Wednesday, May 22, 2013
The Left and Animated Objects
For the Left, there is no guilt it appears, because it is objects which do the actual harm. It is guns which kill, not psychos; now it is the tax code which is tyrannical, not the human operatives who make the decisions. It would be interesting to see how they interpret a gun walking into the IRS shop and shooting the tax code.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It seems to be a very common tactic - not sure if the Left has the market cornered on it - to reduce the discussion to "things" rather than people (because things cannot be held accountable) and then attempt to control the "thing", whatever it may be.
The trouble we have with the Left, as such, is that they attempt to reduce Men to the category of "things" and then dispose or control them in the same fashion. Thus the strong desire on their part to parse a human into 'merely' so many experiences, chemical processes, etc.
Where I have issue with this is the obvious (and necessary) exclusion of the Left from its own reduction process. If they were honest about it, they themselves would be reduced to a 'thing', no different in any way from other animals.
Of course, the obvious question - "why should I pay any particular attention to what a mere animal says" is countered by the Left with the response typical of all aspiring controllers - "because I have a [gun/law/drug/wad of political mud] pointed at your head".
They are always assumed to be exempt from their own rulings on the presence (or absence) of God, of objective morality, or indeed, any power that does not come from the barrel of a gun.
It's this logical bootstrapping that rubs my rhubarb. Really? Just because you say so? Well, the gun at my head IS a convincing argument that 2+2=5. Apparently Orwell was spot-on. Holding up four fingers and calling it 'five' is the preferred tactic. Always has been.
And so with this apparent silliness with objects assuming agency all on their own. As if they were people. Because the real thrust is to get the two to be interchangeable in the reader's mind - and then silently suggest that the opposite is also true... that people are nothing more than objects. And of course, as objects, we don't have to exercise charity, humility or pity towards them. They are merely things.
I submit this is another in the ongoing game of lingual subversion so clearly outlined in 1984 and other places.
Post a Comment