The Keys to the Kingdom and Other Nonsense

From "there's nothing to see here" to "the keys to the kingdom are at stake" -

does it matter

who's right and who's wrong?

The Keys to the Kingdom and Other Nonsense

A number of people will say: "the keys to the kingdom are at stake". Likewise, a number of people will say: "there's nothing to see here". Not because these are factual statements, per se. For 

making statements is neither synonymous with honesty nor integrity, is it?

*

Indeed, many individuals 'issue statements' that are outright lies.

*

Case in point: consumer pushing.

Businesses in the business of business are explicitly not about morality nor about conscience after all. Whether such businesses are in the business of popular temporary and cosmetic remedies or fossil-fuel-powered tools.

Such that an abundance of 'trust' professedly 'earned' by corporations from loyal consumers through pushy pitches can hardly be said to be the result of contests of facts... so much as contests of popularity, no?

*

Needless to say, a nation of consumers subject to endless and dishonest strategic exploitation for increasing share of the domestic and global economy, is invariably likely to come to believe that 'businesses know something' that, say, governments do not. In other words,

what has softened the beaches, so to speak, of our collective senses, if you will, is corporate demand.

*

With our senses so 'softened', we accept the unacceptable.

We pay bloated tips that are earnings from labor that should be recovered from shares of employer profits. We pay inflated costs for goods and services that are offsets of regulatory compliance passed onto consumers that should be recovered from shares of profits distributed to executives and shareholders. 

Then we say we're adamantly for tip-earning work and tip-earning workers because paying for work burdens employers. Then we say we're unwaveringly for 'de-regulating industries' and banishing nanny-states because ballooning compensatory pricing burdens pocketbooks.

*

As for government measures that obligate wages and benefits be accessible to employees by businesses that reap rewards from labor and laborers? We say: "we'd rather champion 'contract work'." As for government measures that mandate adherence to safety standards by businesses that subject consumers to material risks and harms? We say: "we'd rather do without 'red-tape'."

As if these ideas are wholly ours and not in service to calculated strategies that invent the appearance of an uncontrived swelling of popular approval for the unacceptable.

*

Including a belief that business-minded hires for government roles makes unreserved sense.

*

For while corporate demand governs the business of business, the public good relies on groundswells and momentum and will for its governance.

Such that plucking outstanding talent from businesses that are unapologetically for crusades against the interests of people and planet and nations and governments to execute the interests of the public good is plainly less to do with effecting a 'sensible' government than with legitimizing the unacceptable as 'the will of the people'.

*

Deserting our common senses, a number of people will say: "such 'sensible' government is not only 'good', I defy anybody to tell me otherwise".

As if such steadfast conviction sealed through relentless and self-serving campaigns calculated to sow mistrust in efforts to serve 'the public good' that characterize public works as unconditionally bad and wrong... is 'earned'. 

After all, a corporation and its bottom line are neither synonymous with trust nor transparency so much as unrepentant apologetics.

Whether such business is in the business of real estate or politics or evangelism or slavered espousal of incoherent nonsense, no?

Then the Wheels Fall Off

I.

A capitalist fever dream is not a 'sensible' government.

Please.

*

Insisting that obligating employers, businesses, and corporations be decent is a wasteful exercise in nanny-state overreach is a pushy pitch less to do with governing corporate 'citizens' than with an unceasing crusade against being willfully decent towards people and planet and nations and governments.

As if what's standing in the way of businesses in the business of business realizing their extolled potential for increasing profitability at any cost being regulation is unconscionable.

*

Such that when the nuts and bolts of governing corporate 'citizens' is advanced by business-minded talent, to what degree is government 'standing in the way of corporations and their bottom lines' really... and to what degree is government codifying the unacceptable as 'the will of the people'?

*

As for oft decried 'out of control' incompetence,

surely a nation of consumers cannot believe that businesses in the business of unrepentant apologetics serve 'the common good' more responsibly than a government of, by, and for the people?

As if the outstanding hand of responsible corporate governance and 'the public good'... are one and the same.

