Worshiping the ‘lesser evil’ will always allow evil to rule over you

By David McElroy · June 9, 2022

Why is America ruled by evil men and women? You don’t want to hear this, but it’s almost certainly your fault.

Almost everybody has been brainwashed to choose “the lesser of two evils.” You’ve been brainwashed to hate one side or the other of the mainstream, so much that “your side” seems almost sane and saintly by comparison.

So most of you hate one group of politicians or another. The makeup of the groups changes over time. Some people used to hate Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan more than anybody else. Then they hated George W. Bush. Most recently, they’ve learned to hate Donald Trump with every fiber of their beings.

For another group, it was once George McGovern, then Jimmy Carter and Ted Kennedy. Bill Clinton and Nancy Pelosi soon followed. Today, it’s Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who they hate with passion.

If you’re pushed into a corner, many of you might admit that the candidate you enthusiastically support is a terrible person in some respect or another, but you’re adamant that you must support your “lesser evil” — because a different brand of evil would rule us if you didn’t worship the evil you choose to support.

And this mass social brainwashing results in the vast majority of people knowing their rulers are evil, even the ones they support — but unwilling to step away from this system — because “the other evil would be so much worse.”

This is why the partisan political system will continue to give you the insanity and evil that you’ve come to accept from it.

Here’s a perfect example that I ran across on Facebook earlier this evening. It’s a comment (from someone I don’t know) in response to the contention that Donald Trump is a narcissist:

“Better a narcissist who loves America than a zombie puppet manipulated by those who hate America and want to teach sexual deviance to your children,” this man wrote.

As long as you continue to fool yourself with this sort of thinking — “your side is more evil than my side, so I’ll lovingly support my brand of evil” — you will continue to enthusiastically accept and support evil rulers instead of expecting to be free men and women instead.

Is Trump a narcissist? Of course he is. Of course he’s dangerous. I’ve written about the dangers of the man multiple times, so this is nothing new for me. I said he was a potential Hitler-like figure long before he was elected. Anybody who’s paid serious attention to his history could see that he has no ideology or morals or scruples. And anybody who thinks Trump “loves America” has just been brainwashed by fear of “a greater evil.” He has no core other than his own dysfunctional false self.

But after working in politics for 20 years, I have absolutely no doubt that the rulers from the other side are narcissists, too. Trump is an unusually severe case — because most of them are smart enough to hide it better than he does — but anybody who wants this sort of power and control over the lives of millions of people is pathologically dysfunctional.

Any system which gives power and money to the winners will attract narcissists to the top. I see no way you could get anywhere near the top of this system without being a narcissist in some form or another. That matches what I saw working in politics. The higher a politician rose, the more likely it was that he was a narcissist. And to stay at the top, it takes narcissism and blind devotion to your own ego and need for power. The people who don’t meet those criteria — the hopeless dreamers who still believe what they were taught in school — tend to wash out or quit in disgust.

These people who are willing to control others are evil — all of them — because controlling and manipulating other people against their will is a truly evil thing. They’re all sick and they’re all just different flavors of dangerous.

The American political system today is an idiotic game of chicken. The vast majority are so brainwashed that they continue adamant support of their particular brand of evil — lest the other brand of evil gain power. The people on both sides are afraid to quit the system, because they’re certain the evil people on the other side won’t give up on it.

Right now, there are very few of us who openly admit that what we have is evil. There are very few of us who realize that we need true “power to the people” — which is power to individuals to make their own decisions. There are so few of us that we can’t insist on change.

But if a critical mass of people ever refused to support evil of any kind — and demanded that they be left alone to live their lives in peace and personal freedom — the evil narcissists in charge would lose their power to control us. And that includes the evil narcissists on any side.

As long as you fear “a greater evil” so much that you’ll enthusiastically cheer for “the lesser evil,” you’ll keep getting what you get right now.

If this is you — and you want to know who’s to blame for this mess — just look in the nearest mirror. As long as you’re willing to support a “lesser evil” of any kind, nothing can change.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts