The story of our country began as a single, unified narrative—all men created equal in the eyes of God, equipped for the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness—and we fought wars to protect that narrative. 

That narrative has fractured, and we are now fighting ourselves—with a strange sort of jujitsu.

For example, let’s look at our war with racism. It’s a wonderful and righteous cause, because all humans are in fact created equal, but it’s been shocking to see us dealing with absolutes again.

Not long ago a war raged about abortion. The pro-choice group refused to agree to pro-life arguments, not because the arguments were factually wrong, but because they claimed absolute authority. Pro-lifers said that each woman’s baby is of equal value, intrinsically, to the next, but pro-choicers placed the authority back on each mom to subjectively, whimsically, define the value of each baby’s life.

Abortion exists because we were told we can’t value an infant’s life objectively, absolutely.

The abortion war focused on the woman’s rights, not on the objective value of a human life.

The absolute was diverted and sneak-attacked by an emotional argument of human rights.

This is the jujitsu that is causing problems.

Because racism and abortion are the same evil: both devalue human life. But our culture approaches them totally differently.

In the renewed war on racism, everyone, both liberals and conservatives, have picked up the heavy hammer of absolutes.

Which is wonderful and even righteous, but it gives us pause.

What about the babies?

This is just an example of the mental dissonance defining our culture.

Somehow, through some mental jujitsu of compartmentalization, we live with both, absolutes and non-absolutes. 

This jujitsu’s secret move is this: replace truth with emotion.

This shift from truth to emotion is clearly seen on college campuses over the last decade, when college students were coddled to run from offensive conversations (debates about truth) because they may cause emotional harm. Universities—academic institutions dedicated to seeking out and struggling with truth—formed safe spaces for the “offended” to retreat to in case of wounded emotions from hard discussions about truth. 

Morality was redefined to not be based on truth but on emotions; it’s no longer immoral to murder or cheat or break promises, but it is immoral to cause emotional harm.

So now, instead of subjecting ourselves to the authority of truth, we serve emotion, and the loudest person to scream offense. Instead of hosting healthy conversation, we censor “harmful” opinions—whether they be truthful or not.

You would think this would trigger some debates, even outrage and revolt, but debating isn’t an option in the public square anymore since truth is labeled as “offensive” or “harmful”. The only way truth claims can be made is through emotional arguments, which always tend toward the extremes. 

Opinions that disagree with the loudest group are censored, and the dictatorship of the offended takes its seat on the throne.

Take the New York Times three weeks ago for instance. Senator Tom Cotton wrote an op-ed entitled “Tom Cotton: Send In the Troops”, an article about restoring peace to cities raped by riots, and it triggered responses within the Times staff, even before publication. After it was published, the editor in chief of the section was fired, and if you look up the article now, it has a long disclaimer that all-but cancels his opinion and sounds a lot like censorship.

This jujitsu has led us to be grouped according to our emotional empathy: we are either the harmed (identifying in some sort of #metoo movement) or identifying with the harmed in solidarity, or we are the offenders. The authority, and the popular vote, is with the harmed, regardless of the truth. 

In this world, police (flawed or not) are extraneous, upholders of a rule of law that doesn’t have any moral authority.

In this world, people with convictions based on truth are silenced, or canceled. 

But they cannot be silent—without a foundational narrative and absolute truth, we can’t really say who is wrong and who is right—now, or ever. 

As smoke rose from the ashes of the twin towers, liberal English professor Stanley Fish observed what a world looks like without absolute truth. He said, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” 

I’ll take the offense of truth to the jujitsu-justified mass murder of innocent civilians.

 

Adam Setser

Financial Advisor

Kerrigan Capital and Risk Management

3543 N Crossing Cir, Valdosta, GA 31602

229-588-8448

 

Securities and insurance products are offered through Cetera Investment Services LLC, member FINRA/SIPC. Advisory services are offered through Cetera Investment Advisers LLC. Cetera firms are under separate ownership from any other named entity.

The opinions contained in this material are those of the author, and not a recommendation or solicitation to buy or sell investment products. This information is from sources believed to be reliable, but Cetera Investment Services LLC cannot guarantee or represent that it is accurate or complete.