Those who follow our newly minted notion of Dreherian emperorography* are already aware of Rod Dreher's opaquely named "Law of Merited Impossibility" which states, and I roughly paraphrase, "X won't happen to Y [variable you], and when it does Y [you, again] will deserve it."
I'm pretty sure no more effort was made to give this most recent emperorographic Dreher-branding effort any sort of intelligent name because, although he's been using it recently to bait paranoid Christians with inferiority complexes that, yes, so-and-soes are out to get you, he's really casting a much wider net to reel in any chump at all psychologically needing a reason outside themselves to explain why it wouldn't get hard that time, why they didn't get tenure, why she got the promotion instead, why you can't find a pay phone anymore, why those hose you paid a fortune for ran just as you stepped from the limo, why your dog stole your truck and ran off with your wife to the honky-tonk, why life happens, and all other generic reasons why there really wasn't a pony under the tree just like you wanted when you were six.
Don't underestimate the market for this sort of thing. Huge.
But I don't see why Rod Dreher should garner all the embarrassment of making up and trying to push phrases that make normally intelligent people say, "Wait - what? What can that even mean?" We can do that, too, by golly, and do it far worse, or my name isn't Keith.
So here's my own kickoff entry into making up an important and scientifically-sounding but semantically impenetrable Law I can then use to manipulate naive goobers with at will to my own self-promotional benefit:
The Law of Unintended Precedents: It didn't happen then, but it will when you least expect it, and then look out because there will be consequences.
which means - well, I'll think about it and let you know. Oh, I remember. You remember that issue we were talking about the other day - there was quite a bit of heated discussion at the time, as I recall, and tempers got a little short between some of you that really should be on the same side on this. Well, that was why: The Law of Unintended Precedents. Didn't happen then, did it. Which means that we all need to be ready, because it will, when we least expect it, and we should all be on the same page when it does. Because there will be consequences. Be sure to bookmark this paragraph so I can keep you posted.
Remember, you heard it from Keith: The Law of Unintended Precedents. Keith. Law of Unintended Precedents. Keith. Important. Affecting you. Keith. More importantly, your children. Keith.
Now your turn: why not come up with your own Law?
And if you can't, but if you've got something like a time share contract or a U-Haul trailer full of Hummel figurines you really need to offload, why not Google the phrase "Law of Merited Impossibility" to locate a sucker nodding thoughtfully over it online whom you could immediate dump either on?
*a game of mirrors gazing into mirrors that can be played meta-levels deep, for example, here I am coining a term vaporously thin in meaning at best to describe writing that is nothing but a film-like shell of self-promotional form enclosing, if anything at all, only more of itself
**The genuine human culture levels deep that lies behind the title of this post is actually worth far more than the post itself, but I thought I'd write the post anyway to give Dreher, culturally little more than a rodent eagerly eating through the paintings in the Louvre for no other reason than that the egg proteins in the paint are tasty and still nutritious, his rightful place in the history of that phrase. That and because his assault on Dante comes out in April, remember.
The most memorable thing about Dreher's original post on merited impossibility so-called is the protesting-too-much line at the end:
ReplyDeleteIf marriage weren’t at issue, I would almost never blog about homosexuality, because it just doesn’t interest me all that much.
LOL
For those unfamiliar with the lineage of the title, I probably didn't make the connection with his "Laws" and other emperorographic vanities sufficiently, but I think this sytematic evisceration of our Western culture into nothing more than tokens of his narcissism is what has really come to define Dreher most recently, the particular nature of his treatment of the Catholic Church, for example, being just one particularly salient example.
DeleteTime was the he really was trying to understand a certain sort of socially conservative hippiedom as "Crunchy Cons", if only as a means of understanding himself, but those real world connections are snapping like guy wires as he retreats further and further into the divine mystery of his cult of himself.
Now it doesn't take very much scratching of the surface of anything at all to immediately understand he's operating solely as a koozie factory, systematically desubstantiating whatever flows through his news feed while converting it into just more Dreher-branded "moichendice", in Gabriel Sanchez' term, the "vacuous sloganeering" he reduces the practice of Christian faith to.
Only a needy True Believer thinks he cares about marriage, homosexuality, religious liberty, or anything else any more than he does your dog stealing your truck unless there's a Dreher-centric angle available to be milked.
Dante will only be the latest casualty, but probably not the last.