Skip to main content

Leftism and the Rejection of Personal Responsibility

This past weekend, I witnessed a woman drop a carton of almonds on the floor at the grocery store. 

She was talking on the phone and decided against picking them up, allowing them to remain scattered around the check-out lanes. 

This is the attitude of the San Francisco Bay Area resident, the paragon of the modern Leftist, who’s obviously far too important to assume responsibility for herself, as that responsibility is reportedly reserved for those with “privilege,” whatever that means. 

It appears that we are witnessing a developing competition to the bottom, whereby every resident aspires to outdo the other in terms of struggle, excuses and handicap instead of responsibility, triumph and success. 

The glorification of struggle — even self-imposed struggle — has become some sort of twisted yellow badge of courage celebrated by the community empowered to assume that some other abstract body (of people or institutions) is responsible for their failings. 

Of course, their stations in life are manifestly nothing short of their daily attitudes and routines that have coalesced to produce every conceivable reason to fail, to render their failures a foregone conclusion on the basis of merely visualizing themselves this way. 

In many of life’s purported mysteries, we assume that there are poetic explanations behind them, but most phenomena are the consequence of extremely basic factors. 



When faced with the problem of trash lining the streets of the East Bay, the problem of academic or professional underperformance, the high incidence of suicidality or incarceration, the dissolution of the family unit, the relinquishment of personal responsibility, it all appears to stem from the decline (or transformation) of household and community values. 

In the case of the San Francisco Bay Area, the results are unequivocally driven by the abolition of the concepts of community and personal responsibility in favor of transferred obligation and culpability to a faceless entity known principally as government.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Kaepernick Craze: Exposing the Nation's Fools One Conversation at a Time

The Kaeparnick craze and other viral movements haven't merely pressured people into becoming simpler caricatures of their prior selves, but they have manifestly exposed people for how foolish and uninformed they've been all along. 



In his final year in the NFL, Kaepernick ranked 17th in passer rating and 34th the year before that. 

He played through an entire season in only two of his six years in the league, and his best full-season performance ranks far outside of the NFL's top-250 single-season passing performances in the league's history. 

For reference, the oft-criticized Tony Romo posted a career passer rating of 97.1, as compared to Kaepernick's 88.9. 

Romo's passer rating dipped below 90 for only one season of the eleven seasons he played, whereas Kaepernick failed to eclipse the 90 mark on three of his six seasons, a full 50 percent of his time in the NFL. 

In fact, Kaepernick accomplished this feat only once if we are to discard those other two seasons in …

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century. 

Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties? 

The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery. 

It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession. 

It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860.

It was a war that would blur the lines and jurisdictions between sovereign states, that would indiscriminately sacrifice the founding principles etched …

Institutional Racism: The Sasquatch of Political Folklore

A great confusion has arisen out of the clamor of political debate, one which presupposes that any dismissal of the merits of “institutional racism” somehow equates to one’s rejection of personal struggle. 

Whereas the struggle of any individual remains always and everywhere unique and wholly personal, his common bond of complexion with others who have struggled serves inadequately as the basis for any argument which regards this commonality as the cause, or as the reason, for that veritable struggle. 

To condemn the unidentifiable and nebulous abstraction, then, by castigating an unnamed institution which persists beyond our specific capacity to recognize its power, serves only to absolve individuals of their personal responsibility, to shift blame and culpability to a specter which exists only by the creative designs of our imaginations, which exists as the scapegoat for all outcomes popularly maligned as undesirable. 

This unactionable practice, then, swiftly and categorically excuses…