I heard about this article, The Democrats May Not Be Able to Concede (theatlantic.com), on a Conservative radio show this morning. The talk show hosts thought it full of unintended humor, and they are right.
Remember the big stink in the presidential debates of 2016. Horrors!
(CNN) Donald Trump on Wednesday refused to say he would accept the result of the presidential election if he loses to Hillary Clinton, raising the possibility of an extraordinary departure from principles that have underpinned American democracy for more than two centuries.
“I will look at it at the time,” Trump said when asked during the final presidential debate whether he would concede if he loses on November 8, following his claims that the election is “rigged” against him.
He added: “I will keep you in suspense.” (continued here (cnn.com))
What happened after Trump won? Ever since then Democrats have concocted one conspiracy theory after another — including trying to frame Trump of committing treason — in order to drive Trump from office.
Well, the author, Shadi Hamid, of The Democrats May Not Be Able to Concede admits the obvious, Democrats have never been able to accept the results of the 2016 election. Then he adds this paragraph.
A loss by Joe Biden under these circumstances is the worst case not because Trump will destroy America (he can’t), but because it is the outcome most likely to undermine faith in democracy, resulting in more of the social unrest and street battles that cities including Portland, Oregon, and Seattle have seen in recent months. For this reason, strictly law-and-order Republicans who have responded in dismay to scenes of rioting and looting have an interest in Biden winning—even if they could never bring themselves to vote for him. (from here)
Effectively, Hamid wants Republicans to give up because Democrats cannot control their feelings. Of course, he thinks Democrats are justified in their feelings, that the feelings of his party are special, but this is still a weird way to think, or is it? Well, just because people are doing something irrational doesn’t make it unusual, unfortunately.
Consider Voters must choose between revelation or revolution this election year (washingtontimes.com) by Everett Piper. Here he refers to Eric Voegelin (britannica.com), a political philosopher, to describe progressives as political Gnostics.
Voegelin also understood that progressives, with their claims to superior knowledge, are little more than political Gnostics. Like the discredited religion of old, they degrade the human being by elevating emotions over the rational. In their narcissistic self-worship, they become gods unto themselves. They are sure that nothing is sure, and they know nothing can be known other than what they know. Their dismissal of sin leads them to believe that anything they do can’t be a sin, and that includes defaming and hating all who stand in the way of their sin.
Voegelin knew that one of the most characteristic things about Gnostics is that they are always right. They have all the “right” ideas. Furthermore, they are right to condemn you for thinking you’re right. In their denial of morality, they have risen above the moral order with their superior morality. Logic, proof and reality don’t matter to them. It’s all about their feelings.
What is Gnosticism? Since academics and Christians have trouble agreeing upon a definition, the term is a bit awkward (see Gnosticism (britannica.com)). However, Piper is apparently using this definition.
Basically, the Gnostic believes in acquiring special, mystical knowledge as the means for salvation. According to Gnostic beliefs, there is a Great God that is good and perfect, but impersonal and unknowable. The creator of the universe was actually a lesser deity—a cheap knock-off of the “true God”—who wanted to create a flawless material universe but botched the job. Instead of having a utopia, we ended up with a world infected with pain, misery, and intellectual and spiritual blindness; all matter is now corrupt and evil. However, when this lesser deity created man, he accidentally imbued humanity with a spark of the “true” God’s spirit, making man an inherently good soul trapped in the confines of an evil, material body. (from here (gotquestions.org))
Because Gnostics believe in a lesser deity and that salvation requires acquiring special, mystical knowledge, Gnosticism provides a basis for making idols out the creations of man (stuff), pleasure (especially sex), the knowledge of man (science), good government (the state), and especially one’s self.
Just how many Americans are Gnostics of this sort? That’s hard to say, but the philosophy does seem to be popular with our elites. Hence, much of the news media pushes the rest of us that direction. Here in NFL fans kneeling to leftist martyr Colin Kaepernick’s political correctness (washingtontimes.com) Robert Knight provides an example. Knight criticized the objectivity of the question The Washington Post used in a poll it commissioned. The question was obviously designed to get the results the paper wanted, a number that demonstrates most Americans approve of athletes kneeling when our national anthem is played (see Most Americans support athletes speaking out, say anthem protests are appropriate, Post poll finds (washingtonpost.com)).
Knight ended his article by asking us to consider a few questions.
How about this, for those who identify as Christian or Jewish: “When you kneel in church or during the High Holy Days, are you praying to God or to Black Lives Matter?”
And the follow-up: “What other entities do you kneel to, and how often?” (from here (washingtontimes.com))
Who we choose to believe God is makes all the difference in the world.