This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Cynicism is Intellectual Cowardice ... a Cop-Out to Rationalize Fear and Laziness
Cynicism Is Not Smart, Sophisticated or Detached … It’s a Cop-Out
Preface: Obviously, giving up cynicism and getting active doesn’t mean adopting phony hopium. It means abandoning both fear and laziness – on the one hand – and false hope on the other.
In other words, question authority and be cynical of those in power. But don't be cynical of the desirability - and necessity - of acting to challenge the destructive or criminal acts of those in power.
We have overwhelming numbers (and see this). If we worked together we would win.
Why aren’t we?
A large reason that we are failing is that people are copping out … by adopting a cynical attitude.
Many of us pretend that we are too smart to think anything can change. Too smart to get emotionally involved in the destruction of our prosperity or our liberties.
“Cynicism is nothing but intellectual cowardice”.
- Henry Rollins
“Cynicism is not realistic and tough. It’s unrealistic and kind of cowardly because it means you don’t have to try.”
- Peggy Noonan
“A cynic is a coward …. Cynicism always takes the easy way out. It is a form of laziness that provides someone with an excuse for not making any attempt to change the world …. Cynicism is a way to hide …. Cynics are afraid …. So, instead, they pass judgment on anyone who is trying to make a difference. They ridicule the efforts of individuals and organizations that are working hard under incredibly difficult circumstances …. Being cynical is often thought of as being composed and detached. It is considered to be a sign of sophistication. Cynics are mistakenly given credit for possessing a deep awareness regarding the limits of what humans can accomplish which is somehow lacking in those who spend their time in passionate efforts to change the world …. Being filled with cynicism is indeed a cowardly and sad way to go through life. ”
- Michael Crawley
We’ve previously noted:
The ironic thing is that if all of the people who think of themselves as cynics or skeptics made noise, things would instantly change for the better. In other words, the millions upon millions of cynics/skeptics/self-described “realists” aren’t raising a ruckus against the fraud being committed by the giant banks, the corruption of our political system, or the lawlessness and imperial arrogance of our military-industrial complex because they think things can’t change.
But by staying silent, they are actually creating the conditions in which nothing can change.
If the millions of cynics woke up to the fact that they are a huge group – especially when combined with the people who are already actively working for the restoration of a democratic republic, justice, and the rule of law – they would suddenly realize that collectively we can change things in a heart beat.
***
Skepticism, cynicism and “realism” is an act of fear, of cowardice, of apathy. Because if the skeptics just got off their backsides and made some noise, things would change.
The Real Hero Fights Without Knowing Whether Or Not He’ll Succeed
The optimist – whether a person of faith or plain old positive temperament – is sure that he’ll succeed.
The pessimist - i.e. the cynic - is sure he'll fail. Indeed, the powers-that-be try to instill pessimism (see number 2) so that we won't try.
But the truth is that we never know in advance whether we’ll win or not.
How do we know if what we’re doing will really have an effect or not? How do we know if we are being called upon to struggle in order to succeed in changing things for the better … or for the heck of it?
***
We are called upon as part of our core purpose to struggle to try to make the world a better place. But we are not privy to fruits of our actions. We are not granted a view of the future … we will never know how many people we will help, and how we will change the course of history.
We are called upon to struggle, but we can never know the end result of our efforts … that is not for us mere mortals to know.
Chris Hedges – the Pulitizer-prize winning reporter who challenged the indefinite detention law and amazingly succeeded against all odds in having a judge strike down that law, saying:
None of us thought we would win.
Another judge – amazingly – halted all nuclear construction and licenses until disposal risks are addressed.
They didn’t know until they tried whether or not they could win.
And – even if we lose the immediate battle – we will help win a long-term war. Specifically – as bad as things are (and yes, we know things are getting worse) – they would be much worse if millions of people worldwide hadn’t struggled.
As Hedges writes:
The battles that must be fought may never be won in our lifetime. And there will always be new battles to define our struggle. Resistance to tyranny and evil is never ending.
