This letter is part of a larger conversation about how historians should judge the past. Mandell Creighton, an Archbishop of the Church of England, objected to what he saw as a modern tendency to be unnecessarily critical of authority figures. When Creighton wrote about the past, he tended toward a moral relativism that was uncritical of past leaders (for example, glossing over past popes’ corruption or abuse).
Lord Acton disagreed. Although he was Roman Catholic, he could not ignore popes’ corruption or abuse. He argued that all people — past or present, leaders or not — should be held to universal moral standards.~https://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/165acton.html
Not so long ago I declared, at least to myself, that I would no longer entertain (crypto-)anarchist’s vision or narrative of how the world should or will evolve.
I’ve developed this defense by the introduction of a question that I will ask such persons that hold this type of framework:
“Do you think this will come about within our lifetime?”
There are a lot otherwise seemingly rational persons that are touting this type of anti-authoritarian viewpoint. But I think few of them would try to put a short term date to their prophecies.
In Bruce Lees notes there can be found a saying that goes like, “A runner should not feel like they should be running faster” It is an observation of a type of friction. Strife or psychological conflict etc.
Anarchists mistakenly look back on the past, as if they live in the future, and judge our modern day technology and institutions as inferior.
Its just a perspective though-one that creates unnecessary psychological conflict.
An enormous (immeasurable) amount of wasted energy.
