No Gods Before Ate

The promise and hope of a 'meritocracy' is the promise and hope of

magical thinking,

a kind of thinking tethered to a fantasy of a superior people, a kind of thinking unhinged from the truth and reality,

where 'meritocracy' is not a dream but a dog whistle, blown and blustered, to deny human beings any universal right to exist,

in Ate's name. 

No Gods Before Ate

When being offensive pretends to be demure - or being virulent pretends to be benign - or being barbarous pretends to be civil -

what is this? and why?

*

When a war is fought with bombs and famine, you know it is a war. You know that armed hostility seethes between you and peace. You know that now is no time to indulge in inaction.

But -

you also know -

bombs do not have to be bombs to be bombs and famine does not have to be famine to be famine.

*

In other words -

when a war is fought with bombs and famine, you know it is a war - even when, say, bombs assume an imposture of demure purity, famine assumes an imposture of benign virtue, and denials of peace assume an imposture of civilized generosity -

you know that what froths between you and amity, will not quit its antagonism - even when its animus is, oh, welcomed by acquiescence and appeasement.

*

Because you know a war does not have to be a war to be a war.

Likewise, an armistice without a cessation of arms is not a healing ceasefire, despite a verbal cloaking of ordnances as threatless friends.

*

For real demure purity does not celebrate the blowing up of civilian economies and finances, urban medical services and rural health care, local safety nets, including band-aids against resource instability;

real benign virtue does not applaud the arbitrary and cutthroat denial of food security to children and veterans and seniors and homeless families;

real civilized generosity does not praise acts of vengeance and seizures of spoils as acts of love that must be suffered for billionaire victors.

*

As if death knells, in Ate's name, with sublime joy.

*

When being offensive or being virulent or being barbarous

emphatically insists this is the very definition of being fair and being reasonable and being nothing more than common sense -

I ask -

when did offense become fair to you? virulence become reasonable to you? barbarity become nothing less than common sense to you?

*

Never.

Because -

when it is you, subjected to offense or virulence or barbarity, this fuels a lived experience defined by grievances -

your truth and your reality -

until your answer to what is this? and why? becomes the promise and hope of a 'meritocracy' that is not a meritocracy.

*

The promise and hope of a kind of human invention, a narrative that untethers what you believe from what is real, to say 'merit' does not have to be glorious to be glorified.

In other words -

words without merit do not have to be commendable to be commended; intentions without merit do not have to be honorable to be honored; actions without merit do not have to be admirable to be admired; etc.

*

Because you know a 'meritocracy' doesn't have to be a meritocracy to be a meritocracy.

*

Never mind

a real meritocracy does not celebrate impulsive wreckers gleefully feeding safety nets to literal shredders, because wasteful efficiency is genius;

a real meritocracy does not applaud punching down, because unimpeachable bullying is a superior people's manifestly destined right;

a real meritocracy does not praise low hanging fruits or trifling crumbs or witless polemics, smugly gilded with infirm promises that suffering for the cause will be absolutely worth it.

*

Obviously.

*

When acts of love that must be suffered for billionaire victors

are part and parcel to a kind of thinking disunited from the truth and reality,

this is neither tough love nor real love nor fatherly love nor divine love;

this is not love at all.

Note

Ate (mythology, here at Wikipedia)

M