Trump supporters have some good ideas.
Clinton supporters have some good ideas.
Ancoms have some good idea.
Ancaps have some good ideas.
I identified the ‘extremes’ of American stateless and statist ‘tribes.’
When we demonize whole groups of people, whole sets of beliefs, we cut ourselves off from gaining a new understanding we might otherwise never see because we don’t, maybe even can’t, see the world the way someone else does.
This is why I get so triggered by certaintarianism (as I’m calling it, because yeah, I love me the neologisms). It creates false either/ors that are almost always either all of us or none of us, either all of them or none of them.
But, because (even perhaps biologically, from person to person) we fundamentally don’t all see the world from the same perspectives (and, I would suggest, actually can’t in many instances), there is no way ONE PERSON, ONE IDEOLOGY can POSSIBLY contain the whole magic formula for anything remotely approaching perfect human governance.
We cut ourselves off from challenging assumptions that never get challenged if we’ve reduced everyone outside of our camp to zombies, cretans, and thugs.
These past few months I’ve been going to the sources of leftist thought (both statist and anarchist) rather than relying on the right’s version of the left.
What I have discovered is that I have learned some valuable lessons from leftist thinking, and also discovered ideas I’ve had for decades are more at home in leftist anarchism than they are in rightist anarchism.
Because I didn’t reduce the left to some form of subhuman, inferior, incapable-of-thinking status, I was given an opportunity to push my assumptions about the world around me.
I have grown in my own self-awareness, in ruling over myself in the sense that I understand a little more the preferences that motivate me to favor one way of doing things over another, and the logic (within the frameworks of these preferences) behind why I believe some of the things that I do.
Because I better understand myself, I am able to make decisions that are based more on my clearer understanding of the preferences I am seeking to satisfy, as well as the cold reality of power that affects the decisions I am able to make.
Certaintarianism is death to self-rule, and you need not float in the ether of total uncertainty to find a way to create a degree of predictability and stability in your life, despite the allowance for varying degrees of uncertainty on almost any point.
The allowance of uncertainty, to follow a more, dare I say it, dialectical perspective (allowing for the possibility of contradictions, allowing for the possibility of not being able on absolute, certain truth) means you are no longer so deeply, existentially invested in your own assumptions and beliefs.
If you do not face a death of self, then your ability to confront and accept evidence that contradicts your current assumptions is significantly enhanced.
If you do not allow for the creation of existential ownership of your beliefs and assumptions, then the power of the charismatic great leader has turned to pointless, vacuous palaver, the blathering of babies.
This, my friends, is why I covet my uncertainty and why I coil at certaintarianism, it is the dazzling crown of a melismatic thug.