Thoughts Before Election Day: Voltaire on the Parade of Absurdities And Atrocities/Injustices Before Us

(Editing in progress ...)

By now, you have made your decision already regarding who you are voting for, and you already know my position, so other than the below encouragement for ALL of us to think about more about what and who we are voting for, whether we realize it or not or if we've taken the bait being distracted/manipulated by more petty issues - I have nothing else to say, believe it or not!  😆

And to be honest, the constant barrage of flyers, absurd commercials telling half-truths and lies are all beyond absurd regardless of candidate, so I'm thinking "Who really believes this stuff?"

On a positive note, one of our candidates finally started focusing on what he stood for and his family, rather than just standing there calling us Democrats names like "Demrats" and idiots. 

It's like "Well, okay, since we don't know what you stand for or what your platform is or what you plan to do in office, and you have just made it clear you don't want our votes anyway based on party alone, so fine, we'll take our votes elsewhere."

I mean, bullying people to your opinion rarely works anyway.

I'm not sure what DOES work, but bullying them into it never works.😂

Well, on second thought - the current trend seems to be the more outlandish and crazy your accusation is about your opponent, even if you just pulled it out of  ... thin air ... DOES seem to work.

Truth doesn't matter - even if it's NOT true about your opponent, and actually IS true about you, but said in projection/deflection off yourself! 😂 (Cough, cough, who's in the Epstein files and who isn't.)

This reminds me of a quote by Voltaire.

(Yes, I know, Voltaire can be problematic, wait for my discussion on that later.)

Yes, I posted the quote correctly. Though the most common English quote tossed around saying "atrocities" versus "injustices" - it's  incorrect/mistranslation.

Because the quote is from Voltaire's essay Questions sur les miracles (1765) and goes "Certainement qui est en droit de vous rendre absurde est en droit de vous rendre injuste."

"Injuste" means "injustice" in French.

"Atrocités" means "atrocities" in French.

(I admit, I've never read it nor can I speak French - I just like to make sure the quotes I'm sharing are from the originals .)

Though injustice(s) and atrocities are not that far apart in meaning and both can be true, it's still a distinction that should be made.

Because although all injustices perhaps should be atrocities, they aren't - but all atrocities are unjust.

(No, this isn't a logic lesson, just saying while we're on the subject, Voltaire would be pleased, both with using his correct verbiage, as well as the logic I just used, so go me. And the next minute, watch me do or say something only a complete idiot would say or do 😂)

Perhaps they just used "atrocities" because it was better-sounding literary alliteration, who knows?

Speaking of contradictions, I questioned whether or not to post it because Voltaire himself was a walking contradiction.

A brilliant philosopher, public champion of civil rights, separation of church and state, and staunch public critic of both monarchies and slavery - but an absolute sh*t privately, that did not adhere to his own ideals.

For example, he invested in and benefitted from slavery himself, despite publicly opposing it, and when asked about writing about the atrocities of  slavery, he explained that he only used it to illustrate that it was a poor economic choice long term, rather than abolishing the practices due to being inhumane.

And he actually privately believed in the "natural order" of things, which is a complete contradiction to his anti-monarchy and anti separation of church and state writings - including that women and people with darker skin were inferior by design thus meant to serve.

Yeah, no  - more about that disproven nonsense in a second.

For now, it's enough to say that it was then that I realized that if I were to look for a single person in history that wrote some GREAT stuff that was ahead of their times that also WASN'T an absolute sh*t of a person privately, as a racist, misogynist, homophobe, and/or just plain crazy or mean - especially during colonial times - there'd be no one to quote 😂

Because the fact is, most of the people whose words we admire in history failed their own philosophies and religions in one way or another, by writing one thing and living another - especially during colonial times.

The same men waxing poetic against monarchies, advocating for separation of church and state and equality for all, privately either had blind spent or only meant it for themselves and other white men of their same social class and faith - everyone else should serve them after conquering them.

(Either that, or they simply didn't have enough guts to free their slaves in their lifetimes due to social pressure, making them cowards, benefitting from the system they condemned, and even in some cases, unable to engage in war that they, themselves, started with their words, relying on We The People to fight it FOR them ).

Thus, proof that even before the advent of social media, we had people writing revolutionary stuff with a quill and parchment, unable to back that up in real life.

(For the record, whatever I say here, I am prepared to back up/fight for in real life - and I have.)

Lastly, on this note of the same men writing the above and things like "all men created equal with certain unalienable rights; the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" but only really meaning it for others exactly like themselves (or their own cowardice and implementing this personally in their daily lives) ...

Recently, we have seen a concerted effort to go back to a "conquistador" or conquest/colonizing country, forgetting that this is exactly what we theoretically were trying to get away from, when we built this country, and it's being done by propaganda to convince us if we don't make them the enemy/attack them first, then the people we're attacking will attack us first, though we have no proof of that.

(Your big clue should've been changing the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War?)

I know that many people still today laud a conquering mentality as something to be admired - and by that, I don't naturally gifted with athleticism or strength or strategic prowess winning fair competitions.

