Jean Daullé: The Magic Lantern (1757)

"Why, then, does Decency so often prevail?"

Contrary to popular misconception, Decency is not necessarily in a competition with indecency. They might both exist on some imaginary continuum, but that line bisects dimensions as well as linear space. It’s more diagonal than level, and not necessarily a straight or narrow line connecting the two poles, which cannot be adequately characterized as opposites without ignoring some rather obvious similarities. One continuing challenge stems from the straightforward-seeming notion of good and bad, beneficial and evil. Decency isn’t necessarily without sin, and indecency doesn’t always qualify as even a venial sin. Decency might satisfy convention while offending with pretension. Indecency might occasionally be absolutely necessary. Let he without indecency cast the first stone.

Indecency might seem to lack the discipline necessary to fully abide by the rules. It often seems sloppy in execution and, therefore, lackadaisical. Decency might pretend to be more pious, sometimes to seemingly take advantage of the rest of us. It’s not above resorting to MisDirection to achieve some end. It’s capable of pretending to lose so that it can succeed. It need not show all the cards it’s holding. It’s perfectly acceptable to encourage a competitor to assume whatever they please, especially if that provides a Decent advantage. Indecency seems to be so busy imagining ways to break the rules that it never occurs to it to see if they’re making a fool of themself. Decency sees that success sometimes seems a simple matter of letting indecency take advantage of themself. Give the greedy bastard the gold he desires, but cannot swim away carrying.

The Parable of the Government Shutdown showed Decency engaging in MisDirection. After forty days and nights of stalemate, seven Democrats and an Independent proposed a resolution. The Repuglicans had been adamant, following their insistent incumbent’s vehement instructions, that they would never agree to anything the Dems proposed. They wanted a so-called “clean bill,” one without any changes. The shutdown, though, was taking its toll on the Repugs more than on the Dems, who had been just as adamant about continuing Affordable Health Care Act subsidies as the ‘Pugs’ had been about devastating the economy. The Dems mustered a MisDirection, superficially giving in to precisely one of the Pugs’ demands. They’d forego renewing the health care subsidy if the Pugs would agree to fund food assistance. The Dems would agree if the Pugs conceded to reopen the government and agreed to reconsider funding the health care subsidies in January. Deal accepted.

Every Repuglican senator and representative had to agree to change their non-negotiable strategy. Seven Dems did, all lame ducks or secure in their future electability. The Dems roared, not in victory, of course, but in apparent defeat. Many called for the minority leader to resign, as he had not been able to keep his party members in line. However, tellingly, nobody on their side volunteered to become the replacement Senate Minority Leader. The deal preserves and amplifies the blatant insult that the lack of health care subsidies will represent.

Furthermore, it focuses exclusive attention on that issue after the impact of the missing subsidies trickles down to the kitchen table level over the Christmas period. Bernie Sanders, ever the reliable shill, served as the outrage amplifier, while the Dems carefully continued promoting their curated myth that they are rudderless—a perfectly Decent ploy.

Decency shouldn’t be above letting indecency occasionally have its way. Indecency often serves as the most effective advertising against its own position. It might at first appear that indecency enjoys unfair competition, until the effects of competing against itself are factored in. Until then, it often seems the world is tilted against their opposition. Decency isn’t beyond feigning loss. It’s not indecent to insist that even the indecent be precisely who they always aspired to be. It’s not necessarily any skin off Decency’s back for indecency to lack the insight to see that they’re usually the author of their own misery. Nor is it a sin for Decency to gloat sometimes, even self-satisfyingly. The competition might be eternal, but it’s never necessarily fair. Indecency often seems as though it holds the inside rail. Why, then, does Decency so often prevail?

©2025 by David A. Schmaltz - all rights reserved

Tags: #Decency, #PureSchmaltz