I admit that I have a love/hate relationship with the concept of logical consistency. Hear me out please. First, my enemies don’t care if their arguments or policies possess logical consistency and, unfortunately, they tend to be the ones that control the reins of power that keep me in bondage to the State and their apparatchiks. Second, if I stay wed to the idea that I must adhere to logical consistency to be a legitimate voice for people who desire the same freedom from oppression that I do, it’s almost certain that I will only be doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result (insanity). It appears that the few of us who do value logical consistency may be the only ones left. And that’s something that should be discussed more often.
In the past, the American Christian-Right (CR) did a decent job of being consistent in their principles when it came to endorsing candidates, even if it was superficial. At least George W Bush and Ronald Reagan portrayed themselves as Christians, but when the American Evangelicals chose to go to the mat for a twice divorced, foul-mouthed billionaire who bragged about banging porn stars, they lost any high ground they claimed to have. Any Christian who threw their lot behind someone who is closer to Ron Jeremy than Billy Graham deserves every bit of scorn and derision thrown in their direction.
One of the things the CR loves to do is highlight what they often call “liberal hypocrisy.” As an example, the Left championed the George Floyd riots which were responsible for 19 deaths, maybe more, but when it came to the incident at The Capitol on January 6th of this year, they were outraged and even lied about how a Capitol Hill police officer died. The CR, and the Right in general, claim this to be hypocrisy. The problem I struggle with is how the CR can care about logical consistency when the person they’ve literally referred to as their “Savior,” Donald Trump, has as much in common with their soteriological New Testament Savior, Jesus Christ, as Kim Jong-un does. If logical consistency is going to be a watermark you use to judge your enemy, it would make sense that you would do everything within your power to make sure your strategy doesn’t submerge you as well.
For those promoting Libertarian/Anarchist/Agorist (LAA) ideology who are considering using logical consistency, much can be learned by looking at the CR over the last 5-6 years. On one hand, the CR abandoned logical consistency and clearly lost the battle they waged. On the other hand, the question must be asked as to whether they even stood a chance when you take into consideration that even with the Right controlling the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court, the Left still possessed all of the power. Is abandoning logical consistency a way for the LAA to attempt to gain some power over the Left? That’s a question for the individual to consider, but I believe the answer is clear.
