I’m always amazed how “right here” I learn so much. I’ve always said “hang out with smarter people and you will continue to learn”, I’m glad to be here!
One thing I’ve learned over my 60 years is when I see someone that is working really hard, struggled to raise good kids, or someone helping another, I honor them with a compliment, “your doing a great job”. We all carry honor and have it to give. When we honor someone we’re not just doing them a favor, we are doing ourselves a favor. When showing honor there is a commanded blessing that will be returned back into our own life. It can be as simple as giving up your seat to an older person, let someone go ahead of you in a line, or just complimenting someone. The amount of honor that you show is directly related to the amount of Gods favor you will see in your life.
Paul said in Ephesians 6 “Honor your father and mother” which is the first commandment with a promise, “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy a long life”. This is saying, honor should start at home. It should start in our own family with those closest to us. We should never treat complete strangers better than our family or spouse, it should be opposite that. Young people should listen to their parents. Mark Twain said “When I was 14, my father was so dumb, I could hardly stand to be around him, but when I got to be 21, I was amazed at how much the man had learned”. We should not honor our parents with just words but with how we treat them.
One thing I am sure of, you will never change a dishonorable situation by adding more dishonor. That will always make matters worse. Honoring someone lifts them. You should honor people the way you would want them to be.
I can’t tell you how much respect I have for women. For centuries women have worked and fought for their position in this world. In a general sense, you will never gain honor, and should not gain that honor, by dishonoring women, plain and simple. You will never receive what you are not willing to give, and if you don’t give honor you won’t have honor. The present dishonor shown to women today saddens me. It is a sign of a sickness spread in our society. The key to a breakthrough that we pray for, is to honor the people and women that God has put in our lives in a greater way.
The only way I see so many of these problems in our world today being resolved, is for people and government to return to honoring and respecting the people, and their God given freedoms, free thoughts, privacies and liberties, anything short of that is surely done with the intent to divide us. J.Goodrich
You can always count on me to add another perspective here from time to time. This time it's to shift the paradigm a tad to where being uncivil has demonstrably benefited the cause of freedom.
To wit, when I've traveled outside the US I've seen and shaken my head at what's described as "the ugly American." Rude, demanding, arrogant, forgetting they are guests in another nation. Not respecting the ways of others. I'd feel for the locals subjected to the ugly American. And tried to make a different impression, as a way to say, "we're not all like that."
I know others will feel the same way. And become apologetic, embarrassed for our nation. It wasn't until 2020 and its aftermath we still live with for me to come to another understanding of "the ugly American" that's not so judgmental. I now believe that had we held onto more of that rudeness, that "ugly American" in our nation's DNA that we'd not have joined in the rush to totalitarianism.
When I've visited Nordic nations I've noted how nice and polite the people generally are. Very civil. There's a superficial civility in public interactions. Not particularly warm, on the cooler side. It's only when you spend time with locals in their homes when they're surrounded by friends and you've been invited to be one of them that they tend to let their hair down, become warmer. And remain polite, civil.
I visited Iceland. So I took note of this story out of Iceland when I read it. Iceland is a very civil, obedient country. And obedience to authority is fertile ground for totalitarianism. That nice civility comes with that big vulnerability.
Count how many times the word "obedience/obey" is used in this story out of Iceland about a nurse in Iceland who defied the testing mandates and was punished, fined for challenging authority:
Could terminate work contract of a nurse who denied taking rapid Covid tests
"employees' obedience to the employer's legal order is one of the primary duties of employees"
"an employee must submit to the mastery of his employer"
"work procedures must be obeyed"
"breach of a duty to obey or refusal by the employee to obey a directive"
"employee’s breach of the duty to obey"
"the employee’s refusal to obey is considered a serious failure"
"Obviously, obedience is considered to be an important part of running a business"
"obedience obligations are evidently to be regarded as critical to the operation of the policy"
"The Court finds that the breach of the duty of obedience by the nurse during the time in question constitutes a serious breach of the employment contract"
"The woman was then sentenced to pay the company Klíníkin 1.2 million ISK [$8,500 USD] in legal costs."
FF - If authorities (including employers) order the people to wear anything, a mask, a strap-on dildo, whatever in public they will and must. Obey. It's the civil thing to do. Society stays nice and peaceful that way. But not very free. Obedient and free do not go together. Mutually exclusive.
Don't mistake nice, civil people for opponents of totalitarianism. Quite the opposite. Nice people support totalitarianism. By their unflinching obedience to authority. And desire to not offend, to remain civil.
I'm also reminded of stories I read from Germans who faced American soldiers in WWII. The Devil's Brigade:
"The “Black Devils,” as they were called by the enemy, carried stickers with their unit patch and the slogan – “the worst is yet to come” – written in German. They stuck these on the bodies of those they killed, as well as on German fortifications. The 1SSF’s reputation was so fierce that, prior to engaging with the group, the German soldiers were informed they would be “fighting an elite Canadian-American Force. They are treacherous, unmerciful and clever. You cannot afford to relax.”.”
Opinion on American soldiers’ character during the battle:
"Another claim Americans were worthy fighters, quite reckless but had nerve."
Americans as their prisoners of war:
"The Americans would complain about the food, which was indeed bad all the time.
They were bad prisoners since they won’t talk or work."