So how can we fight not knowing whether we’ll succeed?
F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote:
The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. One should, for example, be able to see that things are hopeless and yet be determined to make them otherwise.
Hellen Keller pointed out:
Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.
And Czech leader Vaclav Havel said:
Hope is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense regardless of how it turns out.
Go Viral … It’s Contagious
Courage is contagious (and as scared as we may be of the powers-that-be, they're terrified of us as well.)
So is the ability to think.
As we’ve previously noted:
[Studies show ] that even one dissenting voice can give people permission to think for themselves. Specifically:
Solomon Asch, with experiments originally carried out in the 1950s and well-replicated since, highlighted a phenomenon now known as “conformity”. In the classic experiment, a subject sees a puzzle like the one in the nearby diagram: Which of the lines A, B, and C is the same size as the line X? Take a moment to determine your own answer…The gotcha is that the subject is seated alongside a number of other people looking at the diagram – seemingly other subjects, actually confederates of the experimenter. The other “subjects” in the experiment, one after the other, say that line C seems to be the same size as X. The real subject is seated next-to-last. How many people, placed in this situation, would say “C” – giving an obviously incorrect answer that agrees with the unanimous answer of the other subjects? What do you think the percentage would be?
Three-quarters of the subjects in Asch’s experiment gave a “conforming” answer at least once. A third of the subjects conformed more than half the time.
Get it so far? People tend to defer to what the herd thinks.
But here’s the good news:
Adding a single dissenter – just one other person who gives the correct answer, or even an incorrect answer that’s different from the group’s incorrect answer – reduces conformity very sharply, down to 5-10%.
Why is this important? Well, it means that one person who publicly speaks the truth can sway a group of people away from group-think.
If a group of people is leaning towards believing the government’s version of events, a single person who speaks the truth can help snap the group out of its trance.
There is an important point here regarding the web, as well. The above-cited article states that:
When subjects can respond in a way that will not be seen by the group, conformity also drops.What does that mean? Well, on the web, many people post anonymously. The anonymity gives people permission to “respond in a way that will not be seen by the group”. But most Americans still don’t get their news from the web, or only go to mainstream corporate news sites.
Away from the keyboard, we are not very anonymous. So that is where the conformity dynamic — and the need for courageous dissent — is vital. It is doubly important that we apply the same hard-hitting truthtelling we do on the Internet in our face-to-face interactions; because it is there that dissent is urgently needed.
Bottom line: Each person‘s voice has the power to snap entire groups out of their coma of irrational group-think. So go forth and be a light of rationality and truth among the sleeping masses.
And a recent study shows that when only 10% of a population have strongly-held beliefs, their belief will often be adopted by the majority of the society.
This is true of soldiers as well as civilians. Indeed, if the soldiers, sailors, seals, flyboys, intel operatives and law enforcement officers wake up to what is really happening, things would change overnight.
Some historical quotes may be helpful in illustrating the importance of struggling to make things better …
It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.
- Robert F . Kennedy
We must never despair; our situation has been compromising before; and it changed for the better; so I trust it will again. If difficulties arise; we must put forth new exertion and proportion our efforts to the exigencies of the times.
- George Washington
There is no act too small, no act too bold. The history of social change is the history of millions of actions, small and large, coming together at points in history and creating a power that governments cannot suppress.
- Howard Zinn
If you don’t like the news, go out and make some news of your own.
- Scoop Nisker
To hell with circumstances; I create opportunities.
- Bruce Lee
»
- advertisements -
Alcoholism beats cynicism every time. If you think you have a problem with cynicism, start drinking heavily.
There is a time and a place for everything, including cynicism.
While I appreciate your point, GW, you have to be careful about over-generalizing. Cynicism about everything is indeed self-manifesting. But a "healthy dose of skepticism" can be confused with cynicism, when it is really a method of discriminating between those matters that may consume your time and energy unproductively, and those where focused attention brings benefits.
