The Lying Eye Test: Why We Refuse to See the Harm We Vote For
Today, we launch Beyond Rationalization with a hard truth: Most cruelty is committed not by people who believe they are evil, but by people who have become experts at not believing their own eyes.
We are talking about the moment of cognitive collapse in a democracy. It’s the voter who enters the booth focused purely on a narrow self-interest—a tax cut, a perceived advantage for their group—and then casts a ballot for a system that actively creates pain and suffering for others. When the consequences arrive—the evictions, the hunger, the systemic exclusion—they look at the ruin and say, "I didn't vote for that."
The devastating truth is:
Yes, you did.The Comfort of Consequence Blindness
Harm is rarely an accident; it is the logical conclusion of a system chosen for selfish gain. Yet, the human mind is wired to protect its self-image as a "good person." This psychological need creates a wall between Action (the vote, the policy support) and Consequence (the suffering).
To maintain this wall, we employ two powerful lies:
The Lie of Displacement: We delegate the moral fault. "It’s the politician’s fault, not mine." "I was just following the party line." This is the intellectual cowardice of refusing personal accountability for the collective action you enabled.
The Lie of Justification: We re-label cruelty as necessity. The policy that strips aid from the vulnerable is not "cruel"; it is "fiscal discipline." The dehumanization of an out-group is not "hatred"; it is "national security." This is the Devil in the nice suit—a monstrous outcome dressed up in respectable, pragmatic language.
When confronted with the proof of their vote—the children going hungry, the denial of necessary care—the person’s primary defense is to look at the suffering and command their own conscience: "Do not believe your lying eyes."
Beyond the Rules of the Tribe
For many, the problem is compounded by selective ethics, particularly those rooted in faith. You see people who claim to fear God and adhere to the Golden Rule, yet support policies that violate every known tenet of compassion.
They resolve this massive contradiction by shrinking their moral universe. They define "neighbor" to mean only the people inside their immediate tribe, community, or political party. Everyone else—the immigrant, the poor, the politically opposed—is redefined as an out-group, falling outside the boundary of divine love and therefore, outside the boundary of human compassion.
Their vote is not a failure of faith; it is an act of tribal loyalty that has been fully rationalized as righteous justice.
The Call to See Clearly
Beyond Rationalization is a space dedicated to tearing down these comfortable lies. We must reject the seductive command to ignore the facts of human suffering.
Our test going forward will be simple: We will judge every action, every policy, and every political alignment not by the words used to sell it, but by the undeniable consequences it produces in the real world.
If the result is pain, poverty, or exclusion, the justification—no matter how spiritual, economic, or patriotic it sounds—is simply a lie.
What suffering are you being told to ignore right now?