American officers and subordinate relationship:
"The subordinate soldiers lacked iron discipline when it comes to their officers. However, their cordial relationship compensated for this."
FF - Rudeness. Disobedience. Incivility. As an asset. A complete paradigm shift. It's how we stay free. That doesn't mean I go around now and intentionally try to be rude. And as with all things the ideal is found in balance between civil and uncivil. But if it has to be one or the other, uncivil and free or civil and enslaved I will choose uncivil exactly ten out of ten times.
I don't apologize for offending where offense is intentional. And the words "no" and "go f yourself" will come off my lips when told to do something I don't wish to and without explanation unless it earns my consent based on the merit of the demand/request. No "yes" just to be nice and civil.
How's that for a paradigm shift and defense of incivility?
I am not convinced that civility MUST go hand in hand with servility. I see, for sure, how it often does. I have often marveled, for example, at how hive minded the Brits can be, and how unlike us that makes them.
But I do not think that these two things MUST be linked. A knight might be chivalrous and yet still deadly in battle.
Your point is, of course, well taken—because we definitely do not want to be servile. But I think we should find a way to be civil. Civil to friends and neutrals, but brutal to those who would oppress us?
That balance thing. Of course I prefer civility, and when someone's rude I note it, I don't like it, it may and has provoked rudeness in return. It can become a spiral of incivility that can get out of control until an external ordering force is applied. But in the instances I highlighted incivility becomes a defense against totalitarianism. The reason the United States has the globalists conniving and tinkering in ways they don't bother doing in the rest of the world is that we've been described as "ungovernable." No doubt you've seen bumper stickers, tee-shirts and memes with words to that effect, "be ungovernable." It's our "ugly American" rudeness and incivility that is the basis of our ungovernability.
The more we try to conform with European and Asian sensibilities, as most of the educated, privileged class try to model in their effete manners and mannerisms, the lure of playing by Marques of Queensberry rules in public debates and battles the more freedom is lost. Not wanting to appear rude and selfish, the mark of a "good statesman" today is negotiation and compromise, noble lies to the unsophisticated commoners to 'reframe' authoritarian control as protecting freedom, all for a 'greater good.' Is why the needle of human governance has gone only one direction the better part of the last century - towards authoritarian/totalitarian police state surveillance command and control. In what ways are we more free today than a century ago? Porn? Drugs? Atheism? Expanded access to vices is hardly synonymous with more freedom. Depravity 'freed' from God is another sure path into totalitarianism; it begs for rulers to save us from our depraved selves.
Balance. But if society must lean in one direction or the other, uncivil freedom or civil slavery may it lean towards uncivil freedom.
It is possible. I'm not saying I follow this practice all the time... Ideally, we should typically strive to be more civil than the person we are dealing with. Incivility, should only be practiced deliberately. During Covid tyranny, I ended a 20+ year friendship with, "I find your behavior towards me unacceptable.
You are supporting evil because it doesn't directly harm you. I'm cutting everyone that supports tyranny out of my life. Good luck, and feel free to let me know if you repent." From my perspective, that was polite and civil, but bluntly honest.
Again, during Covid, one of my friends was at Walmart when they were enforcing the mask policy at the registers. They informed him that he had to wear a mask to make a purchase. He calmly informed them that he did not have a mask and would not wear a mask if he did. Then he left to do business elsewhere and let them figure out where to return a car full of stuff. It's a small thing, but a polite no to tyranny is often all it takes. Had 200 people done the same on the first day, the mask policy would have effectively gone away. Our more freedom minded Subway started off that way. They put up a sign informing customers that the state had a mask policy mandated and that if you were not wearing one they would assume that it was due to a health condition that prevented you from wearing one and that existing law prohibited them from inquiring about your condition.
A polite no, to an unacceptable but politely issued instruction is a good place to start. I like, "I would prefer not to." just because it makes me smile inside. Bartleby is one of the fictional characters that left a lasting impression.
You can't change government by yourself. You can be part of what moves the mass of people to change government. Just make sure your actions move them in the right direction. To the observer that just began paying attention, the person doing the yelling is unhinged. The Communists have used the playbook where the overreaction to their deliberately unacceptable behavior is the tool to advance their revolution. Just because they are evil does not mean we cannot learn from them what tactics to use and what to avoid.
When my better self heeded the calls to be rational and empathetic I was generally more persuasive. And then there's when I had my fill, the person or situation was too much and I let loose. Not much empathy or rational to the outside observer. But sure was necessary to vent as I did, lest it fester inside me to something even more extreme than merely impolite and rude language. Though I'd often later regret it.
I found David Charalambous' "Reaching People" videos sometime in 2021:
And they made a lot of sense. I tried to practice the techniques he describes, and when I did they usually were better outcomes than how I had been trying before. And then I'd meet a situation I hadn't practiced for, considered, and reverted to form. Have regret. Tell myself to learn from it and do better next time. Over and over.
I never mastered his techniques. It takes a whole lot of intentional practice, trial, error, for it to become a habit. I've not put the requisite work in to make it a happen and will still revert to form if pushed. Life trials and errors. As long as we strive to learn from our mistakes it's all progress. Until then I remain a spectacularly messy work in spectacular progress.
Not related to the polite/impolite subject, but this is an interesting video he also presented in from about eight months ago:
"Hidden Influence" - the forces that convinced so many (53 minutes)
In Gulag Archipelago Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote:
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur — what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!”
