Ratfuckers and Sewer Politics
You might want to catch the comments in reply to davidm in the last post, particularly my last reply. Just when you thought human beings couldn’t descend any lower, they surprise you by going lower still, to the very ends of debauchery and of “trafficking in the black arts”, as Mr. Stone himself calls it.
These last couple of days have been quite educational for me. If this now represents the mainstream of contemporary politics, the situation is worse than even I believed it to be.
For, if you read The New Yorker piece on “Dirty Tricks”, and the excerpts to which I link from Matt Labash’s book Fly Fishing With Darth Vader you are definitely bound to put the question once again, “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” I don’t just take that as a “rhetorical question”, but as a genuine question that requires a genuine answer.
I find it strange indeed that Labash describes Stone as “a Catholic”, when probably what he should have written was “a lapsed Catholic”. Not that I believe being a professing Christian in any way insulates or inoculates someone from turpitude. In a lot of cases, being a “professing Christian” has simply become another con, another mask for Mr. Hyde’s predation and turpitude, somewhat like Anders Behring Breivik. “Duplicity is the currency of the day”, indeed.
Mr. Stone, like all the ratfuckers, is very Mephistophelian. That description fits, I’m sure you will agree. In that sense, he conforms rather spectacularly to the Trickster archetype also, who ultimately tends to serve the good despite himself. Canadians will probably recognise the typical “ratfucker” and Trickster in the flesh as being Michael Sona of the “robocalls scandal”.
Given the allure of evident material rewards of such debauchery and turpitude, it’s probably “natural” to ask, “what’s so bad about turpitude?” Do men like Mr. Stone “revel” or “wallow” in turpitude? It seems both. But if anything, it compels us to seek an answer to the question.