November 25, 2020

Corruption only exists as corruption when an alternative to corruption can be recognized to exist. Corrupters are persons who cannot comprehend the alternative to corruption. So they assume that the most skillful persons at corrupting are superior to the persons who refuse to learn.

This is why corrupters cannot be talked out of their corruptness. There is nothing but corruptness as a method of doing things to corrupters. Rationality does not exist as an alternative to them, because rationality is too far removed from their comprehension.

This explanation should look too preposterous to believe. It seems to be; and that is why critics can never quite get their heads around the corruption problem. They can't quite believe that it is what it is. But being what it is is the explanation for the preposterousness of the method of doing things that corrupters self-righteously try to impose upon everyone.

Corruption is assumed to be the reference standard for existence to corrupters. Other persons cannot believe that such an assumption would exist. So the problem never gets confronted. But this explanation is why corruption is so resilient. No other standard for existence can be comprehended by persons who cannot comprehend what rationality is.

Promoting corruption is below the level of criminality. Criminals know they are doing something wrong, so they try to conceal it. Corrupters assume their schemes are virtues, so they openly promote them.

When corrupters see rationality they assume it is such futile nonsense that it must be replaced. They assume rationality is an attempt to impose opinions as facts. Of course, corrupters try to impose their opinions as fact, which is exactly why they assume rational persons are trying to impose their opinions as fact. But the difference, which makes rationality unacceptable futility, is that rationality is complex with related realities as evidence. Relating one thing to another is criminality in communication to corrupters.

To a large extent, corruption is the assumption that there is no relationship between one point and another. With no relationships between points, obtuse relationships are just as good as correct relationships. And the most exploitable obtuse relationships are the most criminal ones in defying truth, knowledge, justice and laws.

It's like putting together the pieces of a puzzle. Rationality is making all of the pieces fit together properly. There is no right way to put puzzle pieces together for corrupters. So they try to fit them together wrongly. Wrongly means criminality at the expense of everyone else but aligned upon the motives of corrupters in dominating to prevail and monger power.

Self-interest is one of the primary principles of promoting corruption. If it isn't self-interest it must be against self-interest—a totally illogical concept to corrupters. Supposedly, rational persons are doing things against their own self-interest. Such a methodology must be stomped out of existence before it spreads and corrupts the rest of the world.

Corrupters are trying to stomp rationality out of existence as if it were an evil which tends to spread too easily. Bleeding for the nobodies, as social justice warriors do, is one of the manifestations of going against one's own self-interests in the assumption of corrupters.

The manifestation of these standards of corruption is to find examples of imperfection in liberals as the epitome of the misdirection being imposed upon society. An example can be found for any imperfection in any location.

An example is what one person does as the supposed representation of what millions or billions of other persons do. Therefore, examples provide the fertile ground for the endless proof of concept for the assumption of corrupters.

If a claimed liberal can be found who tripped an old lady to steal her purse, then every liberal will trip old ladies to steal their purse. Under those circumstance, no real example needs to exist; the valuable examples can be contrived, faked or framed.

For these reasons, finding or contriving examples is approximately the exclusive method of condemning opponents that corrupters use. There is no concept of right or wrong in that methodology. Examples are so rudimentary that no one can miss the point. In fact, they are so rudimentary that they tell nothing.

The claims of a fraudulent election show the methods. Supposedly, someone carried fake votes into election centers in garbage cans. There is no explanation of surrounding realities to give it meaning. How many? By whom? Through what means? Nothing. Examples are that way. No surrounding realities exist to create meaning. Fakery is as good as fact at that standard. Only rationality will tell the difference between fakery and fact.