Tuesday, October 04, 2011

The Power of Weakness

Weakness is one of the greatest forms of power imaginable in the modern West. Weakness grants irresponsibility for personal actions and more importantly in a collectivist society, it provides freedom from for the collective burdens of society and civilization.

The weak are not responsible for their actions. They can rob, kill and rape, and still be excused for it . They can blow up buildings, behead prisoners and get sympathetic nods. Because they had no choice.

Weakness is helplessness, it implies irresponsibility because the weak are not capable of making their own choices. Their choices have been made for them by the "Man", the "Patriarchy", the "Privileged" and the "Military-Industrial Complex"-- all different names for the defined power structure and the people who are responsible for it.

Since the choices have been made for them, they have no choice but to lash out. When they kill, it is not an action, but a reaction.

To the people being raped or murdered by them, the ones jumping from buildings and coming to claim the pieces of their children at the morgue afterward, they do not appear to be helpless at all. But that is only because the people being raped and murdered, and waiting to identify a small can of their child's remains are privileged. So privileged that they don't know how responsible they are for the state of affairs which caused them to be raped or murdered. Which caused their children to end up in coffee cans.

Even when they are being raped or waiting to die, they are still the strong and the responsible, and their rapists and murderers are the downtrodden and dispossessed. The weak who are so helpless that they cannot help but seek their source of strength through violence against their oppressors. And if those oppressors happen to be women and children-- well then as the left has said from France to Russia to New York to Israel- "Power to the People". The "People" being the ones doing the killing. The oppressors being the ones doing the dying.

Weakness does not always translate into such extremity. What it translates into is irresponsibility for the collective burden of guilt that the left hangs around the head of every society. The responsibility for the poverty, the bigotry and all the inequities that are said to spring from it.

There are no more personal failures, whether economic or marital or ethical, only collective ones-- and the strong are responsible for their own failures and for everyone else's, while the weak are not even responsible for their own failures.

On the collective scale, choice is nearly irrelevant. Only people with power have choices. The idea that the man waiting in the alley with a knife has a choice is a heresy because he is not a man with a knife, he is a collection of social statistics which assign him an automatic level of responsibility based on his race, gender, socioeconomic status and all the other variables. Whether or not he stabs someone with a knife, is not up to him, it's up to how society treats him.

Similarly financial troubles are not personal, they are social. Whether you can pay your bills has nothing to do with you, but with your race and class. If you succeed when the statistics say that you should fail, then you are an outlier. A rogue exception that only goes to prove the rule. Likewise if you fail when the statistics say that you should succeed. Individual actions can never disprove the collective snapshot of how society is.

If every person is wired into society like a giant bank of servers, then every individual malfunction is actually a social malfunction. If a man kills, then it's because his connection with society was bad. To understand why it was bad, the left examines the nature of the connection. If it was a privileged connection, then he was warped by his excessive access to the innate racism, sexism, classism and all the other bad "isms" of the society. If it was an underprivileged connection, then he was warped by his lack of access to the benefits that society had to offer him and being marginalized, he went off the reservation.

Since all responsibility ultimately devolves to the society, not to the individual, and since the degree of individual responsibility depends on the degree of his connection with the society-- the less the connection, the less the responsibility. The man driving to work from the suburbs is more responsible for a murder in the ghetto than the actual murderer because he has helped create the conditions that led to the murder.

The "weak" murderer is better than the "strong" murder victim because being outside society, he is not truly responsible for anything. Not for his own actions or for the ozone layer, for toxic waste, illegal wars, unrealistic portrayals by the media and the rest of the litany of guilt that the left recites every day in its ceaseless prosecution of all of society and civilization.

In a society where people are expected to feel responsibility for planetary catastrophes and local inequities alike-- weakness is the greatest form of freedom.

Weakness is moral freedom because it liberates you from responsibility for your own actions and those of society. It is political freedom, because the weak can never say or believe anything that is inherently wrong, only "unhelpful". It is political privilege because politicians are expected to pay more attention to the downtrodden. It is economic privilege because companies are expected to redress social ills by advantaging the oppressed.

This dependent-independence from the system is a paradox as the weak derive maximum benefit from the system, while taking the least responsibility for it. It is the essence of the un-citizen of the nanny state who does not need to care how things are run, so long as they appear to be run for his benefit.

When social weakness is translated globally then it leads to global weakness. The globally weak, like the socially weak, are not responsible for their atrocities and genocides. It is the strong nations that are responsible to them and for them. Even when the weak are ridiculously wealthy and powerful, they are still weak. This is true socially and globally.

The weak can never become strong because they are a permanent constituency for change. To be week is to be in need of a protector, whether it's the nanny state or the united nations. Weakness justifies the illegal exercise of power on behalf of the weak. It justifies the disenfranchisement of citizens in a nation state, the destruction of nation states and the end of all individual rights if that is what it takes to create a just society. And that is what it always takes.