FF - That wouldn't have been very civil and polite. The police "were just doing their jobs." Why be uncivil, even violent against state operatives just doing their jobs? Because, freedom. What Solzhenitsyn and others who had their freedom taken from them burned inside at was having restrained their uncivil, rude instincts in favor of civility and politeness. Caring about self to the point of incivility is rational and fiercely protective of freedom. Becoming so domesticated into civility that we care more about being welcome in polite society makes us easy to enslave. Only when our would-be rulers fear that we won't be civil are they restrained.
Sort of like how some nations opposed to US hegemony like North Korea and Iran get all crazy-eyed and crazy-talking leaders. Who do crazy, uncivil things. Makes the bigger nation, US, think twice about doing something to them. Like a big, muscular bouncer at a bar. They'd much rather take on another big, muscular guy in the bar than the little crazy-eyed, crazy-talking guy. The big guy is predictable. The little guy might do something crazy, unrestrained, stab the bouncer in the eye with a broken beer bottle. Completely uncivil and impolite. Makes the bigger guy, governments think twice.
But then we have to know when the Solzhenitsyn moment is upon us. We are in oppression now—soft and frog-boiling and Huxleyan (as opposed to Orwellian) though it may be. At one level of analysis, the sort of resistance Solzhenitsyn wanted is justified NOW. But it also will just get us all martyred. So we have to know what actually triggers that.
"To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.
How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice-'Resist the beginnings' and 'Consider the end.' But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might.”
...
“On this new level you live, you have been living more comfortably every day, with new morals, new principles. You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things that your father, even in Germany, could not have imagined.”
FF - A whole lot more in that book if you're not familiar with it. Very few people will see it. I happened to have a greater degree of political and historical awareness than most ever had occasion to develop. So do you. But most don't.
Absent requiring an entire population to become more politically aware, perhaps driving home the simple maxims of "Resist the beginnings, Consider the end" as general, usual and ordinary, customary for any and all changes to law is the only way. Provoking that critical thinking. As many on the left now scream with shrills that Trump must be resisted how does that instinct get focused on ALL political leaders, not just the "other team's?" I dunno. Maybe this hive mind sharing thing you and I do will help us discover the solution. And I'm pretty sure it won't be directing rudeness at those we seek to change the minds of. I think that's reserved for resisting as totalitarian measures are enacted.
Comment above fits with one I made on one of your prior Stacks about mask enforcement being stopped at big box stores because of customers who done lost their minds about forced masking. Very uncivil. They took "being ungovernable" seriously, to an extreme. They're doing prison time for it. As tragic as it was, their incivility resulted in more freedom for the disobedient, rude and impolite.
Yes, I recall that. But I still wonder. Like, with the masking thing—we were so freaked and angry, and we refused to kneel. Which was great! And I am proud. But because we were angry, we also weren't calm. I lost my cool a few times. I wonder if we could cultivate the ability to resist, and to say, "Sorry, but that ain't happening" but do it calmly, politely, etc.
I mean, most of the people enforcing the mask crap did not have a clue what they were doing. This is what Havel (a dissident like Solzhenitsyn) meant by "The automatism of the system." They are just drones, going along. Plankton swept by the tide. How do we win them over? I don't think berating them will do it.
We can refuse to kneel without being rude. I am sure there's a way…
You are confusing what they say and what they do. They only tell their opposition that compromise is what makes a "good statesman". Marquess of Queensberry rules are, again, for the opposition only. You seem like the sort of person they compare to Hitler. They do that because it frees their conscience to do anything to stop your resistance and because you may waste time and attention on that attack.
The Communist uses your values against you. If you want peace. They offer it if you do what they say.
We have reached the point very close to the situation between the Nazis and the Jews in Nazi Germany. The difference is that both sides choose the Nazi stance. Freedom lovers want to pursue the final solution against the Left and the left want to do the same to their enemies. Neither side trusts the other--even if one side puts a flower down the barrel of its guns. Even though history should have convinced everyone that war is never a solution, it seems like everyone itches to go to war. Who doesn't support their own army? The soldiers are our fathers, brothers, or sons. Who can conceive of the possibility or even the wisdom of total disarmament?
Why can't we all just get along? What if they gave a war and nobody showed up? Inconceivable! We would have to be willing to turn the other cheek. But we won't. Because we know that to do so is to commit suicide. Nothing will convince us otherwise. We are all boys named Sue.
Can we do it just for one day? One hour? One instance? Not as long as there is one bully. Or one masochist.
How many peacemakers does it take to change the human race?
Well said. That is part of why I don't want a revolution. I don't want to force my views on anyone, or make them submit. I just went them to let me and mine GO.
That's what I want, too. But what of the likely outcome that they won't. I'm thinking of the Russian people who lived so long under the Soviets. Now they're under Putin, and many in our (USA) government are anxious to inflict nuclear war on them. Is our ultimate destiny to be annihilation?
" But what of the likely outcome that they won't."
Yes, the likely outcome is that they won't…yet. Our best hope, and the strategy I intend to employ, is to play a long game. I think we need to get a plan rolling that has a long time-horizon. Longer than many of our remaining lifetimes, probably. That's what the left did 100 years ago, and it worked quite well for them. Each of us has to suspend our desire for instant gratification and commit to something. "We did not light the torch; we will not see the bonfire." This task will require that sort of commitment.
