Sunday, July 28, 2019

You Can't Force People to Embrace You

I've always been an oddity. I rock sometimes when I'm thinking or I'm trying to relax; I'm extremely sensitive to sound and touch; I find it difficult to mingle in a crowd; and I'm prone to developing almost single-minded obsessions with things that catch my fancy (Iron Man blogging, anyone?). Consequently, I've never been popular.

When I was in junior high, this disturbed me greatly -- the whole lack of popularity thing, I mean. So I started reading Seventeen in an attempt to crack the girl code. I begged my parents to buy me clothes that were "cool" in 1991-1992 (oh, God, don't ask!). I even got a perm and tried makeup (never again!). But none of these efforts cured the awkward sense of difference. It took high school and a small group of weirdo friends for me to finally settle into my true identity.

That's what everyone needs, I think: at least one friendship with someone who will take you as you are. It's in an intimate relationship like this that you will find the validation every human craves.

You will not find that validation in the courthouse or the halls of government no matter how much you scream for it.

What you can reasonably expect from the government is a promise to leave you be. Though my inner Christian believes certain lifestyles are questionable at best and deeply damaging to the soul at worst, my inner libertarian has no desire to legally interfere with the decisions of other grown adults because said inner libertarian believes the government is not, ultimately, an instrument of peaceful persuasion.

Indeed, any time you're tempted to petition the government to step in on a cultural or philosophical dispute, you should always ask yourself if you're willing to get what you want through violence.

Some people may scoff at this. "The government can always impose a fee. That's hardly 'violence'." Oh? And what if I neglect to pay this fee? Here come the cops with the guns.

Those cops are sometimes needed to safeguard our rights to life, liberty, and property. But we should be excruciatingly careful in distinguishing between situations in which the threat of violent enforcement is appropriate and situations in which that threat is out-of-bounds.

So let's come back to our aforementioned fundamental need for validation. There are many disturbed individuals out there who've decided they will not be happy unless the entire world is forced through government diktat to affirm their identities. I recognize - and on some level empathize with - the root lack that animates this sort of activism. That doesn't change the fact that it's evil.

It's evil to bully people into professing "your truth".

And furthermore, it's ineffective. Oh, sure: if you succeed in getting a law passed that demands that, say, aestheticians wax your balls or else, most people will swallow their discomfort and do it because most people aren't contrary enough to enjoy confrontation. But what you'll get from this are mere ritualized displays of acquiescence, not the genuine affirmation and love you seek. Beneath the surface, people will resent the hell out of you - legitimately - for your selfish imposition. No minds will actually be changed.

Put down the club and get yourself a pal -- someone who will wrap you in tender loving care. Only then will you actually feel comfortable in your own skin.

12 comments:

  1. "Though my inner Christian believes certain lifestyles are questionable at best and deeply damaging to the soul at worst, my inner libertarian has no desire to legally interfere with the decisions of other grown adults because said inner libertarian believes the government is not, ultimately, an instrument of peaceful persuasion."

    That paragraph is pretty much a perfect explanation of my outlook on life.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You say we should not have legal protections for any group you dislike. What about groups you like? For example, should women be allowed in the workplace? After all the only reason (your words) a group wants legal protection is to make pals. Women can make pals elsewhere. What about Christians? Why should they be allowed to work or indeed to be safe from bullying? They can make pals and not worry about income or safety.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Straw-man arguments, and you are misstating the words of the writer. Government redress has always been available to correct remarkable social, if not moral, inequalities, from slavery to women's right to vote.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. I went on a long pre-caffeine tear that didn't even culminate in the point I wanted to make - but fortunately Will Cate did make that point.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  3. Loved this. Had to link - https://bastionofliberty.blogspot.com/2019/07/beatles-reference.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. "But what you'll get from this are mere ritualized displays of acquiescence, not the genuine affirmation and love you seek."

    Very true. The disturbing problem is, once somebody's angry enough about having been unjustly (in their view) denied the latter, they are often all too willing to settle for the former.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with you on the whole, but I have to disagree. Minds do get changed to a large extent. Most people follow the crowd and pick up on what they think is moral. They can be manipulated.

    I think it involves a little more than government, but given enough time you'll have plenty of people parroting the party line.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree with the thesis, but disagree with the underlying "don't legislate morality". I have never understood this because OF COURSE we legislate morality. For example, we have a Judeo-Christian morality in our laws about our definitions of murder, rape, and theft. These are moral judgments whether we admit it or not. Your point is we need to make tradeoffs and balance the two conflicting sides you point out: morality and liberty.

    The biggest threat, and we are really seeing the fruits of this, is what is taught in public schools. Culture is propagated through education.

    ReplyDelete
  7. While you can certainly use the law (government) to solve problems the law (such as Jim Crow) created. What you can't do is pass a law to change what's in a person's heart. If you try to use the law to do that, all you will get is resentment. Yes folks will parrot the party line for a while, but they'll be working behind the scenes to undermine the law as they do it. It's called backlash, and it isn't pretty.

    ReplyDelete