"Whoever battles with monsters had better see that it does not turn him into a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
Thus, will I vote? Hell no! Why would I waste my time following that meaingless circus? This does not mean I gainsay the efforts of my dear compatriots who DO believe they can effect change through the existing political system, and hell, where they accomplish incremental changes, I celebrate their victories with them. But my skepticism is known by my friends, and they understand they'll get a dose of it. And then we move on to discussing those good things we share and agree upon.
Being focused and discriminate in one's cynicism is called skepticism, and that is a good thing.
Cynic:
Wall Street banksters, using billions of looted dollars,—and their controlled corporate media, lobbyists, think tanks, Supreme Court, federal judges, CEOs at major corporations, the Chamber of Commerce, rigged markets, Fed quantitative easing, credit crisis enabling laws, government regulators, accountants, the IMF, World Bank, foreign policy, defense industry phony wars, false-flag events, financial system, politicians who do not punish wrongdoers and their complicit Attorneys General—are fighting over which sock puppet will occupy the White House.
I am on pins and needles—wonder how this election will turn out, NOT.
Options:
Hope? Choice? Action Plan?
wow what a bunch of gibberish this is.
Think GW's post is gibberish do ya? So tell us Einstein, what in his post constitutes gibberish in your brilliant mind? This should be good and I anxiously await your next post.
The US socio-economic model is based on individual greed being the primary human motive, looking out for #1, and expecting all the resulting conflict/competition to work out for the greatest good by virtue of the "hidden hand".
It is based on the socio-economic theories of
Thomas Hobbes
and Adam Smith.
[Adam Smith propounding that the economy would work out for the best (guided by a “hidden hand”) if everyone were allowed to seek their individual economic interest.
Thomas Hobbes contending that the most perfect natural state would arrive if everyone were allowed to do the closest what each individual pleased. That it is human nature to be individualistic. They concurred on minimal limited government, with Adam Smith emphasizing the economic aspects.]
The extent to which the present government is laissez-faire is beside the point.
Philosophically, culturally, the widely accepted conventional wisdom is that the primary motivation for human conduct is economic self-interest, greed.
The political debate operates within that parameter. One side arguing that (business) greed, left alone, will self-regulate, the other side arguing that the pursuit of materialism/greed must be channeled and contained. Both allegedly want material profit and individual self-interest preserved as the driving motivation for the economy to function.
It is a cultural truism that individualism and economic self-interest are the primary motivations for human conduct. Therefore any proposal based on the common good invariably is met with cynicism as to motive, and pessimism with regard to probable outcome.
The paradigm shift would be to knowingly have human conduct motivated by other than individualistic materialism, and for the society/economy to be correspondingly so organized.
What a bunch of horseshit. Greed and self-interest have been human motivations since humans have walked the Earth. Nothing will ever change that. The problems we have are that regulators are captured and corrupted by those they are supposed to regulate and regulations are so thick today that they merely entrench current oligopolies and protect them from competition. The ultimate oligopoly is the large banks who are uniquely privileged in our current system to create currency from nothing, which if done by anyone else would be a crime. The bankster oligopoly has bought the political class across the West and used them to keep their speculative gains, socialize their losses onto the backs of wage-earners and savers and protect them when they commit outright theft when they steal their clients' funds.
US citizen quality: telling one thing and its opposite in the same breath.
AnAnonymous insanitation: projecting his own flaws and shortcomings onto an exterior fantasy he calls US citizenism.
The disingenuous nature of his methods is eternal.
I'd like to add here Banks and every state of the union aided and abetted by the regional Federal Reserve Banks.
When you fail to pay property tax, the Board of Supervisors of the county sign off on the sale of the evidence of debt.
It gets recorded at the Franchise tax board as a State Tax Lien, then goes up to the State Treasurer where it gets turned into Securities/Collateral recorded by the Regional Federal Reserve Bank. The Federal Reserve Bank gives the state fiat dollars against the collateral.
When you foreclose on a house, the banks process the indebtness through the State Treasurer who turns around and creates the securities/collateral recorded by the Regional Federal Reserve Bank. The Federal Reserve Bank emits more fiat dollars and hands them over to the State. Somewhere in there, the banks get their share of the credit.
