Etymologies are often better than definitions, so here goes:
c. 1400, integrite, "innocence, blamelessness; chastity, purity," from Old French integrité and directly from Latin integritatem (nominative integritas) "soundness, wholeness, completeness," figuratively "purity, correctness, blamelessness," from integer "whole" (see integer).
The sense of "wholeness, perfect condition" is attested from mid-15c.; that of "soundness of moral principle and character; entire uprightness or fidelity, especially in regard to truth and fair dealing" is by 1540s.
The central idea here seems to be wholeness as an essence (or essence as a wholeness). For a human, that comes from the way he or she lives and acts.
Still abstract. But if we reformulate it a little to "believing in what you do, and doing what you believe in" then we get closer to a real and practical definition.
People in the past really had it easy in terms of integrity. Life was simpler, more isolated, and more direct. It was easier then to live with integrity, to integrate our different aspects, to harmonise them. By contrast modern life militates against this.
How is this so? There are many examples. In fact, everyday I see them rushing in on us, and I see them shaping and poisoning our culture.
The tendency towards conspiritardary that is so prevalent today is surely a reflection of the absence of integrity in modern life. What we essentially see here are people supporting something while they are also opposing it.
Going one way with your whole mind and soul is integrity, going two different ways is the complete lack of it. Integrity is aerodynamic in a sense.
Examples:
■ Conspiritards 'believe' there is a "globalist plot" to destroy their culture, take their jobs, and reduce them to materialist cogs in a machine. Yes, they are right, and they oppose it, but they also entirely support it.
Time spent shopping for cheap goods made in China: 10 hours a week
Time spent maintaining unique ancient traditions: a few seconds of wistful thought
Time spent moaning about globalism on the internet: 5 hours
Conclusion: Zero integrity
■ White Replacement Worriers believe that there is a plot to “genocide” the White race. Yet, these are the same people who have actually had sex with other White people while using contraception. And not just once but thousands of times. Hate to say this, but most non-Whites banging White girls without contraception are doing more to save the White race than they are.
Conclusion: They are the White genocide that they proclaim to oppose.
Actions, remember, speak louder than words.
■ Opponents of the “System” claim that our political system is “fixed,” “broken,” “tyrannical,” and “undemocratic,” and only exists to serve and justify elite interests.
That doesn’t stop many of them voting in it. Also, their opinion is wrong: politicians and our so-called elites are quite clearly striving to give most people what they want while wrestling with the inevitable consequences and awkward fall-out of this.
What the voters want are rising economic and consumerist opportunities, along with almost toxic individual lifestyle freedoms. This is exactly what politicians, with a few twists, turns, and fiscal restrictions, have been giving them for the last 70 years.
Sadly, the polling hasn’t been done on a politician running on the ticket of forcing you to get married and have kids before you’re 25, but I suspect it would be in triple digits, with the first digit being ‘zero’ and the second one being ‘point.’
What the people want inevitably ends up producing shit-low fertility. This then inevitably leads to replacement migration, with creeping anti-immigration sentiment being next.
But these awkward fears and phobias are just kinks in our otherwise wholehearted democratic system that fully expresses the wishes of the people. Our subservient elites then have to find ways of coping with this, through such quaint ideas as multiculturalism, anti-racism, partial "immigration restriction," and assimilation.
The essential problem that our "elites" constantly have to struggle with is us, i.e. that the People they rule over and serve have no integrity, and simply want to have their cakes and eat them.
Rather than a kakistocracy we live in a “cakiestocracy.”
Previously published at Colin Liddell's Substack
I mean, all that is fine and true, but why can't you have the General Lee statue AND the George Floyd statue? Why can't we have anti-racism that goes equally in both directions? Why is it impossible to elevate one without lowering the other. That's what doesn't make sense to me. Why can't you have the confederate flag and BLM flag existing in the same space and those who support one politely acknowledging and/or just ignoring the other?
ReplyDeleteOne answer to your question would be the Kremlin, as they have a track record of weaponising group differences in perceived enemy states. Over the last 20 years Americans have become a lot less tolerant of each other. Here’s what’s driving America’s increasing political polarization
DeleteThe other day, I saw a dude in a Confederate flag hat sitting in a Chipolte, and there was black staff and black customers. If that's possible in an area w/o the influence of progressives and leftists crowing about "racism", then certainly, if these influences were expelled elsewhere, it would be possible for the General Lee statue to stand in the same general area as the Malcolm X one.
DeleteTotally agree. I'm reading Mark Blake's biog of Pink Floyd at the moment, and it's clear that mutual antipathy and even hatred, kept within reasonable bounds, can be an incredibly creative and positive force.
DeleteWould you really say that's a great example, considering we ended up with the Roger Waters' jerk-off called The Wall?
DeletePeak Pink Floyd was Wish You Were Here. The Wall was basically a Roger Waters solo project with the rest of the band reduced to a tiny, heavily-policed rebellious ghetto, not unlike Gaza to be honest.
DeleteHow very ironic that Roger Waters becomes the Israel in the Pink Floyd relationship, while David Gilmour and co. are the Gazans.
DeleteWould Nick Mason's producing the second Damned album after John Lydon drew the line in the sand with his "I hate Pink Floyd" t-shirt make him a Gazan refugee?
As for Floyd, I roll with all the pre-Dark Side albums. Yeah, Yeah, I like the group's two most popular works, but I've heard "Have a Cigar" and "Money" too damn many times in my life, while we never hear "Lucifer Sam", "Jugband Blues", or "...Heart of the Sun" on the radio.
What about ‘big brains’ like Colin who like to have their cake and eat it; conspiracy theories are for retards and grifters except when it come to foreign subversion - then it’s a useful panotheory to borrow his own phrase.
ReplyDeleteIt would be bizarre if they weren’t hidden conspiracies but I doubt that the dynamics, the actors and their motivations are as colourful as dissidents imagine. You don’t need to look much beyond narrow self advancement as a motivation for most people.
I think I know what you're trying to say (probable strawman, etc.), but could you rephrase it to make it clearer, as I would hate to effortlessly rebut your apparent point only to find that you were claiming to say something else equally as trite. Try not to use rhetorical tricks, such as attempting to use my own phrases against me, as it just muddies your message and obfuscates the dialectic. Use your own words in your own earnest and sincere way.
Delete