I think people underestimate the value of being likable. On everything from persuasion to promotions at work it plays a meaningful role. Being thoughtful, even keel, and funny helps. I understand its also good to have movie star looks, not that I have any direct experience.
Right. And the converse, too—who likes someone who is unlikable? His dog, I suppose. And maybe his wife, if he is lucky enough, and if she sticks around long enough to see through all that to some deeper soul. But in general…no one.
And yes, it is a fact of life that being good-looking helps. Which is part of why good-looking people more often get away with not being very nice.
Yes, they sure are. And we are not, by nature. FF and I just posited the concept of "respectable rebels" or perhaps "likable rebels." Do you think such a thing is possible?
Yes, being polite, being civil be good things. For one, I've found civility discourages violence in myself.
If I reach a point where I see red, mayhem seems imminent, and I force myself to be extremely civil and polite, refer to the other person as sir, etc., such quickly diffuses my anger and any fight or fight reflex/desire I had.
Hey, I have a question—do you actually literally see red? I have heard this expression so many times, but I have never asked anyone if it quite literally happens to them…
At its most basic level, I would say grace is the empathetic value of being able to consistently step into other people's shoes, even when that action might threaten an egoic response.
My partner says that it's knowing you have a sword, but choosing not to use it in reaction.
Humans have existed for about 11 million years on earth, mostly without any governments, living under the universal natural law applicable to all human beings but not accepted nor practiced by criminals initiatory users of violence. I've written about that natural law before so I won't repeat it here, but I omitted mention of the universal natural economic law of supply and demand which provided humans with all goods and services needed for survival and success during those millions of years before criminals invented governments 'to secure these powers to harm the innocent and get away with it.' There were always a few individuals criminal harmers around but they were few and far between and it wasn't until organized gangs of criminals formed governments and legalized their acts of harm that humanity began to fail.
The universal natural law was a species-wide law that applied to everyone, even criminals who recognized that they were subject to retaliation by their victims. Most people think in terms of nation states and the unnatural laws imposed upon the innocent by predatory governments, bu I don't. I am concerned with species-wide natural law governing everyone on a voluntary mutually beneficial individually chosen and lived by by all. It is intuitive, a simple combination of common sense and The Golden Rule, can be taught to small children without words simply by example and will free us all to be the best we can be, which is all we really want to be anyway.
The summary is that when you are the 'always civil' you will get wiped out by the uncivil. However the always uncivil themselves die out to hybrid strategies immediately afterwards.
The ideal strategy was what they called 'copy-kitten'. Kitten in shorthand for "will return trust with trust" and copy for reciprocal action. They said forgive once or twice but afterwards return incivility for any instance of incivility - however if they flip back to being civil then you can eventually return it as well once they are consistent once or twice.
This simple strategy includes the totality of forgiveness, the duty of the watchman to inform but not endlessly badger, and wiping the dust off your feet if they are determined enemies.
The game boils it down mathematically so convincingly that I would like to see a direct rebuttal if you disagree.
I think the trust in the game is a good stand in for high trust society, politeness, charity, cooperation, etc. For example if an Antifa burns my car down I forgive them once or twice but if they keep doing it then I would be ok to burn their car down too.
To tone it down if a leftist start throwing insults at me on Twitter I can forgive them once or twice, God knows I have mistakenly gotten angry at someone who shot friendly fire at me unknowingly, but if they continue to persist I should hit them back or block. Return the 3rd instance of incivility with incivility.
I’m always amazed how “right here” I learn so much. I’ve always said “hang out with smarter people and you will continue to learn”, I’m glad to be here!
One thing I’ve learned over my 60 years is when I see someone that is working really hard, struggled to raise good kids, or someone helping another, I honor them with a compliment, “your doing a great job”. We all carry honor and have it to give. When we honor someone we’re not just doing them a favor, we are doing ourselves a favor. When showing honor there is a commanded blessing that will be returned back into our own life. It can be as simple as giving up your seat to an older person, let someone go ahead of you in a line, or just complimenting someone. The amount of honor that you show is directly related to the amount of Gods favor you will see in your life.
Paul said in Ephesians 6 “Honor your father and mother” which is the first commandment with a promise, “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy a long life”. This is saying, honor should start at home. It should start in our own family with those closest to us. We should never treat complete strangers better than our family or spouse, it should be opposite that. Young people should listen to their parents. Mark Twain said “When I was 14, my father was so dumb, I could hardly stand to be around him, but when I got to be 21, I was amazed at how much the man had learned”. We should not honor our parents with just words but with how we treat them.
One thing I am sure of, you will never change a dishonorable situation by adding more dishonor. That will always make matters worse. Honoring someone lifts them. You should honor people the way you would want them to be.
I can’t tell you how much respect I have for women. For centuries women have worked and fought for their position in this world. In a general sense, you will never gain honor, and should not gain that honor, by dishonoring women, plain and simple. You will never receive what you are not willing to give, and if you don’t give honor you won’t have honor. The present dishonor shown to women today saddens me. It is a sign of a sickness spread in our society. The key to a breakthrough that we pray for, is to honor the people and women that God has put in our lives in a greater way.