In this equation there are some insurance ramifications. Under Admiralty law, if you insure your freight and vessel, you don't get the right of freight or salvage when the vessel founders. I am still working on it. The insurance code is ominous. Also in the fact that we have been named as surety for the public debt by novation, we are not the holders-in-due-course of our own property.
So the State governments, banks, and Federal Reserves all profit from a massive downturn in the economy.
When you look at the phrase " The dream of home ownership." from the view of an illuminati it is duplicitous in the two meanings of that word-- double, or multiple meanings and a scam.
For the average wage earner it is a great comfort to live in your own home. For the state, property ownership is the single most powerful means of stripping wealth. An illusion, a dream indeed!
You are in denial about the philosophical underpinning for the individualistic, self-centered, materially acquisitive economic beliefs in the USA (including apparently your own judging by your comment on supposedly immutable human nature).
You may not like the way it has worked out. But the elite few are operating under the principle of self-serving greed (as you and others declare ought be the operating principle as it is "human nature").
The elite only forego "laissez-faire" when it is to their advantage.
The oft-proposed solution to return to a "true" laissez-faire enforced only by the "hidden hand" is to go back to Smith and Hobbes -
and leaves aside questions about the validity of their depiction of the essential social/individual condition of humankind,
whether beliefs and institutions founded on such precepts engender societal fragmentation, cynicism,
and whether those institutions and beliefs foster a self-destructive habituation and addiction to acquisitive materialism.
"Greed and self-interest have been human motivations since humans have walked the Earth." Speaking of horseshit... Ever here of the pot and kettle story?
I've told you all what the solution is. The solution is a alliance of Citizens Militias armed to the teeth (with legal weapons, of course) across the US. Peaceful resistence and voting won't mean SHIT. That is the equivalent of knowingly going into a crooked poker game where the deck is stacked against you every time. No. The only way to win is NOT TO PLAY.
"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" - Mao Zedong
If you do not have a gun and aren't willing to use it, you have NO POLITICAL POWER.
I don't agree with the premise of the article. In my experience with cynics (which is pretty extensive at this point), the salient characteristic that I detect is laziness. Specifically, laziness mixed with a good dose of ego. The ego encourages people to believe they have answers without studying the issues and laziness stands in the way of putting in the work needed to learn about the issues. Fear isn't a very big part of it, I guess primarily because ignorance breeds an idiotic version of fearlessness. The cynics I know would be much better off if they WERE more afraid. This just might motivate them to try to learn (Hey! So far, fear has worked for me!)
Peggy Noonan and Henry Rollins, together at last! Left/Right false flag bearers beware...
Don Quixote Dittos George.
there is no shame in hiding, the original gw was a member of over 300 secret societies. you don't have to paint a target on yourself to be brave. in the absence of probable cause, your right to privacy is unlimited.
"it's always better to be the predator than the prey" - Donald Trump
"better to error on the side of caution" - roman proverb
use your right to privacy while you still can.
http://expose2.wordpress.com/2011/11/20/a-voice-from-the-dark/
I'm in the Purple Party (the combination of Red and Blue).
There are good ideas, you just have to dig deeper and synthesize.
Separate the "shit from shine-o-la".
Look for common ground, not foxholes.
I prefer to call it Patriot Party.
That's what we need, a PATRIOT PARTY..
Yes!
It's hard not to be a little cynical when watching the last THREE Administrations allow TPTB to get away with almost every crime on the books while listening to the average American voter blaming the poor (themselves, ultimately) for the Nation's problms.
We're surrounded by the average voter, the salt of the earth, the Silent Majority: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHJbSvidohg
So ya wanna send a message?
Fine.
We all chip in and buy a half pound of meth and a few cases of jack, hire a couple of busloads of Juggalos and turn em loose on the Capitol.
Even if they get beat up and arrested, they'll still have a good time.
Win/win.
Silent cynics in empty boats. - Genesis; The Lamia
Thank you GW! There's a world of difference between a cynic and a skeptic.
