September 14, 2020

Accusing is an extremely degenerate method of communicating. It conveys hate in conflict with realities. Subjectivity and values are not supposed to be imposed; but accusing does that.

Corrupters are so dumb that they assume accusing is no different than criticizing—just more effective. They get a lot of criticism; so they assume accusing is simply reversing the result.

Stripping away reality and replacing it with hate is not reversing something; it is replacing something necessary with something destructive.

Corrupters feel real imposed upon when held accountable. They should. So they feel they are justified in making their enemies feel real imposed upon through lying accusations. They shouldn't.

In other words, truth is an evil imposition to corrupters and lying is their virtue. Only the philosophy of rationality straightens out the difference. That process is one of the evils corrupters oppose.

Truth is the only force corrupters cannot subdue. So they view it as the ultimate evil. The fix is lying accusations, because that is how they oppose truth.

So the philosophical difference needs to be explained. Truth is the combined realities that the universe creates. Such a large number of realities linked together in a consistent manner creates a force that no one can defy. Corrupters can only defy truth by preventing it from existing in human realities.

The definition of truth is the communicated representation of unified realities. Humans can only produce truth to the extent that they can communicate a representation of unified reality. Blocking such communication is the primary means of corrupters evading the truth that condemns them.

Accountability is producing the truth about corruption. It means realities are explained as a method of linking to the unified reality that comes out of the universe. Then the result is produced by the force the universe produces when imposed upon humans. Accountability is linking to the universe as the defining principle.

Truth being intolerable to corrupters, a countering version of imposed reality is needed. Imposing lies upon vulnerable persons is the method corrupters use to replace truth with their version of reality. Imposed lies take the form of accusations.

So an accusation is an imposed lie, where accountability is an imposed universe. The universe is much more significant, but blocking it out is as simple as disrupting human communication.
 
The Accusers

Accusations are primarily used as a justification mechanism. To accuse is to use oneself as the reference for virtue. Every accusation does that. It says the accuser is the reference for normalcy or perfection.

The simple reason is because an accusation is a lie. A lie is something that comes out of a person. It is subjective. With a lie, there is no relationship to anything in objective reality. With no relationship to objective reality, what determines the difference between right and wrong? An accusation says the accuser represents what is right and the accused persons represents what is wrong.

The total isolation of lies from all surrounding realities leaves no other alternatives. The purpose of an accusation is to separate right from wrong, while no other realities can enter consideration. So the accuser automatically becomes right, while the accused automatically becomes wrong. No other result can exist with an accusation due to the total disconnect from objective reality.

You would think then that an accusation would be self-condemning. It is self-condemning in the view of rational persons. Accusing is a corruption. But there are other corrupters who go along with accusations and give it meaning.

So an accusation is a dog whistle attack which all corrupters align upon as their version of reality, while rational persons see accusations as corruption.

To corrupters, there should be such a thing as an accusation that is universal truth. The reason why there isn't is because the process of accusing disconnects from objective reality. Even if it were truth, while the purpose of accusers is to fight a war against all truth, the disconnect from reality would subjectivize the accusation and give it the corrupt meaning that the accuser intends.

The intent is part of the definition of an accusation, while the disconnect from reality is inseparable from the intentions of corrupters. In other words, if producing truth were the purpose, an explanation that connects to objective reality would always be included as the only possible means of producing truth. Disconnecting from reality is the necessary requirement for imposing corruption.

Accusations and accountable truth don't look the same. They can't be mistaken. If it looks like an accusation, it is disconnected from reality. If it looks like accountability, it has explanations that develop truth. The number of words used is part of the reason they look different.

Political Accusations

It should be noticed that about half of the politics of corruption that Trump's group has been demonstrating is an accusation against enemies. Their entire justification is that enemies are creating everyone's problems and corrupters are the solution to the problems.

That political mechanism is an accusation process, which means a self-justification process. The accusers could be talking about a rock and the result would be the same—the accusers would supposedly be justified in protecting society from the rock. There is about that much reality in the accusations corrupters use to justify their political positions.

Directing Hate

Accusing is an expression of hate, not realities. Nonsensical terminology is needed to prevent realities from being corrected. Haters hate all elements of constructivity including rationality, competence and knowledge. those things make haters jealous, and jealousy is the main source of hate.

An example is accusing competent liberals of being "Washington insiders" implying some sort of degeneracy that must be wiped ou—what Trump's group calls swamp. Why aren't McConnell, Barr and Pompeo Washington insiders? Because they aren't competent, constructive, rational liberals.

Notice the nonsensical terminology. There is no way to translate what a Washington insider would be. Just anyone a degenerate hates, and degenerates hate liberals due to their competence, which makes degenerates jealous. Anything real for a label would expose the hate for what it is.

Another example is liberals supposedly creating a "cancel culture" which conservatives are replacing. Supposedly liberals created a cancel culture at universities by opposing racism. Only conservatives do the canceling, while liberals do valid criticizing. Cancelling, as firing people, is the only "art of the deal" Trump knows. There is no one in his government who he doesn't cancel eventually. What is shoving immigrants out of the country besides "cancel culture"?

Another nonsensical label is "liberal elites." Who are the liberal elites? Why isn't Trump's gold plating of his edifices an attempt to create elitism? Liberals don't make such an attempt.

In attacking so-called liberal elites, the hate is directed toward competence and rationality, as if degeneracy were required to avoid elitism. Isms, such as elitism, are artificial constructions, not necessary processes for getting things done.

When liberals were in control of government, before 1981, they defined liberalism as "promoting equal opportunity." There is nothing elite about promoting equal opportunity, which means solving problems for minorities. Why isn't shoving out immigrants elitism? Why isn't racism elitism? Why isn't super nationalism elitism?

Notice that in all of the hateful accusations, the truth applies to the accusers. It's no accident. Corrupters try to cover their own corruptedness by pretending that someone else is more corrupt. They project their corruptions onto their enemies trying to justify themselves. Accusing is how that works.