The only way I see so many of these problems in our world today being resolved, is for people and government to return to honoring and respecting the people, and their God given freedoms, free thoughts, privacies and liberties, anything short of that is surely done with the intent to divide us. J.Goodrich
"For centuries women have worked and fought for their position in this world."
—Good article on that today: https://www.organarchy.net/p/first-wave-feminism-a-necessary-evil
Very well put as usual James.
Thank you Hat!!
You can always count on me to add another perspective here from time to time. This time it's to shift the paradigm a tad to where being uncivil has demonstrably benefited the cause of freedom.
To wit, when I've traveled outside the US I've seen and shaken my head at what's described as "the ugly American." Rude, demanding, arrogant, forgetting they are guests in another nation. Not respecting the ways of others. I'd feel for the locals subjected to the ugly American. And tried to make a different impression, as a way to say, "we're not all like that."
I know others will feel the same way. And become apologetic, embarrassed for our nation. It wasn't until 2020 and its aftermath we still live with for me to come to another understanding of "the ugly American" that's not so judgmental. I now believe that had we held onto more of that rudeness, that "ugly American" in our nation's DNA that we'd not have joined in the rush to totalitarianism.
When I've visited Nordic nations I've noted how nice and polite the people generally are. Very civil. There's a superficial civility in public interactions. Not particularly warm, on the cooler side. It's only when you spend time with locals in their homes when they're surrounded by friends and you've been invited to be one of them that they tend to let their hair down, become warmer. And remain polite, civil.
I visited Iceland. So I took note of this story out of Iceland when I read it. Iceland is a very civil, obedient country. And obedience to authority is fertile ground for totalitarianism. That nice civility comes with that big vulnerability.
Count how many times the word "obedience/obey" is used in this story out of Iceland about a nurse in Iceland who defied the testing mandates and was punished, fined for challenging authority:
Could terminate work contract of a nurse who denied taking rapid Covid tests
Iceland Monitor, March 9, 2023
https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2023/03/09/could_terminate_work_contract_of_a_nurse_who_denied/
"the nurse disobeyed company orders"
"she was required to obey such orders"
"employees' obedience to the employer's legal order is one of the primary duties of employees"
"an employee must submit to the mastery of his employer"
"work procedures must be obeyed"
"breach of a duty to obey or refusal by the employee to obey a directive"
"employee’s breach of the duty to obey"
"the employee’s refusal to obey is considered a serious failure"
"Obviously, obedience is considered to be an important part of running a business"
"obedience obligations are evidently to be regarded as critical to the operation of the policy"
"The Court finds that the breach of the duty of obedience by the nurse during the time in question constitutes a serious breach of the employment contract"
"The woman was then sentenced to pay the company Klíníkin 1.2 million ISK [$8,500 USD] in legal costs."
FF - If authorities (including employers) order the people to wear anything, a mask, a strap-on dildo, whatever in public they will and must. Obey. It's the civil thing to do. Society stays nice and peaceful that way. But not very free. Obedient and free do not go together. Mutually exclusive.
Don't mistake nice, civil people for opponents of totalitarianism. Quite the opposite. Nice people support totalitarianism. By their unflinching obedience to authority. And desire to not offend, to remain civil.
I'm also reminded of stories I read from Germans who faced American soldiers in WWII. The Devil's Brigade:
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/first-special-service-force.html
"The “Black Devils,” as they were called by the enemy, carried stickers with their unit patch and the slogan – “the worst is yet to come” – written in German. They stuck these on the bodies of those they killed, as well as on German fortifications. The 1SSF’s reputation was so fierce that, prior to engaging with the group, the German soldiers were informed they would be “fighting an elite Canadian-American Force. They are treacherous, unmerciful and clever. You cannot afford to relax.”.”
Other German's opinions of the American soldier:
https://inquisitiveflow.com/german-opinion-of-american-soldiers-in-ww2
Opinion on American soldiers’ character during the battle:
"Another claim Americans were worthy fighters, quite reckless but had nerve."
Americans as their prisoners of war:
"The Americans would complain about the food, which was indeed bad all the time.
They were bad prisoners since they won’t talk or work."
American officers and subordinate relationship:
"The subordinate soldiers lacked iron discipline when it comes to their officers. However, their cordial relationship compensated for this."
FF - Rudeness. Disobedience. Incivility. As an asset. A complete paradigm shift. It's how we stay free. That doesn't mean I go around now and intentionally try to be rude. And as with all things the ideal is found in balance between civil and uncivil. But if it has to be one or the other, uncivil and free or civil and enslaved I will choose uncivil exactly ten out of ten times.
I don't apologize for offending where offense is intentional. And the words "no" and "go f yourself" will come off my lips when told to do something I don't wish to and without explanation unless it earns my consent based on the merit of the demand/request. No "yes" just to be nice and civil.
How's that for a paradigm shift and defense of incivility?
I am not convinced that civility MUST go hand in hand with servility. I see, for sure, how it often does. I have often marveled, for example, at how hive minded the Brits can be, and how unlike us that makes them.
But I do not think that these two things MUST be linked. A knight might be chivalrous and yet still deadly in battle.
Your point is, of course, well taken—because we definitely do not want to be servile. But I think we should find a way to be civil. Civil to friends and neutrals, but brutal to those who would oppress us?
