Skip to main content

Conscientious Objection in the Culture War

I finally got around to watching the much lauded Hacksaw Ridge the other day.  It suffers quite a bit from being obvious Oscar Bait, but overall it was a decent movie.  I'm not really interested in doing a review here though; I just found the movie incredibly instructive for another discussion that continues to rage in the social media circles in which I run.  This time it was re-ignited by a couple of people disrupting a version of Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" that features a Donald Trump lookalike being brutally murdered instead of the Roman Emperor.

As usual, one side asserts that disrupting the play goes against their principles and should be condemned, while the other insists that these are the rules imposed upon us by the Left and they should therefore be made to suffer them just as we do.  Or, to put it more succinctly, Be Better Than Them vs. Payback's a Bitch. I of course fall into the latter group for many reasons that go beyond the scope of this particular post.

Hacksaw Ridge features just such an argument about principles versus pragmatism during wartime.  In it we learn about Desmond Doss, a man who could not in good conscience stay home while everyone else went to fight in World War II, and yet, his principles required that he not engage in violence.  He believed this so strongly that he refused to even learn how to use a gun, much less carry one into battle. His fellow soldiers saw this as cowardice and tried to drum him out of the service, asking the obvious question of "why are you here if you can't kill the enemy?"

Doss essentially responded that he may not be able to take the Japanese soldiers out of the fight, but as a medic, he could still contribute by keeping his fellow soldiers in it. He was willing to put himself at an additional risk for that ideal, and through some combination of courage, luck, and the grace of God, he managed to save numerous lives without losing his in the process.  For that, he earned the respect he hadn't been given before.

What Doss did not do was get in the way of the people doing the actual fighting or question their commitment to their shared principles.  He didn't stand between the Japanese and his fellow soldiers screaming that they were hypocrites who could not possibly call themselves Christians if they continued this barbarity.  He didn't go from foxhole to foxhole complaining that throwing grenades at the Japanese made them just like the Japanese.  And he most certainly did not shoot the guy with the flamethrower in the back because he didn't want anyone to associate him with such a horrid weapon.

Now not everyone has the stomach to whip out a flamethrower and barbeque a bunch of poor helpless men in their bunker.  Doss obviously didn't, and I know I certainly have limits on what I would be willing and able to do to win the Cultural Civil War in which we find ourselves.  As such, I don't demand people grab rhetorical flamethrowers and go to town, even if I think we're going to need a lot more of them to save individualism from being destroyed by collectivism.

All I ask is that people focus their efforts on defeating actual collectivists, and recognize that utilizing the tactics of a collectivist against a collectivist does not actually make one a collectivist, just as Desmond Doss understood that indiscriminately killing Japanese soldiers did not make one morally indistinguishable from the Japanese.

So if you are a conscientious objector in the Cultural Civil War, by all means make your arguments about a better way to live, but direct them at the Left.  Explain to them that this whole conflict only exists because they preferred conquest to comity.  Allow your allies the respect of your silence, for it is likely they believe in your principles just as much as you do, but simply recognize you can't win a war with an army of only Desmond Dosses.  Eventually someone has to get their hands dirty.

And if someone should call you a hypocrite for not "calling out your own side," you can say to them "my side is only playing by the rules your side established, and one of the many reasons we told you not to act this way was that our side would have to respond in kind.  If you want it to stop, then you'll have to stop it first."

Then perhaps, just maybe, we can reach a point where we can once again all live by the principles of individualism instead of those of collectivism.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Medieval Medicine

Medical treatment has had a long history of evolution, and for quite a bit of it, going to a doctor was often worse than simply dying. With little to no understanding of how the body worked or the microscopic organisms that could poison it, doctors often relied on religion and superstition to discern treatment. Consider the Dark Ages, wherein disease was considered caused by evil spirits. The Cure? Prayer. Blood-letting. Drilling holes in the skull to let the demon out. That kind of thought persisted well into the 19th century. Even by the American Civil War, doctors were still often little more than butchers and charlatans. A soldier who took a bullet in a limb could reasonably expect to have his limb hacked off with a dull blade that just came out of the leg of someone with gangrene and no anesthesia to speak of. The lucky ones got a sip of tequila or some other hard liquor. Many so-called doctors even traveled the country prescribing a variety of chemicals for ailments that ranged

Trump is the "Fuck You" Candidate

Today we're going to get the first GOP debates for 2016, and as it stands Donald Trump of all people is the leader of the polls.  For the last several hours, conservative media people have been running around with their hair on fire about how Trump is just a plant by the Clintons in some secret conspiracy to destroy the Republican party's chances of winning the election thanks to the fact that Bill encouraged him to run in a phone call. They can't stand the thought of Donald Trump, and that's not really surprising.  Donald Trump is an egomaniacal asshole who could bankrupt the only lemonade stand operating in the middle of the biggest heat wave anyone's ever seen.  And if that isn't explicit enough as to whether or not I think of myself as a Trump supporter before we get into the rest of this, here it is in plain English: no, I do not think Donald Trump would be a good President. I don't think he's trustworthy. I don't think anyone should vote for

The Life of Julianne

The President's campaign has created  The Life of Julia  to tell the tale of a woman's life as it is affected by his policies.  Here is the story of Julianne, the conservative alternative to Julia. The Life of Julianne 3 Years Old Julianne's parents read to her every night.  They take time to play games with her that teach her how to count and how to solve problems. When they enroll her in kindergarten she's ready to learn and succeed. 17 Years Old Julianne excels in school thanks to her parents' active involvement in her life. Her mother is a stay at home mom that carefully monitors Julianne's homework and grades throughout her scholastic tenure. Her father takes practice SAT tests with her and encourages her to work hard. 18 Years Old Julianne's parents have put part of their yearly salary towards a college fund for her ever since she was born. They also encouraged her to get a part-time job in high school and required her to contribute pa