We the People create the world we live in with every choice we make.
Let's widen our discussion to include more possibilities instead of limiting ourselves to only gold and bullets.
Ordinary people will surprise you if you actually engage them in conversation.
Very good point.
Proverbs 1 verses 20-22
20 Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:
21 She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying,
22 How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
Rest here;
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+1&version=KJV
Consider if you will this story of a man who challenged his status quo, was literally exiled into the wilderness, returned to the Imperial capital, wrote a stunning and enormously important manuscript about freedom, spoke the truth as he saw it directly to the elected rulers of his time and....won.
I give you Roger Williams.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/God-Government-and-Roger-Williams-Big-Idea.html
He went on to reject the idea that God lent His authority to government. Instead, Williams made what in the 17th century was a revolutionary claim: “I infer that the sovereign, original, and foundation of civil power lies in the people.” The governments they establish, he wrote, “have no more power, nor for no longer time, than the civil power or people consenting and agreeing shall betrust them with.”
No member of Parliament, even while waging war against the king, went that far. Nor did Winthrop, who called democracy a “manifest breach of the 5th commandment” and insisted that, though elected governor, he still had “our authority from God.”
The Bloudy Tenent was published in July 1644 to stunned outrage.
This Bio on Rodger williams was exellent...
http://www.amazon.com/Roger-Williams-Creation-American-Soul/dp/0670023051
coward man keep safe bones. i'll stick with subversion. better beings than me, like jesus, can wake the sheeple (assuming that's possible)
There is considerable strength in numbers. The majority of the people do tend to be right (and why democracy should work when left to its own devices). The more who spread the word, the more convincing the word will be.
And I agree, it may be far too late now. Without media on the US citizens side, it's unlikely this train will stop before the Cassandra Crossing. But think of what it will be in 20 years? Thinning the herd by madmen? I'd die before I'd leave any a world like this.
We'll be cursed for eternity if we do not make an attempt to right the wrongs. Just living isn't enough. Mankind's instinct to survive should be turning everyone around to see the truth but it is not. I suspect the SSRIs, the fluoride I am told will dull our minds and turn our brains necrotic, the easily available to the hard core drugs which lead to addiction, the circuses filled with debauchery, pretty lights and people along with an orchestra are the only things in our way.
It's a psyops of blibical proportions and yes, sometimes you give what you got just because it feels familiar and becomes an option.
The media would not even cover Jesus if he walked the earth today, attempting to end the lies. Are you kidding me?
Action! Learned the UCC, Title 26 & Title 31 USC. Discharged to zero balance $100,000 of Federal Income Taxes.
Secured Party Creditor! Yeah!
nice to see you again kayl. when GDub starts delving his hyperlinks into the uniform commercial code, i'll swallow my cynicism, poop it out and eat it again.
and smile all the time doing it :)
Excellent, I haven't seen myself all year. But, text analysis is my speciality.
how was that old UCC book you found 6 months ago at the used bookstore?
Great! Found this gem on p. 567 Business Law Principles and Cases Anderson/Krumpf 1975
A negotiable promissory note is an unconditional promise in writing made by one person to another, signed by the maker, engaging to pay on demand or at a definite time a sum certain in money to order or to bearer. ...
If the promissory note is payable "on demand" that is, immediately, it may be used as a substitute for money. If it is not payable until a future time, the payee in effect extends credit to the maker of the note for the period of time until payment is due.
hmm, interesting...now how does that apply to the FRN?
Your homemade on demand promissory note certified and registered through the post office with those numbers on the note make it equivalent to FRNs.
Do not try to copy FRNs or write United States or anything similar to a forgery of any kind. It is your instrument, and you have the right to issue it as an Accommodation and Accommodating Party.
Note: You must be a Secured Party Creditor with the power to manage your own commercial affairs.
O really?
Linguistics, Semiology, Structuralism, Deconstruction, and Connotation analysis. Take your pick.