*

II.

A populist fever dream isn't a 'sensible' government, either.

*

Absurd outrage and howls of 'the sky is falling' and alarmist pandering insult our ask to be seen and heard. Likewise promises of spun candy floss and windbags and blowhards pledging to be geese who lay golden eggs 'for the people'... meet this moment with hollow patter.

That a nation of consumers appears to subsequently shrug, speaks not to what people are asking for so much as to what has become 'business as usual'. 

A leaning into 'feelings are facts' and 'vibes are real', never mind nuts and bolts.

*

That is to say, infinite variations on the themes of 'rescue' and 'salvation': everybody's demanding rescue and everything's our salvation. 

Joyfully. Hopefully. Beautifully. For indulging in fever dreams make our worries and our troubles as ephemeral as frothed foam. Really. 

As if a recipe of equal parts faithless vows and aggressive positivity solve real challenges faced by real people. 

*

There are simply no easy fixes. Still populism attracts fans ecstatic to witness it proclaim: "there, in fact, are."

Because a lie is more palatable than the truth?

*

III.

To state the obvious:

if selling to a nation of consumers what it's not buying isn't winning and selling to a nation of consumers what it's buying is winning -

is "there's nothing to see here" and "the keys to the kingdom are at stake" about being honest no matter what? or is "there's nothing to see here" and "the keys to the kingdom are at stake" about winning no matter what?

*

So... our public forum, if you will, about 'sensible' government is about making a statement, isn't it? and this is about winning, am I right?

*

Namely, a number of people are touting our measurable 'consensus', our professed 'agreement' on advancing and endorsing such 'sensible' government. Never mind

that such 'consensus' is plainly flimsy. Because

our 'consensus' on 'the common good' crashes sideways when we define what matters to us in mundane raw tangible particulars. Likewise our 'agreement' on 'the public good' careens off the rails when we define the role of government and what it protects beyond hazy generalities and fuzzy abstractions. Because

*

when we succumb to the fatigue of being pushy pitched, we the people abandon the common sense that cautions against inventions of corporate demand, that favors broadly beneficial public works, because we'd rather

embrace our role as a nation of enthusiastic fans and loyalists, emphatically disinterested in facts and vigorously engaged in contests of popularity. Because

this is what we buy and champion as a nation of consumers. So we shrug when corporate governance eschews good citizenship for 'business as usual'. Then

*

windbags and blowhards urge we the masses to save ourselves and rescue each other by choosing a fever dream wrapped in slavered nonsense. Which is to say, then

the wheels fall off.

M

*

Epilogue

When so much content before us is a broken record of "there's nothing to see here" and "the keys to the kingdom are at stake" - maybe this is how we go nowhere.

Because buying everything we're sold - hopes, fears, dreams - isn't the key to everything. I mean, content calculated to strategically exploit we the masses, would us give the keys to the kingdom for the materialization of increasing profitability at any cost... while soothed and pacified by lullabies of nothing to see here.

So fever dreams that peddle - hopes, fears, dreams - are not about we the people retaining possession of our 'keys' so much as we the people exercising our choice... to give the keys to the kingdom for the materialization of winning no matter what.

Which is to say, if the rubber isn't hitting the road, maybe the wheels have fallen off and we're going nowhere and everybody's right and everything's wrong and what matters is

Ideological Totality! The March of Tickets! Power!

Because a fiction is a lie.

M

*

Note

(i) "Case in point: consumer pushing" references, for example but not exclusively, 'nudge theory' which is an application of 'behavioral science' to the 'psychology of consumer behavior in economics'. Note that applications of 'behavioral science', whether with respect to 'psychology' or 'education' or 'economics', too often ineptly address questions of morality and conscience. For example: "the business of popular temporary and cosmetic remedies or fossil-fuel-powered tools."

(ii) The Epilogue includes links to apropos posts: Ideological Totality (September 18, 2024), The March of Tickets (August 25, 2024), Power (August 18, 2024).

