No matter how good the training, no matter how just the cause, no matter how tight the bonds of fellowship with comrades, when the shooting starts, some soldiers just do n’t have the nerve for it. They turn and run.
Desertion and stupidity against the enemy have been some of the most significant military acts since the dawn of time, and for good reason. Turning your back on your brothers in arms and your country puts them both in mortal danger.
Just days before an election of colossal importance, common anti-woke academic Eric Weinstein made the decision to do exactly this. He declared to his nearly a million followers on X on Tuesday that, morally speaking, he simply ca n’t bring himself to support the race that is raging between former president Donald Trump and vice president Kamala Harris.
With as much self-righteousness as he could summon, Weinstein said,” I am failing this poll. I tried. But, I just failed. I don’t operate within these ideas. My universe, my state, my America is not on the poll”.
If the winner were to win, he therefore offered his services to either side,” if you win.” He assumed that the success may also demand his assistance.
” I am not giving you my advice. On both sides, the dangers are significant and very very unique. Where the bigger dangers are, I can guess, but that is simply a guess. I am rolling up my sleeves. If you win, I’m these for either group if any of you need my assistance.
” If fealty to efforts matters to you, I am sorry. I am devoted to the nation as I see it, and the campaigns did n’t speak in my native tongue. They made me feel about entirely unworthy. No hard emotions”, he added.
Intellect agencies, Washington bureaucrats, and defense personnel also used the “loyalty to the nation” cliche as a justification for their unsuccessful attempts to impeach a duly elected President Trump for four whole years.
Adopting an nearly irreverent indifference, Weinstein concludes,” Come get things fixed. Or no. Up to you. I’d opt for the previous”.
The full statement represents a classic of insane ego-stroking, and Weinstein’s place was dutifully eviscerated online.
His “woe is me, it’s so hard on me being tormented by this difficult choice between two weak individuals” approach borders on theater-kid histrionics. It’s the behavior of a angry child who is used to not being watched everywaking, who is unable to recognize and wrestle with politics as it really is and who rather fixes on some Platonic ideal of how it should be.
As if the political sphere revolves around you like a hulk, to assume a candidate or party to completely coincide with your choices. Politicians, and life in general, requires making the best decision you is under the current, usually hard, situation. Sometimes, not all of the choices available may be fine. Occasionally, none of them did. However, making a choice is always preferable to sulk in self-indulgent moralizing.
Regardless, the idea that both individuals are sad makes sense as a result of this election. One enthusiastic for president wants to make the nation weaker in every way imaginable. The other does not. The decision should be easy. You’re not nearly as wise as you think you are if you look at each candidate’s objective goals and still come to the conclusion that they’re so equally bad that you ca n’t choose one.
Weinstein’s abstaining from ballot sends a clear information: He’s good with the status quo. He de facto supports the continuation of all the disasters that have occurred during President Joe Biden’s next four years.
In reality, Weinstein and his followers want to keep the status quo because it benefits them.
The army of timorous fence-sitters and “above it all” posturers really want to be “respectable”. Respectable to whom? Towards a government that brutally oppresses its social rivals? A techno-cultural advanced that tricks children into slicing off perfectly good body parts? The people “across the aisle,” as if there is only a civil dispute over scheme in this nation rather than a conflict between those who want to destroy it and those who want to keep it?
They do want to stay on the border, but not out of any genuine internal conflicts. They want to compete on both sides in order to maintain their social ties in communist circles while gaining money and power from the conservative influencers.
Ultimately, Weinstein’s vacillation serves as a reminder that liberals who partnered with the conservative movement amid the anti-woke crusade, who claimed that” the left left me” and achieved astounding influence in the conservative movement as a result, ca n’t be entirely trusted. Usually, an army of an opponent serves as a practical ally, but fair-weather friends like Weinstein can and do crash when the struggle becomes difficult or uncomfortable. They simply lack the political will to oust the remaining and regain this nation.
Weinstein wants to portray the suffering ideal who prefers to see the country burn than to reject his own ideological purity. Weinstein is a mastermind behind a tired-old swindle that only leads to disdain and fatalistic impotence. He appears willing to pass by a possible historic moment just so he can watch and sit on the fence. It’s a signal that he needs to grow up rather than a noble gesture that shows his devotion to badly held rules.
Hayden Daniel is a personnel director at The Federalist. He formerly held positions as assistant editor/opinion director at The Daily Caller and as an editor at The Daily Wire. He received a B. Washington and Lee University offers an A. in Western Story with minors in theory and masterpieces. Following him on Twitter at @HaydenWDaniel
