should have arrived at in our days has been anticipated by all men in human history, only to be studiously violated by them until very recently. The third assumption was that the male conspiracy behind the suppression of women established a guilt among contemporary men and an obligation for them to make good in terms of positive discrimination favouring women.
In the course of our discussion, he remained trapped in doublethink, firmly believing both that it was not right to pass the best candidate over and that such injustice assumed the quality of just behaviour when it came to restoring women's rightful station in contemporary life.
Eventually tired of the debate, he told me that the issue was of little import as the promotion would involve only a negligible pay rise and that his present position required only one or two days effective work per week and thus left much leeway for other activities to satisfy his needs.
Incidentally, the man's job is to define what our pupils are to be taught.
A hallmark of our time, assiduously promoted in the educational system and asserted by a haggling variant of democracy, is the replacement of consistent principles of justice by a calculus of popularity ("but that is what everyone thinks") and expediency ("why, I can/can't get away with it"). The idea that justice rests on consistent principles gives way to a notion of justice based on the enforcement of organized interests.
Once special interests are fortified by a majority, the totalitarian concept of democracy (i.e. the belief in the unconstrained power of a majority) guarantees that these special interests define justice - arbitrarily, of course.
Democracy as we know it, i.e. the philosophy holding that political power defines justice, overrides consistency and, thus, creates moral overload and the need for doublethink.
Main Entry: dou·ble·think
: a simultaneous belief in two contradictory ideas