That balance thing. Of course I prefer civility, and when someone's rude I note it, I don't like it, it may and has provoked rudeness in return. It can become a spiral of incivility that can get out of control until an external ordering force is applied. But in the instances I highlighted incivility becomes a defense against totalitarianism. The reason the United States has the globalists conniving and tinkering in ways they don't bother doing in the rest of the world is that we've been described as "ungovernable." No doubt you've seen bumper stickers, tee-shirts and memes with words to that effect, "be ungovernable." It's our "ugly American" rudeness and incivility that is the basis of our ungovernability.
The more we try to conform with European and Asian sensibilities, as most of the educated, privileged class try to model in their effete manners and mannerisms, the lure of playing by Marques of Queensberry rules in public debates and battles the more freedom is lost. Not wanting to appear rude and selfish, the mark of a "good statesman" today is negotiation and compromise, noble lies to the unsophisticated commoners to 'reframe' authoritarian control as protecting freedom, all for a 'greater good.' Is why the needle of human governance has gone only one direction the better part of the last century - towards authoritarian/totalitarian police state surveillance command and control. In what ways are we more free today than a century ago? Porn? Drugs? Atheism? Expanded access to vices is hardly synonymous with more freedom. Depravity 'freed' from God is another sure path into totalitarianism; it begs for rulers to save us from our depraved selves.
Balance. But if society must lean in one direction or the other, uncivil freedom or civil slavery may it lean towards uncivil freedom.
I agree with you. I will have to figure out how to express this as a part of the overall outlook.
Question: Is it possible to be polite even while saying, "@#$% you, we will never kneel"?
It is possible. I'm not saying I follow this practice all the time... Ideally, we should typically strive to be more civil than the person we are dealing with. Incivility, should only be practiced deliberately. During Covid tyranny, I ended a 20+ year friendship with, "I find your behavior towards me unacceptable.
You are supporting evil because it doesn't directly harm you. I'm cutting everyone that supports tyranny out of my life. Good luck, and feel free to let me know if you repent." From my perspective, that was polite and civil, but bluntly honest.
Again, during Covid, one of my friends was at Walmart when they were enforcing the mask policy at the registers. They informed him that he had to wear a mask to make a purchase. He calmly informed them that he did not have a mask and would not wear a mask if he did. Then he left to do business elsewhere and let them figure out where to return a car full of stuff. It's a small thing, but a polite no to tyranny is often all it takes. Had 200 people done the same on the first day, the mask policy would have effectively gone away. Our more freedom minded Subway started off that way. They put up a sign informing customers that the state had a mask policy mandated and that if you were not wearing one they would assume that it was due to a health condition that prevented you from wearing one and that existing law prohibited them from inquiring about your condition.
A polite no, to an unacceptable but politely issued instruction is a good place to start. I like, "I would prefer not to." just because it makes me smile inside. Bartleby is one of the fictional characters that left a lasting impression.
You can't change government by yourself. You can be part of what moves the mass of people to change government. Just make sure your actions move them in the right direction. To the observer that just began paying attention, the person doing the yelling is unhinged. The Communists have used the playbook where the overreaction to their deliberately unacceptable behavior is the tool to advance their revolution. Just because they are evil does not mean we cannot learn from them what tactics to use and what to avoid.
When my better self heeded the calls to be rational and empathetic I was generally more persuasive. And then there's when I had my fill, the person or situation was too much and I let loose. Not much empathy or rational to the outside observer. But sure was necessary to vent as I did, lest it fester inside me to something even more extreme than merely impolite and rude language. Though I'd often later regret it.
I found David Charalambous' "Reaching People" videos sometime in 2021:
https://reachingpeople.net/presentations/
And they made a lot of sense. I tried to practice the techniques he describes, and when I did they usually were better outcomes than how I had been trying before. And then I'd meet a situation I hadn't practiced for, considered, and reverted to form. Have regret. Tell myself to learn from it and do better next time. Over and over.
I never mastered his techniques. It takes a whole lot of intentional practice, trial, error, for it to become a habit. I've not put the requisite work in to make it a happen and will still revert to form if pushed. Life trials and errors. As long as we strive to learn from our mistakes it's all progress. Until then I remain a spectacularly messy work in spectacular progress.
Not related to the polite/impolite subject, but this is an interesting video he also presented in from about eight months ago:
"Hidden Influence" - the forces that convinced so many (53 minutes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8t-DyjK8zkk
Work in progress here too, brother. But it's work worth doing.
Your words, and those of FreedomFox, are helping a great deal in this process. Thank you!
In Gulag Archipelago Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote:
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur — what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!”
FF - That wouldn't have been very civil and polite. The police "were just doing their jobs." Why be uncivil, even violent against state operatives just doing their jobs? Because, freedom. What Solzhenitsyn and others who had their freedom taken from them burned inside at was having restrained their uncivil, rude instincts in favor of civility and politeness. Caring about self to the point of incivility is rational and fiercely protective of freedom. Becoming so domesticated into civility that we care more about being welcome in polite society makes us easy to enslave. Only when our would-be rulers fear that we won't be civil are they restrained.