UCC is non-isomorphic to the Tax laws. They are opposite in construction, but UCC takes presidence. You can discharge a tax presentment even after it goes into dishonor by issuing a new negotiable instrument, value for value, and accompaning the negotiable instrument with a voucher. Presentment, Payment, and Promise to Pay.
Remember the Trinity: Bid, Payment, Performance. Bid, insurance, reinsurance. Charge Bond, Bail bond, Surety bond. Contract, Indemnity Bond, Surety Bond.
Asset note two-signature paper is what we use in the US. The signatures represent first and second liability insurance (front and back indorsements). The number in arabic numerals and spelled out is the payment info. duh
Macro and micro structure of discharge and transfer of value, interest/right, or liability on the papers or paper.
Brave talk from someone posting under a pseudonym. Try posting under your real name like Gerald Celente does and then you can lecture the rest of us.
Who Are We?
Yes, that points us towrards the image you wish to project. But your writings tell us who you are: doomsday sayers (Fuchishima), anti-American (as America is the only Imperialist these days), class warfare baiters (The only way for the down trodden to wrest power from the evil elites is to snatch up a weapon and break windows of the wealthy!) When GW says, "Get off your couches", he doesn't want you to effect the US ecomomy and political system....... he mants you to END it. Violently would be fine. It's a little tedious, but compare GW to Russia Today. Go ahead, check it out..............
Numbers 1, 4, 11, 12 and 14!! http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/08/the-15-rules-of-internet-disinfor...
Daring seekers of Truth.
Lonely are the braves.
This article strikes me as more baby boomer American bullshit, of the "liberal who never got mugged" variety.
Cynicism has it's place in a balanced society. The lack of cynicism led to this crisis.
There are people here from other countries who are braced against while we watch you Americans dawdle and critique the facts and unarguable end (the death of the US dollar).
We are to the point point Sandy Weill goes on record as supportin the reenactment of Glass-Steagall, the g-force that is accelerating against America's economy as it circles the drain is clear to see.
G-force induced Loss Of Consciousness, G-LOC
While you may not like the authors or their messages, the simple fact remains that the US dollar is bidding for vital and necessary goods in a global market in which severe shortages are predicted. If the dollar is allowed to collapse in value, there 25.00 to buy a loaf of bread and the 200.00 per pound beef will be what will end the American dream. There will be nothing left after you feed yourself and your family. Centralizing food supply will ensure this.
The young people will be who you'll be fearing then, as lawlessness, home invasions, smash and grabs by bands of men who have nothing to lose and may realize dying isn't such a bad alternative compared to living in this world today.
Please read the preface ...
The article is bullshit. Underlying it is an assumption that everything GW believes in, and everything he believes needs changing, is spot on correct. It seems his definition of cynicism and cowardice is not standing up and fighting for what GW believes in. Maybe GW is dead wrong about most things (I believe GW lives in a fantasy world of perpetual paranoia), and what he sees as cowardice is, in fact, general contentment, if not with the way things are, then at least for the system that theoretically allows change and improvement from within, or represents something that is the best of a group of bad choices. Some choose to fight enemies who do not exist, while others pick their spots with an eye toward conservation of energy and resources.
Personally, I despise what the bankers and their lobbied minions have done, and will forever voice my disapproval of it. Most of the other things against which GW rails, especially his endless conspiracies, I believe are nonsense and chasing phantoms that do not exist. It is not cynicism or cowardice that prevents me from struggling against these phantoms, but rather a difference of opinion. I suspect I am not alone, and might well be in the majority. His fight is not my fight, because I think he is 95% wrong, naive, and quite often bordering on delusional. I don't even want to play Sancho Panza and try to point out his fantastical errors.
People like me can fight for what we believe in, and also prepare for the possibility we will fail. I have taken many of the precautions often noted on this site, as well as taken many other steps no one has ever mentioned. I will not share these steps, because as much as I do not want to live in a world with Geithners and Dimons, I equally do not want a world where I have to share air with the likes of GW. If a worst case situation happens to materialize, I'll be happy to see both disappear, or at least be far away from them all.