Got inner turmoil?

skdadl at pogge reminds us that certain parties regularly get away with spinning their regular wrongitude into a larger, more noble narrative of rightness.  And that those who were right never get the credit for it.

Look: the point is that Iggy and company may have been wrong in the observable, normal universe---what you or I might call "reality"---but they were wrong in a noble, beautiful way.  The kind of wrongness to which they fell victim is the kind of wrongness that allows one to cover ones eyes with the back of one's hand, stretch out the other hand, and sigh, "Ah, me!" 

On the other hand, those who were right are, as Krugman points out, DFHs.  They may have been right in the observable universe, but they weren't right in an ennobling way.  They were right in a childish, "I told you so" way, which only highlights their fundamental unseriousness.  It was easy for them to be right.  When DFHs are right, they are right in a dirty $@#$ing way.

You see, the real distinction between being right and being wrong is not one of verifiability.  It is one of aesthetics.  Was it difficult for you to come to your conclusion?  Did you suffer for it?  Was it dramatic?  Did you sit leaning forward, chin on fist, in pensive repose like that cliché thinker sculpture, only with more clothes?  It's the inner turmoil, and the hard decisions about other people's lives (whether they will live or not) that makes you a Serious Person.

But if the answer was obvious to you, plain as day, well, that's a pretty ugly way to come to the right conclusion.  No drama, no suffering, no inner turmoil.  You didn't even have an interesting pose.  There was nothing tragic about it.  You may as well have been at the grocery store or driving home or doing whatever it is that unserious, unimportant people do.

If you come to conclusions based on evidence, and if you see what obviously is unfolding before your eyes, and you do not have a Deep, Difficult Choice to make to sacrifice the lives of thousands, you are unserious and Serious People should ignore you.  Actually, the choice to sacrifice thousands of lives would prove that you were a Serious Person, because you certainly felt inner turmoil as you did so.

And the inner turmoil is what matters.

Comments

[johnny rotten of sunnybrook farm]

nicely done.

Being wrong in the right way is more valid, more serious than being right in the wrong way.

But liberals are the moral relativists.

How long have we been living in George Orwell's world again? I lose track, and I'm not sure if time measurements are of the correct ideological purity....

[Snag]

I find it even more serious when a person shakes their head sadly before acknowledging the need to run tanks through a neighborhood full of civilians.

[johnny rotten of sunnybrook farm]

well, snag that leaves out Kraphammer and Kristol. Because they very nearly cackle with glee when they encourage those types of actions.

And Chimpy of course just smirks and goes 'heh-heh'

[mdhatter]

They were right in a childish, "I told you so" way, which only highlights their fundamental unseriousness.

None of the assholes at the bar remember the bet we made about WMD being a hoax and Iraqi Freedom being a giant snow job to justify a 50+ year presence in Iraq.

I'm owed dozens and dozens of drinks.

I'm deeply serious.