The Good and Bad of Certitudes

The Moral Pendulum

By Robert Ringer

There can be no question that Western civilization was, until relatively recently, the most civilized culture in the history of our planet. And the foundation of its remarkable stability was a widespread respect for certitudes — a code of conduct that was generally accepted by the vast majority of citizens. The Moral Pendulum swayed strongly toward America's conviction of right and wrong.

Stability is a direct result of certitudes, and certitudes are a direct result of a non-diverse culture. Diversity, by its very nature, is at odds with certitudes. Which is why the mantra that America's strength lies in its diversity is a blatant lie. On the contrary, diversity is America's greatest weakness.

It's important to point out here that diversity has nothing to do with the color of one's skin. Nor does it necessarily have anything to do with national origin. Diversity has to do with differing views of the world. The reason American society has become a cauldron of hatred and violence is that, for the first time in its history, it lacks a consensus on certitudes.

There are two Robert Ringers, and, if you dare to look deep within, I suspect you will find two of you as well. One Robert Ringer believes in certitudes, because without them society has no structure ... no order ... no cohesiveness.

But there is another Robert Ringer who is a rebel at heart ... a Robert Ringer who sees the wisdom in the words of Buddha: "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."

The overthrow of established ways can often produce morally superior results, the American Revolution and the abolition of slavery being two excellent examples of this. Like all things in life, however, when the pendulum of change swings too far, mayhem can ensue.

The hippie movement of the sixties is the archetype of this. It brought us rampant drug use, promiscuous sex, and previously unimagined vulgarity. It also brought us the Manson Family murders, "black power," and a collectivist mindset that has bankrupted the U.S. through a phenomenon known as "entitlements."

Whether "liberal" or "conservative," we can all understand why millions of people — not just hippies — were against the Vietnam War. But I believe that unpopular adventure into Southeast Asia was nothing more than a detonator for a rebellion that had been festering for a long time — arguably, since the beginning of recorded history. What I am referring to is the rebellion against established ways.

I have an aversion to sloth, drug use, promiscuous sex, and, above all, violence. But with age, I've come to realize that the best way to combat that which I dislike is to first try to understand what inspired it. You should ask yourself, "Why does the Moral Pendulum even oscillate?"

What, for example, prompts a college professor to say that the victims of the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center were "little Eichmanns?" Clearly, Ward Churchill was referring to stock traders when he made that infamous remark.

He apparently sees such people as cogs in a machine that kills in a much more subtle and silent way than war. As repulsive as a Ward Churchill may seem to those of us who are "civilized," I believe it is in my own rational self-interest to try to understand what someone like him tick. And a good start on achieving such an understanding is to absorb the message in perhaps the greatest cult film of all time ... coming up in the next installment.

Previous - Part XVIII, The Option of Choice: Play the Game

Next - Part XX, Winking at Hypocrisy

Go to top of "The Good and Bad of Certitudes: The Moral Pendulum"