Navigating Political Choices: Who is the Lesser of Two Unfavorable Options?

When faced with significant political choices, many individuals find themselves trying to discern between two seemingly unfavorable options. The term 'lesser of two evils' often comes to mind, yet the validity of this concept is frequently questioned. Is it truly a valid approach, or is it a misapplication of our subjective perceptions and definitions?

Subjective Perception: The Heart of the Matter

When it comes to politics, our definitions of 'evil' can be overly dramatic and hyperbolic. The term 'evil' is often used when what we really mean is that something is simply not in line with our preferences. While it is true that in theological terms, evil is defined as a total lack of virtue, making an object, person, or institution inherently evil is a more nuanced and subjective concept.

For example, a rock, a gun, or even a political party can be criticized for various reasons, but these entities are neutral and do not possess evil intentions. It is the intentions behind actions and perceptions of harm that often determine whether something is considered 'evil' within the context of human interactions.

Ultimately, the phrase 'lesser of two disliked' becomes relevant when faced with constrained choices, such as those in elections where the 'sweet' options have already been selected by others. However, it is crucial to weigh the long-term consequences and the truth in these choices. Everyone and every belief system contains elements of good or truth, even if it may be misleading or deceptive.

Deceptive Nature of Evil

Evil can be deceptive and is not, in essence, an absolute or independent entity. It is more accurately described as a perversion or a distortion of what is fundamentally good. Evil is not simply the opposite of good but can manifest in various forms, such as disunity, disharmony, inequity, unrighteousness, lawlessness, and injustice.

Notably, only God is considered truly good, as there is no evil in Him. This perspective helps us understand that evil is a human construct and that its impact is highly contingent on the context and the intentions driving it.

Choosing Wisely: A Personal Perspective

When it comes to presidential elections, the choices can seem particularly dire. In such cases, individuals may find their allegiance or preference intertwined with political parties. Personally, one might hold a negative view of one party simply because it aligns with an ideological stance. However, this should not necessarily equate to labeling the entire party as 'evil.'

For instance, the comparison between the Democratic Party (‘the left’) and Donald Trump (the then-Republican candidate) often involves layers of complexity. While Trump was certainly not ethically spotless, his presidency did not lead to the same level of loss of life as the decisions made by Hillary Clinton during her campaign. There is evidence to suggest that many lives were lost due to the misleading and deceptive actions taken by Clinton and her team in their quest to orchestrate a win, which undermined the integrity of the democratic process.

Therefore, when faced with the 'lesser of two evils,' it is essential to consider not just immediate gratification but the long-term consequences and the true impact of each choice. The concept of comparing political figures as solely 'evil' or 'lesser' can be both misleading and harmful to our collective understanding of governance and human behavior.

In conclusion, navigating political choices requires a nuanced understanding of the complexities involved. While the term 'lesser of two evils' can be a useful heuristic, it is crucial to avoid overgeneralization and embrace the full spectrum of human actions and intentions when making decisions that affect our society.