Quotation to Ponder
Here's a quotation to ponder. It comes from "Limits to Democracy," an article by Roger Scruton published in The New Criterion (Vol. 24,Number 5) January 2006, p. 27.
Scruton describes the "moral obesity" afflicting "ordinary voters, to the point where ideals and longterm goals induce in them nothing more than a flummoxed breathlessness. A politician who offers short-term advantages in the form of subsidies, welfare programs, and distractions will secure their vote more easily than the one who promises short-term sacrifice for the greater long-term good. And as a result of this, democratic societies may use up their inherited capital of virtue, and find themselves facing the future unprepared."
Several paragraphs later, he writes:
"It is a characteristic error of the times in which we live to confound the virtue of tolerance with the refusal to judge. To be tolerant and to be 'non-judgmental' are in fact opposite characteristics. The tolerant person is the one who makes room for things of which he disapproves; the non-judgmental person is the one who disapproves of nothing, and therefore tolerates nothing. The refusal to judge is also a part of moral obesity, and the egalitarian culture, which is deeply hostile to any form of judgment other than the blanket condoning of human weakness, is therefore preparing the ground for a new kind of intolerance--the intolerance of virtue."
Scruton describes the "moral obesity" afflicting "ordinary voters, to the point where ideals and longterm goals induce in them nothing more than a flummoxed breathlessness. A politician who offers short-term advantages in the form of subsidies, welfare programs, and distractions will secure their vote more easily than the one who promises short-term sacrifice for the greater long-term good. And as a result of this, democratic societies may use up their inherited capital of virtue, and find themselves facing the future unprepared."
Several paragraphs later, he writes:
"It is a characteristic error of the times in which we live to confound the virtue of tolerance with the refusal to judge. To be tolerant and to be 'non-judgmental' are in fact opposite characteristics. The tolerant person is the one who makes room for things of which he disapproves; the non-judgmental person is the one who disapproves of nothing, and therefore tolerates nothing. The refusal to judge is also a part of moral obesity, and the egalitarian culture, which is deeply hostile to any form of judgment other than the blanket condoning of human weakness, is therefore preparing the ground for a new kind of intolerance--the intolerance of virtue."
posted by G.Rap | 7:59 AM
1 Comments:
A wonderful analogy! It speaks so directly to the moral decay of contemporary society that it is caused by the same ills that cause physical obesity. What a society we live in that people call themselves helpless victims when the type, quantity, and nutrition of the food they put in their mouths and the movement (or lack thereof) of their bodies whether performing labor, playing sports, or exercising are two of the only things that any human actually can control. Even then, one only has as much control as is granted by our Creator. See, e.g., Oliver Sacks’ The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. Certainly, however, that is not to say that those who choose not to act in their own best interests are powerless victims without the ability to control their decisions and actions. Quite the opposite, in fact, is true: those who have free will and choose to be kites in the wind are merely lazy, not victims. How much harder is it for a ship’s mast
Scruton deftly pares tolerance from nonjudgmentalism. His distinction only lasts in the true sense of each word. In today’s politically correctspeak, tolerance means nonjudgmental, which is unfortunate. Fortunately, because of people like Scruton, no matter how popular language evolves to hide that which is supposedly unpleasant, the truth remains. As Shakespeare wrote in Romeo and Juliet: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would still smell as sweet.” (Act II, scene 2).
A is A. No matter what.
People who judge and tolerant of some things are condemned for judging at all. Nonjudgmentalism masquerading as tolerance is PC’s ideal. Being nonjudgmental simply is easier than drawing clear moral lines which would allow true tolerance. Similarly, modern society has found it easier to do nothing and then blame “others” for an individual’s refusal to act or live morally. Frankly, what easier way could there be to sound PC while doing nothing?
Whatever is easiest is often PC’s goal. Moral obesity: True tolerance requires moral standards by which other views may be measured, evaluated, and yes -- judged. PC’s tolerance is easier – acceptance of everything no matter what. Physical obesity: eat whatever you want whenever you want it. Everyone else’s responsibility is to make sure you eat healthfully without having to think about it.
Those who advocate for and those who choose nonfeasance should be reminded both of Dante’s quotation from The Divine Comedy, that “the hottest parts of hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crisis remain neutral” and of Niemöeller’s poem “First they came . . .”.
Maybe, people will eventually get off their moral and physical behinds and start losing their obesity. Or maybe that just takes too much long-term determination.
Post a Comment
<< Home