Narcissistic Nannies

Narcissistic Nannies – the Moral Narcissism of Collectivists

Does what you claim to believe define you as an individual and makes you smarter, rather than what you do or the result of your actions?   Do the values you promote, regardless of their actual truth or reality, signal that you are a virtuous person?  Do you believe that you are simply what you say you are and that should be proof enough of your superior character?  Do you feel like you have the right to tell other people what they can or cannot do because you are so obviously more capable by virtue of which Ted Talks you watched?  You, my friend, are a moral narcissist.

This is not the narcissism of a fabled Greek youth staring longingly at his own lovely reflection.  There was at least the fact that he was incredibly attractive.  No, this narcissism is devoid of any reality.  This is the narcissism derived from being entitled to intellectual superiority simply because you claim it.  And you claim this superiority based entirely on your uninformed but adamant belief in something better.  You are better simply because you want something better.

This narcissism is entirely lacking any actual intellectual effort, real-world experience or results based scientific inquiry or actual personal behavior.  Because the purpose or goal they verbalize is supposedly so lofty and ideal, anything attributed to it and anyone supporting it is now somehow elevated to demi-god status.

For example, you say that you support cleaning up the environment so suddenly you are imbued with a knowledge that exceeds any actual education in biology, economics and energy production.  In fact, your intellectual level is now so far superior to other people that only a fool or worse a “denier” would ever oppose your altruistic and compassionate efforts to save the world!  Indeed, no one who agrees with things like you do such as your support for the idea of a clean environment would ever question or doubt any rules proposed to accomplish this goal.

Did that sound vaguely familiar?   It is the classic “the ends justify the means” fallacy.

We’ve now expanded that to mean “the ends justify my moral superiority” as well as “the ends justify silencing anyone who disagrees with me”

We must oppose fossil fuels to stop anthropomorphic climate change! You have no real science, no proof of success, no proof of an actual causal relationship that can be solved, but it sounds good and you are sincere and it is for the betterment of society, so it’s the right thing to do and you are superior to everyone who disagrees simply for agreeing verbally with this idea.

Since, after all, you can plainly see the rightness of the end goal when others cannot, you are without a doubt much more superior to their dim and uninformed view of the world.  Why, it’s as if you were on Mount Olympus itself and far below you see the poor benighted fools struggling about in darkness and ignorance.  If only they would recognize your incredible brilliance and allow you to dictate for them what they should or should not do, then by magic they would come to their senses and recognize your true greatness and worship you for the incredibly sacrificial effort you have put forward by agreeing with a few others about the importance of this topic with such fervor and confidence.

Here’s a real world example.

This is a basic thought progression – There are obese people in America.   People are obese because they have poor eating habits.  One of their poor eating habits is drinking too many soft drinks.  People should drink less soft drinks so that there would be fewer obese people in America.  And now the collectivist  turn into tyrannical behavior happens – Politicians should makes rules about this, but we have to move slowly for the sake of the poor ignorant masses.  Let’s start with a restriction on cup size.

I am a celebrity.  I have no medical degree, I have no statistical evidence, I have not employed the scientific method to test various hypothesis, I have conducted no trials to determine efficacy of reduction in cup size to eating habits, I have not studied the Constitution to determine if this is a power granted to the government, I have not made any effort at all to look at alternative methods, I do not even care about the impact to individual liberty or that this may open the door to even more government intrusion into the lives of free people.  I do not even understand the source of power or authority by which the government has the ability to make such laws, but fewer fat people is good, I am promoting something good therefore I am a better person.

I am asked to promote this ban on cup size and since I agree that society should have less obese people, I can confidently assume my place of superiority and talk about how this great new effort to improve the lives of obese people everywhere should happen by allowing the government to make more rules about what they can or cannot consume.  Only a fool or denier, a naysayer who is evil and mean would object to this lofty goal.  I have the morally superior high ground because this is a good thing . . . right?

Or, take this example – Families are the bedrock of any culture.  Marriage is the foundation of the family.  Marriage is a holy institution.  Only a man and woman should be allowed to marry.  And now the collectivist turn into tyrannical behavior happens again – Politicians should make a rule about this, but we have to move slowly for the sake of the poor ignorant masses.  Let’s start with a federal law recognizing the sanctity of marriage as only being between a man and woman.