Sort of like how some nations opposed to US hegemony like North Korea and Iran get all crazy-eyed and crazy-talking leaders. Who do crazy, uncivil things. Makes the bigger nation, US, think twice about doing something to them. Like a big, muscular bouncer at a bar. They'd much rather take on another big, muscular guy in the bar than the little crazy-eyed, crazy-talking guy. The big guy is predictable. The little guy might do something crazy, unrestrained, stab the bouncer in the eye with a broken beer bottle. Completely uncivil and impolite. Makes the bigger guy, governments think twice.
But then we have to know when the Solzhenitsyn moment is upon us. We are in oppression now—soft and frog-boiling and Huxleyan (as opposed to Orwellian) though it may be. At one level of analysis, the sort of resistance Solzhenitsyn wanted is justified NOW. But it also will just get us all martyred. So we have to know what actually triggers that.
Milton Mayer gave us an insight about how totalitarianism crept into German lives, slowly at first in his 1955 work, "They Thought They Were Free":
https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html
"To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.
How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice-'Resist the beginnings' and 'Consider the end.' But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might.”
...
“On this new level you live, you have been living more comfortably every day, with new morals, new principles. You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things that your father, even in Germany, could not have imagined.”
FF - A whole lot more in that book if you're not familiar with it. Very few people will see it. I happened to have a greater degree of political and historical awareness than most ever had occasion to develop. So do you. But most don't.
Absent requiring an entire population to become more politically aware, perhaps driving home the simple maxims of "Resist the beginnings, Consider the end" as general, usual and ordinary, customary for any and all changes to law is the only way. Provoking that critical thinking. As many on the left now scream with shrills that Trump must be resisted how does that instinct get focused on ALL political leaders, not just the "other team's?" I dunno. Maybe this hive mind sharing thing you and I do will help us discover the solution. And I'm pretty sure it won't be directing rudeness at those we seek to change the minds of. I think that's reserved for resisting as totalitarian measures are enacted.
Comment above fits with one I made on one of your prior Stacks about mask enforcement being stopped at big box stores because of customers who done lost their minds about forced masking. Very uncivil. They took "being ungovernable" seriously, to an extreme. They're doing prison time for it. As tragic as it was, their incivility resulted in more freedom for the disobedient, rude and impolite.
https://christophercook.substack.com/p/pastor-powlowski-imprisoned-treated-enemy-combatant/comment/88463582
Yes, I recall that. But I still wonder. Like, with the masking thing—we were so freaked and angry, and we refused to kneel. Which was great! And I am proud. But because we were angry, we also weren't calm. I lost my cool a few times. I wonder if we could cultivate the ability to resist, and to say, "Sorry, but that ain't happening" but do it calmly, politely, etc.
I mean, most of the people enforcing the mask crap did not have a clue what they were doing. This is what Havel (a dissident like Solzhenitsyn) meant by "The automatism of the system." They are just drones, going along. Plankton swept by the tide. How do we win them over? I don't think berating them will do it.
We can refuse to kneel without being rude. I am sure there's a way…
You are confusing what they say and what they do. They only tell their opposition that compromise is what makes a "good statesman". Marquess of Queensberry rules are, again, for the opposition only. You seem like the sort of person they compare to Hitler. They do that because it frees their conscience to do anything to stop your resistance and because you may waste time and attention on that attack.
The Communist uses your values against you. If you want peace. They offer it if you do what they say.
For the record I was using their voice to describe good statesmen and Queensberry rules. Of course, they are as you describe.
We have reached the point very close to the situation between the Nazis and the Jews in Nazi Germany. The difference is that both sides choose the Nazi stance. Freedom lovers want to pursue the final solution against the Left and the left want to do the same to their enemies. Neither side trusts the other--even if one side puts a flower down the barrel of its guns. Even though history should have convinced everyone that war is never a solution, it seems like everyone itches to go to war. Who doesn't support their own army? The soldiers are our fathers, brothers, or sons. Who can conceive of the possibility or even the wisdom of total disarmament?
Why can't we all just get along? What if they gave a war and nobody showed up? Inconceivable! We would have to be willing to turn the other cheek. But we won't. Because we know that to do so is to commit suicide. Nothing will convince us otherwise. We are all boys named Sue.
Can we do it just for one day? One hour? One instance? Not as long as there is one bully. Or one masochist.
How many peacemakers does it take to change the human race?
Blessed are the dead.
Well said. That is part of why I don't want a revolution. I don't want to force my views on anyone, or make them submit. I just went them to let me and mine GO.
That's what I want, too. But what of the likely outcome that they won't. I'm thinking of the Russian people who lived so long under the Soviets. Now they're under Putin, and many in our (USA) government are anxious to inflict nuclear war on them. Is our ultimate destiny to be annihilation?
" Is our ultimate destiny to be annihilation?"
—I don't know, of course, but I don't think so.
" But what of the likely outcome that they won't."
Yes, the likely outcome is that they won't…yet. Our best hope, and the strategy I intend to employ, is to play a long game. I think we need to get a plan rolling that has a long time-horizon. Longer than many of our remaining lifetimes, probably. That's what the left did 100 years ago, and it worked quite well for them. Each of us has to suspend our desire for instant gratification and commit to something. "We did not light the torch; we will not see the bonfire." This task will require that sort of commitment.
I think people underestimate the value of being likable. On everything from persuasion to promotions at work it plays a meaningful role. Being thoughtful, even keel, and funny helps. I understand its also good to have movie star looks, not that I have any direct experience.