The left justifies its existence and its abuses by its self-depiction as a revolutionary force dedicated to remedying inequities in a permanent cycle of reforms that ends only when it enjoys total control and wields maximum power over every aspect of life under its dominion. Since equality cannot be created through the inequity of power, and since the left's mission is to create power inequities in order to remedy power inequities, its revolutions and reforms justify a permanent totalitarian state.

Social inequity is the permanent emergency that the left uses to justify its totalitarian state and the perpetuation of social inequity is the means which the left uses to maintain a state of permanent emergency. If one form of social inequity diminishes, the left finds another. And another. This endless search leads to a deconstruction of every aspect of society and the destruction of every human system. Human ways of living are replaced with grafted on artificial modes that fail and destroy their users. And the worse the society becomes, the more the state of permanent social emergency is justified.

The left consists of the strong who challenge the strong in the name of the weak, regardless of whether the weak want the challenge or not. By conceptually dividing the strong from the weak, the left disenfranchises the weak, and then disenfranchises the strong in the name of the weak. The end again is tyranny.

The left's remedy to inequity is to convince the majority and minority that they are incapable of exercising their power in a constructive fashion. The minority is told that they are incapable of it because the majority will not allow them the freedom to do it, but will thwart every effort they make at empowering themselves. The majority is told that any exercise of their power is a form of privilege which consciously or unconsciously disenfranchises the minority.

The minority are taught that they are weak. The majority are taught that they are abusive. The weak can escape into irresponsibility, while the strong escape into grandiosity. The weak refuse to take responsibility for anything until they become amoral monsters. The strong take responsibility for everything until they fancy themselves malicious gods who are destroying the earth.

By teaching some they are unnaturally weak and others that they are unnaturally strong, both are left unable to constructively exercise their power. The weak are taught that they can't do anything and therefore they can do everything without consequences. The strong are taught that they are doing everything and therefore should do as little as possible. Both are taught to distrust their use of power and to loathe their use of it.

The weak are taught to kill and still feel helpless. The strong are taught to feel that a single twitch of their finger is disturbing the earth. While the weak are robbed of conscious power, the strong are robbed of unconscious power. The weak treat their weakness as a strength and the strong treat their strength as a weakness. This leads naturally to the welfare state, to the elevation of the unqualified and the extinction of the competent.

Lost in all this is the individual as the pivot of life and the pillar of governments, whose rights justify the society and the state. By diminishing the individual to the level of a cog in a social machine, reducing his ambitions and dreams to irrelevancies amid the socioeconomic statistics that define his life, and eliminating his responsibility for his own actions, rather than those of others, the left destroys the base of every healthy society and the transformative energy that alters social orders.

In its pursuit of equality through tyranny, or tyranny through equality, it neuters the individual as the wielder of creative and economic forces that are actually capable of setting men free.


churrie said...

Biologically speaking, actual parasites are not cognizant as to any concept of choice regarding their blood-sucking, host-draining actions.
What are human parasites with the same lack of cognizance?
Brainwashed at best, spiritually possessed at worst.

BS Footprint said...

It sounds like you are describing moral and spiritual weakness among the presumed strong, the victims who are blamed for their own demise.

It seems to be a recurring theme in Western society: There so much internalized, self-imposed guilt (mostly unwarranted) that people willingly submit to any number of punitive actions -- perhaps as a way to make one feel better about one's relative wealth, health, and happiness. Perhaps as a form of indulgence. Or perhaps as a form of self-flagellation.

Gagdad Bob said...

Each day we demand more from society so that we may demand less of ourselves.

It is customary to proclaim rights in order to be able to violate duties.


Compassion, in this century, is an ideological weapon. --Don Colacho's Aphorisms

Gaucho said...

One of the smartest writings on society by anyone ever. Isn't it about time you gather all your Important Postings in a book? You surely have enough fans to turn it into a Kindle best-seller overnight. I sometimes look for one of your works of genius to forward to friends or random Leftards met at social events and in need of treatment, and have trouble finding them back. A book would be ideal, as well as the most helpful aid for Leftard detox of dear ones. I'd no longer have to struggle to come up with birthday gift ideas. It'd be Daniel Greenfield's book for everybody for every occasion!

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Gaucho, I've considered it and will probably do it before too long, though given how many comments this article has picked up, not so sure of the demand for pieces like this

but pygmies said...

Sultan -- Left unsaid is that, to make this system work, power itself qua power is vilified. Power itself is bad. Seeking power is therefore a sure sign of evil. Those who are able to wield power, e.g., corporations, banks, military, must have evil intentions.The left never seeks power (according to the slogans of the Left); it only seeks to right wrongs.

Gaucho said...

