The “Middle Ground” Is Empty
November 10, 2010 by Mike P
People often tell me that I”m too extreme. They tell me that I need to
look at the other side of the issue. Often times people tell me that I
ought to find some “middle ground” from which I can negotiate and
compromise with others. This is is all very conventional and sounds very
nice, but quite often it is actually a load of crap and a form of bullying.
People tend to get nervous and upset when you take an absolute moral
stand on something. They do not like moral certainty, and they
particularly do not like it when it can be backed up with logic and
evidence. People tend to be more comfortable with certainty when it is
religious in nature. If someone is certain about some kind of
unprovable abstract absolute like god, sin or the apocalypse they can
be dismissed as crazy. Alternatively they can be agreed with by someone
else that shares their crazy belief system or they can be manipulated by
charismatic demagogues. Whichever route you go down, this kind of
fundamentalist certainty is something people are used to and comfortable
with.
Recently a group of liberals led by government comedian John Stewart
held a rally in Washington DC called “The Rally to Restore Sanity” to
oppose this sort of fundamentalist certainty and demagoguery. Its
interesting that this rally was aimed primarily at the “insanity” of the
political opponents of liberals, not the insanity of the people that
claim to be the state. Apparently these liberals don’t like other
people criticizing the state and they see this as insane. Its
interesting that they don’t seem to have any complaints about the
insanity and extremism of their own Nobel Peace Prize winning leader who
commands a robot drone army and destroys villages of impoverished
peasants. This seems pretty extreme and insane to me. In fact, I have a
hard time coming up with anything in today’s world that is more insane.
It seems that if people are looking to restore sanity, that may be a
good place to start. But of course that is not what these liberals want.
Restoring sanity is just code for restoring relativistic morals and not
questioning the state.
Moral certainty that can be proven with logic and evidence will always
make relativists like John Stewart and the liberals that attended his
rally uncomfortable. They will usually try to lump it in with religious
fundamentalism and attack you with sarcasm and snarkiness. This rally
was basically a bunch of liberals getting together to snark at
conservatives and libertarians. Not that tea-party style conservatives
and libertarians necessarily should be defended, but if we are going to
attack them we should do it with reasoned arguments, not snarks, sarcasm
and moral relativism.
I’ve had a lot of arguments with liberals that have ended by “agreeing
to disagree.” The liberal usually sees this as a compromise. In fact it
is not. Agreeing to peacefully end the conversation and not initiate
violence against each other is in fact the
libertarian/voluntaryist/anarchist solution. The liberal, by agreeing to
disagree, is in fact embracing the position I was arguing for. The
people that claim to be the state do not agree to disagree. They want me
to pay tribute (taxes) to them. They may allow me to disagree in my mind
that I should have to pay taxes, but they will initiate violence against
me if I do not pony up the cash. So the state actually does not
compromise no matter what liberal relativists may think or wish. You
cannot agree to disagree with others and support the state without
falling into contradiction.
When someone tells you that you are being too extreme, or that you need
to find the middle ground and compromise, what are they really saying?
Usually they are trying to get you to shut up because you are making
them uncomfortable.
If we are talking about taxation, or pretty much anything the state
does, the issue is actually clear cut. Taxation is immoral because it
requires the initiation of force. Period. This is not an issue where
there are grey areas. Where exactly would the middle ground lie here?
How could you compromise on this? It would be like compromising and
finding “middle ground” with someone that wants to punch you in the
face. True, the two positions “You want to punch me in the face” and “I
do not want to be punched in the face” are two extreme sides of an
issue. But where exactly is the middle ground here, and what would be
the virtue in finding that middle ground? A mild slap perhaps? This is
not even middle ground because violence is still being initiated. In
this case the side of virtue lies with one extreme and with the moral
certainty that it is wrong to punch another person in the face.
Sure there are some areas where compromise and the middle ground are
appropriate, but these are areas of preference, like where to go to
dinner, what movie to watch or what to do over the weekend. These are
not clear cut moral issues, but rather areas of preference where you
really do need to negotiate with the people in your life. When it comes
to clear cut moral issues like taxation, war, and statism the virtue is
in the extreme and the middle ground is empty. Don’t compromise with
people that want to punch you in the face.
http://theemptiness.info/2010/11/the-middle-ground-is-empty/
--
*Our courts will never be fair and just again until we force lawyers and
judges to follow their own rules. Do not allow yourself to be ruled by
tyrants. Learn how to control corrupt judges and crooked lawyers
<http://www.jurisdictionary.com?refercode=CG0004> so you can get
Justice! Learn to litigate: Buy and Study JURISDICTIONARY
<http://www.jurisdictionary.com?refercode=CG0004>*
*I Refuse To Comply With The Unconstitutional Demands Of The Federal
Government*
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
*"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they
are free."
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe*
*Government is only as strong as those who allow themselves to be
governed are weak.*
*"We have plenty of rights in this country, provided you don't get
caught exercising them." - Terry Mitchell
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free it expects something that
cannot be."
- Thomas Jefferson***
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
