The Activist’s Delusion — September 14, 2022
Justin Patton
“Let us get two propositions written into our minds with indelible ink. 1) The human mind has no more power of inventing a new value than of planting a new sun in the sky or a new primary colour in the spectrum. 2) Every attempt to do so consists in arbitrarily selecting some one maxim of traditional morality, isolating it from the rest, and erecting it into an unum necessarium [“the one necessary thing”.
C.S. Lewis, Christian Reflections
These great propositions from Lewis are some of my favorite ways to imagine humility. They are not immune to misinterpretation or misuse, but taken personally they can also be a healthy reminder that we all operate within the confines of a reality that we cannot define solely by our subjective experiences. Still, the tendency is often to breeze over the wisdom of these principles and to instead use them as justification for accosting what we consider to be the failures of others.
Initially, Lewis’ reader ought to ask themselves: “what ‘new values’ have I been fooling myself about? What ‘one necessary thing’ have I elevated to idol status, and now try to wield as a means for controlling, fixing, or even discarding other people?” Only after a thorough examination of oneself (which will reveal issues if performed sincerely) should anyone dare to apply these ideas externally. Even then, such outward judgment should be conducted with great caution. It is impossible to fairly judge souls, but—if one remains dispassionate—one may hold out the hope of evaluating ideas and behaviors with a modest degree of objectivity.
Ah, but to really change the world… doesn’t that usually involve a little blood and death? The Allies had to fight the Nazis, after all. They couldn’t just focus on their own logical and moral shortcomings and expect their introspection to win the war. And yet, the number of times we are required to go to physical war—compared to the decades that we live alongside one other in peace—is miniscule. There is a name for preoccupation with war during times of peace: warmongering (even when it is just within one’s heart).
It seems wise, then, to retreat from this mental image of (culture?) war. Especially if one is regularly tempted to apply it to neighbors, co-workers, and fellow countrymen. This notion of fighting fire with fire, violence with violence, or anger with anger has been rejected by many of the world’s most effective activists (such as Martin Luther King, Jr. …and Jesus). But there will always be an appetite for violence and anger, and so always someone tempted to justify and exploit it.
I would hazard this guess: there have been far more experiments in fostering or justifying violence and anger than there have been in substituting something else for those things. Has a focus on “righteous indignation” ultimately created more things of beauty? Has righteous anger driven out unrighteous anger? Has violence ever cleansed the world of hatred? I think not. At best, it has beaten it back. But if nothing higher fills the void left by the retreat of lesser things, they will return.
The deluded activist fails to recognize that the void cannot be filled by his new value. He sees only the need for the power to implement his “unum necessarium.” But by itself his one necessary thing is not enough. Like one individual standing apart from the rest of humanity, it is incomplete. The humility to value the whole of morality—and to see that the individual cannot know the “whole” all by himself—is what must stand in the void. Nothing else can keep the violence at bay.
Justin Patton 