Globohomo looks at us like we’re cattle. If you couldn’t feel it before, the COVID 19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates should make it abundantly clear. Throughout history, human beings have defined morality relationally. This is human nature to some extent. Those outside the tribe aren’t really humans. They’re outsiders. It makes it much easier to physically harm those members of the rival tribe when conflict erupts. Universalism is the modern answer to this psychological state of nature. Basically, I see universalism as considering all humans a part of your moral community. I actually like universalism, and I practice it by applying the non-aggression principle to all humans.1 If you’re interested in maintaining the moral high ground in our ongoing conflict with globohomo, I can’t recommend this technique enough. If you’re American it is especially important, because Americanism is inherently universalist. Anyone can become American if they adopt the ideology and some common critical core cultural norms. This is just one of the things that makes America absolutely exceptional.
Federalism and Particularization
Federalism is also a fundamental component of Americanism and functionally reduces the number of common cultural norms that need to be adopted at the national level. Another fact of human nature is that we like being integrated into communities where the compatibility of values among cohabitants is high. This is one of those tricky subjects, because this in-group preference can easily be castigated as bigoted.2 The truth is that people tend to like people that are more similar to themselves than not. For a lot of folks, this includes external features.3 This inherent human preference results in discrimination. We’re in this wierd cultural space where certain types of discimination are allowed and encouraged while others are castigated as evil. I’m not so judgemental, and the American way allows us all to share the same nation while living in particular communities where, yes, there is discrimination. To be sure, there are parts of this country where I am not welcome. It would be nice to be able to visit anywhere in the country and be treated with dignity and respect, but to expect that every single person in a nation of 330 million would be excited about having you as their neighbor is pretty… narcissistic. The bottom line is that whether you’d admit it or not, everyone discriminates, and for us all to get along, we MUST tolerate/accept this fact. It should also be noted that you can expect more and more discrimination - on whatever grounds - the smaller a community gets. This mosaic of particulized communities is the what is promised by a true adherence to the principles of federalism, and is integral to Americanism.
Universalism Includes Globohomos
This is where a lot of people, knowing the evil hearts beating within the chests of globohomos, are unwonted to apply the only moral framework consistent with a nation founded upon equal protection under the law and the universalism of Christianity. After all, if they think of us as cattle, why should we bother to integrate them into our moral community? Basically, I believe it is our only hope to live in harmony. To put it a little more bluntly, this universal application demonstrates that we are better than them. It is proof of our moral superiority, and in this existential battle for sociopolitical control of America, we must maintain the high ground. Don’t get me wrong, given my current understanding, I believe it necessary and appropriate to put individuals like Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, and Peter Daszak to death. So long as these executions are preceeded by a fair and constitutionally valid trial, this administration of justice is consistent with a universalist moral community that includes all of humanity. I am generally content to accept the verdict of an impartial jury in such circumstances.4
Forgiveness and Mercy
Of course punishment isn’t necessarily the optimal path for society. I would personally prefer restitution in most cases, but these types of preferences vary wildly between individuals. It should also be noted that we don’t know with any degree of certainty which approach will be “best” for society for this same reason.5 I’ll close this article off by touching on a topic of deep controversy which I may come back to later to explore further if there is interest. I believe resitution can only be accomplished by individuals that can be held directly responsible for the loss in question. Holding people accountable because of their family, or worse yet, their race, is not only unreasonable, it is also logically impossible to enforce in a morally consistent manner. This means that some people will end up getting away with great evil. This can’t be avoided. Since it can’t be avoided, it should give everyone energy to be vigilant and aggressive about holding those committing evil and causing terrible loss accountable while they still draw breath such that at least some modicum of restitution or justice can be achieved.
I use a very fluid definition of “aggression” where argument is welcome as to what counts. I believe the current framework of U.S. law, especially the Constitution is consistent with the NAP so long as this broad conception of what constitutes aggression is permitted.
I have the luxury of being an ideological bigot, which is a difficult position to attack, because by attacking it, you demonstrate ideological bigotry. Checkmate woketards.
Not me, I love diversity of external features, especially among those I align with ideologically. It tickles my liberal brain. I should note that I would have to be a raging asshole to think that this innate dispostion somehow makes me better than anyone else.
I speak of circumstances where I personally believe great evil has been committed. No justice system will ever be perfect, but an impartial jury comprised of individuals with good character makes for about as good of a system as I can imagine to administer justice in these cases. Of course, this makes the overall character of a population absolutely critical. Unfortunately, there are no suitable substitutes for character in the functioning of civil society.
Yes, I’m talking about the subjectivity of value again.
There seems a deficit in what it means to be a universalist American. With so much political and media propaganda seeking to divide us, it would be good I think to work out some core values of what it is to be American, and articulate that each in our own way. Because America is the one place that stands in the way of Globohomo exterminating the myriad cattle of the world.
Agreed. I don't use the term "moral community" much myself, but I think your use is apt. The woke left has definitely slipped into "if you aren't with us you are against us, and since we are good you are therefore inherently evil and should be destroyed" territory. It is important to not make that mistake, while at the same time understanding that there is behavior that deserves punishment and simply can not be passed off as just different.