Right. And the converse, too—who likes someone who is unlikable? His dog, I suppose. And maybe his wife, if he is lucky enough, and if she sticks around long enough to see through all that to some deeper soul. But in general…no one.
And yes, it is a fact of life that being good-looking helps. Which is part of why good-looking people more often get away with not being very nice.
Very Accurate Well Put Christopher!
🙏🏻
"For if you [only] love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same?" (Matthew 5:46)
How you navigate problems, including people who do problematic things, reveals your character.
True. But see also FreedomFox's important challenge. We cannot become doormats like so many others have…
No doormats in my religion. And I find tribalists and other collectivists to be the real cowardly doormats.
Yes, they sure are. And we are not, by nature. FF and I just posited the concept of "respectable rebels" or perhaps "likable rebels." Do you think such a thing is possible?
Possible? Better than possible; actual! Jesus 😇
I use the term "dignified defiance" in Station 5 of my book, which sounds a lot like "respectable rebels," etc.
Not saying I agree with Jackson Browne's politics or his theology, but he has a beautiful song called "The Rebel Jesus": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKuCTgGDX5Y
Yes, I suppose Jesus would be a rather famous and popular example. Even bigger than James Dean 🤣🤣
"dignified defiance"—I like it.
Yes, being polite, being civil be good things. For one, I've found civility discourages violence in myself.
If I reach a point where I see red, mayhem seems imminent, and I force myself to be extremely civil and polite, refer to the other person as sir, etc., such quickly diffuses my anger and any fight or fight reflex/desire I had.
Hey, I have a question—do you actually literally see red? I have heard this expression so many times, but I have never asked anyone if it quite literally happens to them…
Nope.
I was just reading a little bit about it. Some people, apparently, do report seeing red, or perceiving red more, when angry.
Could well be. I'm pretty mellow I guess, I've only been extremely angry a few times.
Civility is the practice of grace.
One can never go wrong by being graceful.
Amen.
In this context, how would you define"grace"?
At its most basic level, I would say grace is the empathetic value of being able to consistently step into other people's shoes, even when that action might threaten an egoic response.
My partner says that it's knowing you have a sword, but choosing not to use it in reaction.
That's pretty cool.
Humans have existed for about 11 million years on earth, mostly without any governments, living under the universal natural law applicable to all human beings but not accepted nor practiced by criminals initiatory users of violence. I've written about that natural law before so I won't repeat it here, but I omitted mention of the universal natural economic law of supply and demand which provided humans with all goods and services needed for survival and success during those millions of years before criminals invented governments 'to secure these powers to harm the innocent and get away with it.' There were always a few individuals criminal harmers around but they were few and far between and it wasn't until organized gangs of criminals formed governments and legalized their acts of harm that humanity began to fail.
The universal natural law was a species-wide law that applied to everyone, even criminals who recognized that they were subject to retaliation by their victims. Most people think in terms of nation states and the unnatural laws imposed upon the innocent by predatory governments, bu I don't. I am concerned with species-wide natural law governing everyone on a voluntary mutually beneficial individually chosen and lived by by all. It is intuitive, a simple combination of common sense and The Golden Rule, can be taught to small children without words simply by example and will free us all to be the best we can be, which is all we really want to be anyway.
Let's do it!
Civility must hit back in order to stay in the game.
May I share a small online game that demonstrates my point?
The game: https://ncase.me/trust/
Text Description: https://www.clearerthinking.org/post/evolution-of-trust-game
The summary is that when you are the 'always civil' you will get wiped out by the uncivil. However the always uncivil themselves die out to hybrid strategies immediately afterwards.
The ideal strategy was what they called 'copy-kitten'. Kitten in shorthand for "will return trust with trust" and copy for reciprocal action. They said forgive once or twice but afterwards return incivility for any instance of incivility - however if they flip back to being civil then you can eventually return it as well once they are consistent once or twice.
This simple strategy includes the totality of forgiveness, the duty of the watchman to inform but not endlessly badger, and wiping the dust off your feet if they are determined enemies.
The game boils it down mathematically so convincingly that I would like to see a direct rebuttal if you disagree.
Very interesting. Is the cooperation (or lack thereof) in play in the game the same as civility/incivility, though?
I think the trust in the game is a good stand in for high trust society, politeness, charity, cooperation, etc. For example if an Antifa burns my car down I forgive them once or twice but if they keep doing it then I would be ok to burn their car down too.
To tone it down if a leftist start throwing insults at me on Twitter I can forgive them once or twice, God knows I have mistakenly gotten angry at someone who shot friendly fire at me unknowingly, but if they continue to persist I should hit them back or block. Return the 3rd instance of incivility with incivility.
That seems like an entirely reasonable formula to me!
Thank you!! 🙂🙌🫶
🙏🏻
🙏
Herr Cook
Thanks for your civility
It allows for open conversation and discussion finding out what we have in common
And also allows one’s hypothesis to be proven wrong
The Orthodox is mostly wrong and threatening but its mass and momentum change gradually-the herd shifts
Tusen Takk
Jon
I wonder—has the mainstream always been as wrong as it is now?
I believe it follows the YinYang progression through generational change
Perhaps so!
I like this!
I am glad!
Correction: I KNOW they appreciate it!! 🥰
Yup. We won't be able to reach or convince everyone. But we can reach some, and do our best among ourselves.