The Problem with choosing the lesser of two evils is the initial pairing of the evils, or the creation of the sort-of mental arena for Competition between them; giving force of choice to the average person, and the force of support to what might actually be the greater – more intelligent – of the two evils.
This makes one feel quite honored to be chosen to choose. To be offered a chance, albeit a gambling, hopeless one, From Our point of view, getting asked, selected, or forced to choose is enough. Yet it is not enough for Us to realize the trouble with this choice, or offer in the first place.
In our day choices have become very pleasurable, so to the point where the idea of “evil” may altogether diminish and accepting and even seeking out the choice becomes common living.
Many choose either evil in their own self-created contexts, yet acknowledge it’s existence there nonetheless. The sensible solution is seeing it rather as “good” in its own, very new way. What else can we do? Not dwell in the past, for sure, but lean into the future…
Must we learn a new method of non-participation, some form of social protest? Peaceful sit ins? Silent boycotting? Outright anarchistic vandalism? What does it take to avoid being sucked into the selfish ladder of choosing? The decision to commit our own wrongs, sins, or dismiss them is not a game.
“But I wanna see it all go down”, is when we get rid of the decision to think about it. If your mind, your life attracts the choice to you – there is probably a reason. Perhaps, Maybe the evil forces sense weakness in you.
I’m sure about one thing now – that your Radiant attention, your endless train of thought tuning in gives these growing forces of admitted “evil” the power of your attention, the moments in your limited life. They also work similarly with forces of good, although may not be similar always.
Of course will many want and need to see the competition unfold… and in the end we all must choose. What I console you with is an escape; that there is a third option, possibly a fourth and fifth depending on the scenario one faces.
In some cases, many have refered to the US presidential elections as “choosing between the lesser of two evils” for it is generally regarded as an important chance that we as loyal citizens of America, feel forced to choose in out of obligation.
When in the end we are admittedly participating in a contest that we cannot ourselves influence with a single vote. In the end Americans know that no matter how many voters One leader can rally on their side, it comes to a choice between the two people representing parties; Democratic or Republican.
With this individual “lesser of two evils”, people are mistakenly choosing an entire party, lurking unseen behind them in the shadows; as well as an entire 4 years of decisions that can turn into events beyond anyone’s wildest dreams, and entire cabinets of officials moving in, people who in no way are required to show their true concern for our country to the public, bringing spice racks full of bills and decisions and deals under the table to the White House.
Otherwise it seems the vote is being thrown away, if one chooses not to take it.
Is this why people have considered choosing a US President a task of “choosing the lesser of two evils” – Because of all the funding that each President recieves during campaign? (…in turn making deals and alliances with major interest groups and corporations with interests all their own in many cases). But the President is a greater entity, standing alone as the elected, and if they in fact are corrupted, in other words the Greater of the two evils, then he (and his group) would undoubtedly find a way to win the vote. If not somehow be convincing and decieving enough to APPEAR as the Lesser of two evils, when in turn really being the more intelligent, cunning, and overall greater.
Although figurative, this concept of “choosing the lesser of two evils” also applies to the everyday world. People feel pressure when asked to choose between their own conscience and something “bad”, they are used to being forced to make a decision and it is this very repetion of choice, choice, choice, that creates a rift in the mind. This rift makes us behave like machines in our choices in order to act more efficiently.
We become like little mini-presidents of our own day-to-day. Instead of passing bills, bills, bills and acts across our desks, we, the conditioned choosers between two evils pass choice, after choice, after decision, after decision along through our minds until every choice we make seems automatic.
So it goes without saying happily, one tactic used by promoters of these contests would be creating the urging pressure of choose. Making one feel forced to make a choice, an ultimate stand (for the time being) on the issue, that actually makes us cooperate.
It is a combination of inner needs we all may have; to be led to a choice (forced or asked), and to be included (to participate), and to feel victorious. These urges at times exists in everyone, held in captivity, and to be herded in our own way to a choice with their help is something that independent people eventually fall to. Comforted, each one of us needs to feel the voice of someone telling us it’s alright. Somehow, some way, that it is not our fault. Blessing us with kindness, and a gentle voice.
A tad bitter about all of the times I have heard people use this “phrase” – I soon came to see call it the test of mankind.
I’ve given it more than three seconds of thought and figured why it should be reconsidered and in some cases entirely avoided. Avoided, that is, if it in some way can prevent the “chooser” (of the lesser of the two evils) from being the subject of some later harm, being made an ass of, being broke and without help, being called to battle, being forced to lose the one he/she loves, or being overrun with regret all at the hands of his decisions.
(i.e. – the people who elected hitler to power, the people who caused the Gulf Oil Spill, the people who fell for the ponsi schemes)
If you put two evils against each other, the greater of the two, whether it be intellectually, physically or any other way that it appeals in that strange, terribly modern way to the twisted people of our time, shall most likely win. For the appointed ” final judges” or powers that be (whoever controls the contests) have creating a situation where one of the two must be chosen and the people must participate.
Few things, with all due respect, feel as excitingly human as to be “Given” the choice between two evils. The chooser thereby accepts to elect evil (figuratively). But how deep does this literal evil go? What? I mean, this is what people who are fine with accepting the investment of evil don’t consider.
But if we trace both true and fictional accounts of evil (many of which are doubtless based on true experiences of “evil” in the writer’s life) they always seem to lead the protagonist astray, the chooser often gets tricked unfairly in the process.
Each of us has a different view of life, a different vantage point of vision from our stance of living. Standing still as a lighthouse is our self within our tower, looking out in our beam of life’s total understanding.
The true question, in the end, is..Can you turn the evil you see into Good? Can you turn from evil, and turn evil to good? Or do you allow it to grow, and diminish in size in your life, until nothing at all is evil, and evil is good?
Don’t underestimate yourself, your choice, your statement. It is only up to you in there. But no, not forever.