December 12, 2018

“The Truth is More Important Than Civility”

I was reading a Kurt Schlichter article sent to me from Townhall. It’s about civility and truth and the battle that rages between the liberals and conservatives (wink-wink). From my perspective, a perspective that is far from the “normal,” the author appears to use different terms to mean the same thing. For example, is there a difference between Left, liberal, and democrat? Definitely!

But I’m not interested so much to debate the ups and downs of this article, but only to address two statements made. To keep my discussion also in context with the article, let me say that the author, as I interpret things, is confusing a bit to me.  While preaching “civility” he also says that giving in to the demands of the Left should never happen and in the end says that if civility means surrendering, forget it. There seems to me anyway that there is great conflict between truth, civility, violence and the need to never back down from such things as defending one’s inalienable rights. More on this in a bit.

The first statement made is the following: “And truth is more important than civility.” 

As is usually the case, it’s important to examine the definitions of two keywords here – truth and civility.

An examination of “truth” from Webster’s shows us there is already confusion that comes from the meaning and use of the word. We find the number one definition as “the body of real things, events, and facts.” But we also find “…a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true.” Uh oh! And, …“fidelity to an original or to a standard.” Uh oh again! Then, let’s throw this in just to put the finishing touches to it – sincerity in action, character, and utterance.” (emboldening added)

Before we get into a further discussion about “truth,” let’s look at “civility” as also found from Webster. As the word applies to civilized conduct, Webster says the word means, “courtesy and politeness.” That’s pretty straightforward I would say.

It may not come as a surprise to anyone to discover there are real issues in the use of the term truth. Once again from my perspective, there is only one source of Truth (note the capital “T”) and that is what is found the Scriptures of our Creator, YHWH. Man’s “truth” as you can see, is confusing with indistinct, muddied and not well-defined meaning, as though it was crafted by lawyers. And that is much the root cause of many problems that exist in our society.

It is a simple task to call upon “truth” as something you have that nobody else does. But when you examine what man’s ideas of truth are you see that essentially it means whatever a person chooses to accept as their foundation of beliefs. Therefore truth and not Truth is a worthless instrument.

Some might ask why I didn’t choose to use the definition of truth as, “the body of real things, events, and facts.” We live in a post-normal world where there is no such thing that exists anymore that resembles real things, real events, or real facts. To deny it means you’re in serious trouble. I suggest help.

When we look at the original statement of “The truth is more important than civility,” what only exists in today’s world as a definition of “truth” tells us that it is pretty much impossible that any discussions or debates about anything can any longer be civil. When both sides, or multiple sides, claim to hold the truth, civility soon departs. Any form of civility is an exercise in compromising one’s well-crafted “truth.” Only politicians do that.

The second statement the author makes is this: “Civility is not a sign of weakness when a system of reasoned debate is in effect. But it is a sign of weakness, and will be taken as such by our enemies, when we cling to civility because we are too weak and afraid to admit the awful truth, that we are no longer a society ruled by reason but by power.

“You want a civil society again? Good – so do I. But the way to get it is not to surrender. It is to defeat those who want to crush you with lawless rulings by leftist judges, with economic warfare launched by woke corporations, and by the steady erosion of the rights your Creator granted you.

“If civility means submission, the hell with it.”

Putting this in the context of injecting man’s truth into a discussion of civility, shows how conflicting the statement becomes. Where both sides hold the “truth,” reasoned debate and thus civility, have taken a permanent vacation. The focus then becomes who will become the weaker of the two sides.

(Note: Were we ever ruled by anything other than power?)

In war, those more determined to win and never surrender are not operating within a theater of civility. No war is civil, whether physical, emotional or political.

The author calls upon the Right to rise up against the Left and not be weak by never surrendering, or allowing you to be “crushed” with “lawless rulings by leftist judges.” Is it that we should expect the Left to surrender or are we to beat them in a war? Remember, in the Left’s minds, just as the Right’s, they have dibs on the truth.

There is some truth in the statement that by the nature of conservatives, to live and let live, the Right has silently acquiesced to a more Leftist world/society. With constant cries to “go along to get along” and what appears to the Right as the only side that ever compromises (surrenders), perhaps the time has finally arrived (arriving with the onset of Artificial Intelligence which will become the new holder of man’s truth) that some on the Right see the end to their peaceful existence and are now just learning how to fight back.

It’s obvious as well that they are struggling with the concept.

So, what is the answer? The only answer is to seek the Creator’s Truth and to hell with man’s truth. It’s up to you. Government and party politics (Artificial Intelligence) are your enemies. It’s time to recognize and accept that.

Share