the best attitude is Gratitude

the Secret

the property—erh, prosperity gospel

when depressed my father would yell at me and tell me I was transcendentally ungrateful, compared to the all suffering of limbless children in war zones

he sent me a business insider article about the kid who went to jail in Israel for not joining the military and said “looks great what do you think?”

he is millionaire and has been all while I was homeless, my birthing person and him

when I used their first names to beg for money for food during pandemic he told me off using their first names.

they stole my edges to invest in war bonds and have violated the terms of my grandmother's trust to keep me from accessing the money

lol I should ask R to pay my legal fees for going after that

when I leaned he was invested in Musc Industries™ and pointed out their use of enslaved child labor he half grinned half smirked

I have been dreaming of my grandfather on my father's side who last I heard was in hospice and voted for Trump and stayed married to a child abuser. he and I have been on our way to funerals. I see Belle sometimes. but she's usually far away.

“you wouldn't want the enslaved children to be unemployed, would you?”

lesser evilism <—> a logic which embraces and defines itself with a fetish for totaling up and substracting harm from one’s rationalist-reformer-loyal opposition-progressive imperialist back bench in parliament or as a junior investor in a number of businesses, the salon for a throne, from which you decide others fate<—>effective altruism ™<—Hank Green’s Utilitarianism <—> MP and colonial secretary John Stuart Mill whose childhood was an experiment of his father's and Jeremy Bentham

philosopher CEOs love this logic, and I do not exaggerate when I say using it does damage to our souls

the utilitarian is weirdo quick to as “yes but …” to happily stipulate it causes pain but does it cause enough pain, maybe we need to meet some infinite threshold of this evil to counteract that one.

he is always quick to bring out the scales, sigil of school and office.

he would love for Utilitarianism to cause pain to our selves, because then we could measure it and decide it's worth it anyway, though not everyone need end in it, only the consequential.

in making this argument he displays that in practice the virtue ethical process oriented perspective has a lot to say here, RE carrying out decisions as Becoming and sacrificing on the altar of Utilitarianism forms a kind of sacramental ritual relational embodying relationship, a Doing-, Christianesque quality, actual quite Anglican, very Stiff Upper Lip

in a revolution monsters are constantly being summoned and loosed and thrown about and enthroned, and who can say what will be Evil the Greater or the Less?

to be a Utilitarian you would need to stand at the end of Time, to know what was more hurtful in aggregate

epistemology vs the practice of embodying ignorance

a methodology requires blind spots to define the edges of the heuristic, dampeners to distinguish noise from spark, smoke from flame.

Utilitarian Lesser Evilism silences questions like what harm does it do to us to use lesser evilism not by assuming the answer is Yes or No, so much as the assumption that it wouldn't matter either way. but to refuse to engage in this inquiry does not make us saints, for all such self sacrificing and self denying feel like penance, they are the most abstract and harmful office of sin, because they encourage one to feel the pride of superiority, the pride which engenders one towards government, and in the name of such sacraments regailed in sacrifice weild many evils which might otherwise refrain from passing.

thers a reason boycotting

the Lesser Evil is closely tied to the existential immanent threat, such they one adopts a game theory of one time encounters because each might be, is assumed will be, a Last Encounter. over a longer series analysis boycotting an election or a party or limus test becomes feasible, thinkable, think past tense: thank, thankable, extended ongoing circuit of debt, rather then a one time encounter drop and swap and dash away trade often taken as the par exalance truck-&-barter exchange.

classical economics, utilitarianism, reformistic imperialism,

Utility and Time, Utility and Positivism, Common sense scientific deterministic ignorance idealism

Neo-liberalism and positivism assume some level of lesser evil logic, the trim and cut and sheer frame of mind, archetypically displayed in Austerity.

all epistemologies imply ignorannetics but some ignorances are more totalizing, more self congratulatory, as certain neo-liberalisms, positivisms, common sense isms, anti criticality assume themselves omniscient by reducing everything to the simple self interested rational actors who claim their is no such thing as society and act as though society existed entirely for their benefit, or better yet, to the benefit of the Lesser Evil.

once you start thinking in lesser evil logic even stepping out for a smoke break to possit alternative modes become a subtle and difficult doctrine, and who can hope to make others understand it.

ironicoparadoxically, it is for precisely that reason that those thinking outside a lesser evil logic find it, right, arbitrary, contrived, to make all these assumptions.

“so what if it damages our souls?” asks us to assume a split between the unavailable heroic ego making the choice now and choices forever and the abstract soul/providential wellbeing/afterlife/self respect/feelings. but souls are more complex.

lesser evil logic is limiting, but all heuristics are limiting. lesser evil logic is harmful, but all things are harmful relative to someone's agenda, standard, criteria, value, inate self interest, or pre-essencial existential evaluation.

what I want to raise concern over is not so much these things as it's addictive quality, diffuse and self-redacting.

to question Lesser Evil doctrine, like questioning Christian doxology, like questioning an abusive sin is easy to constitute as a sin. according to many iterations of those doctrines, they are Necessarily sins. all sin is Absolute sin relative to the standard which describes it as sin, a sin is a sin because it describes an orbit contrary to someone's agenda, someone's covenant, someone's law, someone's self interest, someone's embodied choices. Gods and Patriarchs, States and Selves and Physics, all can and do function as legislators, and Sin is the emmenation of an If,-Then relationship re some transgression, deviation, contralogic, and we assent to their category as sin insofar as that is a Value-Claim we recognize, accepting its ambassadors into our courts and affording then full powers plentipotenciary

let our assurance be this: we can question and critique lesser evilism without foreclosing acting in accordance with it's advice.