I mean a return to misusing or abusing these gifts by using them for the wrong reasons - to overpower other smaller or more vulnerable groups or even countries (under false pretenses/propaganda) just to steal their resources, just because we can, as if this is a basketball game instead of an all-out raid on people's lives and livelihoods. 

(Though these groups or countries may be smaller and temporarily weakened by exhaustion from inner turmoil, this does NOT mean they are inferior or "weak" overall and thus "deserve" attack.) 

Others of us who like to believe or hope we've learned from history and hope to have evolved - we have nothing to prove or "conquer" but personal obstacles and insecurities, our goals, and fun/fair competitions  - and we would prefer truly seeing all men and women with different perspectives being valued as equal, allowing them to own their own resources - and if we WANT those resources, then share or obtain them the proper and humane way - pay them for it , through fair trade.

In fact, fair trade is SUPPOSED to be what a pro-capitalist society is about -  but it somehow devolves into power abuse,  fraud, stealing resources, and lack of consumer protection.

That circles us back to Voltaire's more private philosophy - natural order/selection.

First of all, social Darwinism/natural selection/survival of the fittest i does not exist - because there are factors at play in the human world that do not exist in nature that affect whether or not the "best" or "fittest" representative of our species survived - sometimes they shittiest did, in fact, through pure shittiness.

Secondly, define "inferior, " please?

If you mean just physical strength, what are you, a Nazi?

Because what is a weakness to some is a strength to others - and I wouldn't necessarily define "strength" in physical terms anyway, but if we did, although men may be physically stronger, many women can actually tolerate physical pain better than men (believed to be due to the evolutionary functional need of childbirth).

As for intellectual strength, that clearly is NOT exclusive to gender or race - but socialization DOES have much to do with it.

Regardless, some of us believe that just because you have greater  "strength" in anything doesn't mean you should use it/display it in situations that don't require it -  particularly against others you deem "weaker." 

In fact, misusing it in situations that don't require it is akin to being a bully and thus may actually be a sign of insecurity or even jealousy - as those secure in their own strengths have no need to display it or weild it as a weapon other than situations that literally require it of them.

Secondly, there's nothing "natural" about exploiting other people you merely perceive as weaker for your own gain anyway, and there's natural about it.

Like chimps, we are among the only animal species that becomes violent NOT just to eat, defend territory or survive - but also to also expand our territory for power and more resources than we likely even need compared to others - and in the case of humans, for economic gain.

However, even worse than chimps, we make excuses, try to convince others the people we hurt or stole from or cheated that they deserve it -  but the truth is, we're simply claiming things for ourselves we don't own, didn't earn, and didn't pay or trade for.

Along with that ugly truth is, whenever we overpower anyone through force OR deceit for these things, especially if smaller/less powerful than you - that actually reflects more poorly on YOU than it does on them!

So my only question to you before the election is - which type of person are you?

Are you the sort of person who values "conquest" over others  as some sort of affirmation of your superiority using any means necessary, imagining it's "survival" for you and your own family versus others as if this is a post-apocalyptic society, though you may already have more than most?

To include stealing their resources, either through direct military action OR deceit (or both), just because we can - as if this is a basketball game or board game, rather than people's lives and livelihoods?

Or are you the sort of person who believes in true, honest fair trade of goods and services with mutual benefit for both parties, as well as that people secure enough in their own strengths don't need to wield them as weapons over others, believe or prove superiority,  AND that we can learn more from others with different strengths?

Even more importantly, are you the sort of person who also realizes that We the People are the ones actually paying for these "conquests," but receiving NO benefits of them unless we're in the powerful inner circle already?

And lastly, proponents of this group realize above all the above this very real possibility most of all - that the more internal turmoil within our own country we have, the more it puts our own country at risk, just as the countries we've just invaded were - divide and conquer.

I am proud to be in the latter group that genuinely does view all humans as equal with unalienable rights despite race, faith, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation, and that these rights should be extended to other humans around the world despite citizen status - as our own constitution protects noncitizens with undergoing due process of law in its 5th amendment clause -  rather than  justice being rendered by brute force by jack-booted thugs in costume in the street!

If you agree with me, thank you, glad to have you aboard.

If you don't agree with me, totally okay - and though I can't find "love" for some of your politicians, I still love YOU as my fellow countrymen and women - -  and I hope you can find it in your heart to do the same for me, though you may disagree with me.

And though totally okay with you disagreeing with me, can't say that I don't pray you'll join me at least in this perspective, if nothing else ...

...  if we don't stop this mentality and internal turmoil now, we may find ourselves suffering the same fate as the countries we've just invaded attacked military for their resources - being left wide open to other countries for conquest/invasion ourselves, Russia, China.

Also, historically, once-great nations/civilizations who lived by the sword, died by the sword -  either directly, by being conquered themselves - or a slow, painful death by stagnation/lack of progress due to underlying superiority beliefs lying underneath, as well as internal conflict (and in some cases, genetic issues due to inbreeding, also caused by false superiority beliefs).

Those who instead learned to trade to gain resources and learned from/valued new perspectives, not only survived, but thrived.

So my question before you vote is - which type of person/mentality are you? 

Regardless, I encourage to just GO VOTE!!!

Ya feel me on that, at least?