M

Ideological Totality

Maybe we're afraid of someone's music, too loud and too vulgar. Or that religion that evokes a sense of unease because it's so strange. Or time and

the uncontrollable,

the future and

the unknowable.

Ideological Totality

I

We think because we feel terror -- we think because hope will never fail to rise in triumph -- we think because the unimaginable is inconceivable -- we think because what's impossible cannot be what's real --

we believe the problem is someone's music. or religion. or the future. because we know the problem is everything and everybody except

we thinkers, we believers, we knowers.

*

We feel the problem, so manifestly present in our lives, is as inescapable as the sun and the moon. As real as waking and sleeping, we feel the truth like a tooth that aches

in the bones that cradle our skulls. Who dare say

this is misinformed? or disinformed? or uninformed?

*

Well -- facts will rescue us! 

From how we feel? Like playing rock, paper, scissors?

Because because -- reality checks us! 

From the problem? Like manifesting a wish by tapping our heels?

After all -- the truth has sheltered us!

From what?

*

We think because we believe -- we are saved. We think because we know -- we are saved. We think because we feel -- we are saved. From

fear. unease. doubt.

*

Not because a fact will suck all the oxygen from an immovable feeling. Or because a feeling will foundationally cut through an inflexible fact. For of course, some facts do suck all the oxygen from immovable feelings and some feelings do foundationally cut through inflexible facts. After all,

*

when a god proclaimed that it was the only truth -- when a color of people declared that it was the only people in chains -- when a party vowed that it was the only answer --

what eclipsed all the light in the world? Nothing but

a shadow. So unthinkable, the solution to the problem of illumination, who dared gainsay

such proclamation? or such declaration? or such vow?

*

II

What??

*

Totality isn't a thing blessed. It isn't a thing to claim. It isn't a thing for taking. Totality is an exercise of free will that rejects enlightenment for artificial 'light' that anoints false piety, righteousness, and authority in false glory.

Such that when a god proclaims, a color of people declares, a party vows -- both 'the solution' and 'the problem' are illuminated -- neither by reason nor by honesty nor by revelation.

*

Who dare deny we thinkers, we believers, we knowers who feel the problem cannot be what's real -- we thinkers, we believers, we knowers who feel the inconceivable is the only solution -- we thinkers, we believers, we knowers who are saved

when everything and everybody is eclipsed by a shadow that gate-keeps goodness, decency, and merit -- a shadow that says fake heroism, ease, and certainty are as good as the real thing -- a shadow and nothing more.

*

So what if that which is absolutely anointed by the 'light' of artificiality is definitively nothing but a shadow? Who would question this enlightened matter of principle but the misinformed! the disinformed! the uninformed!

Who would dare?

*

III

Maybe we're afraid of fear. unease. doubt. So we will ourselves

to pretend. to imagine. to make believe. both 'the solution' and the 'problem' have to do with what a god proclaimed. or what a color of people declared. or what a party vowed. never mind

reason or honesty or revelation.

*

Maybe we're saved. So we will ourselves unafraid of someone's music. or religion. or the future. Because being saved eclipses all the light in the world.

*

Maybe ideological totality is as brittle as a cracker and as inexplicably formless as a nameless specter -- it's facts! it's feelings! it's both! it's neither! and as real as waking and sleeping. Who dare not

know that gate-kept piety, righteousness, and authority

pale in the light of the real thing.

Author's Note

Ideological totality is the eclipsing of all but one religious, cultural, political, etc. idea as an 'enlightened matter of principle'.

Such that piety, righteousness, and authority are gate-kept in order to proclaim, declare, and vow that a totality of ideology is 'the purest expression' of goodness, decency, and merit.

Hence counterfeit heroism, ease, and certainty advanced as salvation from fear, unease, and doubt. After all, who would dare gainsay facts and reality? or deny rescue and shelter? or question fear-motivated will or salvation-motivated will?

As if a thing as brittle as a cracker and as inexplicably formless as a nameless specter cannot be gainsaid and denied and known as a shadow and nothing more.

M