In either example, do I as an individual or do you as an individual have a right to tell any other individual what size cup they should purchase or who they should or should not marry?  Then how could there ever have been a transfer of power to the state to make decrees on either of these issues?  If I do not individually possess the right to control the behavior of others in relation to either of those things, I cannot empower the state to do those things on my behalf.  The state has no right to dictate to you which cup size you must purchase for your soft drink and also has no right to determine what is or is not a marriage.  Those are both choices left solely to the individual.

Any time a piece of legislation come up for discussion or vote, the central point on which it should be judged is “by what authority is the state wielding this power over the lives of its individual citizens?”  The power of government Is derived from the consent of the governed and the governed can only consent to grant the state powers they possess as individuals.

A collective right cannot exist where an individual right does not exist.

Do you have a right to healthcare?  NO!

Understand what that means – if you have a right to health care, you are saying that you have a right to have the care of your health provided at the expense of someone else.  That person, in truth, is now your personal slave and must toil away at their employment to take care of your medical expenses or insurance premium.  Do you have the right to rob me at gunpoint to pay your medical bills or to pay for your insurance premium?

So if you do not have a right to rob me gunpoint to pay for your healthcare, how can you give that power to the state?  By what authority does the state have the right to force me with the threat of violence to pay taxes to subsidize your cost of healthcare?  Where does the state obtain the right to rob me to benefit you?

Is it any wonder that the concept of a right to healthcare or the enslavement of a citizen to take care of you is promoted so vigorously by the party of slavery?  The Democrats have not changed at all.

The collectivists are truly narcissistic nannies.   They firmly believe that any ends they identify as desirable – good health, good wages, good food, good environment, good thought, good housing justifies any action on their part regardless of the impact to individual liberty or rights.

They love the thought of being your constant nanny, which of course they are entitled to be because of their obvious moral superiority by virtue of claiming they want what is best for you . . . as long as they get to define what that best for you is.  Since they want only what is best for you *cough* as they define it *cough*, you should relinquish any control over your own choices to them.  Let them make the tough choices for you.   You should trust their benevolence, they will make sure you can work and that you will have a least a minimum wage for it, they will make sure you have housing, food, medical care, education – but in exchange for all of these things, all they ask is your agreement to be robbed  . . . uh I mean . . . taxed yeah taxed for the costs involved in maintaining these amazing benefits for you and you must also accept of them as your lord and masters . . . uh  I mean . .  vote for them as your leaders, yeah leaders and never ever leave the ideological plantation . .  I mean the ideological purity of their political party.  After all, by virtue of their moral superiority only they know what is right and good for you . . . .

But sweetie, its for your own good.   Your taxes are just the bitter medicine you have to swallow for me to make everything all better for you . .  well not better per say, just , well it will be at least as good as everyone else has it . .  maybe . . just trust me. I only want what is best for you and I know what is best for you.  After all, I am your lord and master and you can always trust me to watch out for you and take care of you.  Ohh, don’t worry about those chains.  They’re there just make sure you don’t harm yourself  . .  or escape I mean wander off in a fit of delirium . . . .  trust me.  Freedom is a nasty business and is  sooo dirty and dangerous, you should just let us manage the whole affair for you.  Here watch this “reality” show and pip down.  We’ll let you know if we need you to do anything . . . . like protest those evil liberty lovers who can’t promise you everything we promise you. . . . they must hate you if they do not want to make laws that will ensure you have all of these good things. . . .

Progressives hate individual liberty.  They can’t control it.  But as moral narcissists, as your narcissistic nannies – they want to control you!  They do not want you to be free, they want you to be entitled to live under their “care and guidance” so that they can live the life of the master of the house.  If you will simply trade away your liberties for their benevolent rule, all will be well with the world and they will be the ruling elite once more.

Is that what you want? Do you really want to give up your freedom to a narcissistic nanny in exchange for the soft chains of slavery?

Not me – I stand with Patrick Henry:

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!