1) As a trial balloon you could start with an e-book or Kindle version. Good sales there will give you a stepping stone for a big paper launch, or...
2) The right literary agent for you must be out there somewhere. Often just a one-chapter treatment sample and index are enough for a good agent to start a bidding war, as happened to a friend of mine who got a $150K advance as a result, BEFORE starting to write his book, as a first-time unknown author, on topics that were of no wider interest than yours.
3) The lack of reader comments after an article tells us very little about the level of interest or depth of appreciation. A while back you wrote a piece that truly changed my awareness and I thought was a sublime work of genius but I didn't say anything. Surely many others experienced the same. [It was the one about the Left always finding underdogs to speak on behalf of, who eventually gain their own voice and make the Left feel unneeded: workers, Blacks, the Third World, and so on. Till finally now they got the truly trustworthy ones who will never use their own voice to let the Left down: polar bears!]

Gaucho said...

...btw, the aforementioned is one of the articles I'd love to forward to the Greendiots among my friends & family but I lost it in the stream of your past articles, and I'd love to keep it tidy, safely anchored and unvanishing, in paper book form.

Kristin Solo said...

Can Society really be entirely to blame for the choices and the conduct of innumerable individuals ?
While I concur that quality of lifestyle, parental influence, education and environmental factors certainly contribute to the shaping & moulding of personality & character, I have to contest the inference that every individual can be categorised re a propensity for weakness or strength, based on those defining factors alone.
Mankind is made in the image & likeness of The Creator.
Freedom to choose is the God- given right that differentiates a person from a robot .
If people's choices were so effectively influenced as to be governed by the structure of the Society in which they live, we would be in danger of becoming Planet Stepford!

Kristin Solo said...

I absolutely agree with Gaucho that Sultan's inspiring articles should be preserved in book form!
I have frequently forwarded one of them to friends as a brilliant analysis of the issue in question.
Currently, I am saving & collecting them in file format!
I also accessed and appreciated The Sultan Knish Blog for quite some time before submitting comments.

t1klish said...

This is really good, and I enjoyed the rhythm of the writing.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Gaucho, thanks, it's always good to hear that from people. And if I were to write a book, it would like this article, be a nuts and bolts look at the ideological mess behind the thinking.

Kirstin, thanks also, especially for commenting, as it makes writing articles worthwhile.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Gaucho, might be this article

or this one

Gaucho said...

Thanks again DG!

Gaucho said...

It's the one from 12/13/09 ( I wasn't able to find it because it's not labeled as Important Posts as I assumed it would. It's one of your masterpieces!

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Yes I thought it would be that one. It's an important point, but you can only put so much into Important Posts.

cornholio said...

So the muslimes who are busily raping and/or murdering and/or persecuting Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists in the islamofascist pigsties of the world are the real victims!

Lily said...

A book sounds like a fantastic idea.

Alot of people love your articles.The low rate of comments just represents how intelligent and thorough your articles are, they need no additional information or opinions.

For instance this article: It is clear, concise and can be used in a wide array of demonstrations- from welfare abuse to war to AIDS but it is simple enough for a high school student to comprehend and use.It should be available to educators and read in Congress.

And the best part of you writings is the lack of self- righteousness,preachy language and extreme political correctness. You express a viewpoint,give facts and encourage us to think ,not demand we agree.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

well ideas are useless if they're imposed, it just creates another hierarchy or cult

Arithon8 said...

A book is a wonderful idea. I read but don't comment, and I am sure many others do too, so please don't let lack of comments be an indicator. I would buy a book of your articles as soon as I saw one, Daniel.

Keliata said...

I would buy your book, too. I've seen any writers with the ability to combine current events (and make the knowledge easy for the politically challenged reader) and with such beauty.

If you were ever to consider fiction you would be fantastic at historical narratives such as The White City. In fact, you'd blow the guy who wrote that right out of the water.

(Major compliment from me considering how much I love the book).

bob said...

Good point. It's a nice way to sum up the calls of victimisation and discrimination we hear over and over again.

Thinking I should start storing these articles somewhere for reference. Google reader has been useful for finding articles at times not not useful for grouping articles for later retrieval.

Yes a book would be good, although with the breadth of topic's it may be better to have more then one book.


Hmmm, there are lots of connections/relationships between each that it's hard to mention one with out mentioning the other.
america & israel
america & the left
america & islam
... etc

I guess Islam & "the left"/Communism/Socialism are both systems for enslaving and controlling people.

The good America and Israel have done has been in part because of the freedom provided to the people.
Biblical morals have helped a lot in this. Good family values provide a stable society.
(e.g. the teaching of "love your neighbour" )

Anonymous said...

WOW ! So that's how their evil (the left) minds work. Thanks for the explanation. Personally, I think they're deranged. Regardless of one's situation, the only person responsible for their actions is THEM. Full stop. Islam is an evil cult IMO.

Post a Comment