Bonfire of the Inanities

Before Tom Wolfe wrote Bonfire of the Vanities in the 1987, there was an actual bonfire of the vanities in 15th Century Italy.

The historical Bonfire of the Vanities, after which Wolfe named his quintessential tales of the ambition, racism, social class, politics, and greed in the go-go 1980’s New York City, happened in 1497 in Florence, Italy. The city was under the sway of the Dominican priest Girolamo Savonarola. Savonarola ordered the burning of objects that church authorities considered sinful, such as cosmetics, mirrors, books, and art.

I would argue our culture has seen a similar bonfire over the past decade, a bonfire of the inanities of sorts, where, under the sway of a pagan religion called “wokeness”, statues were pulled down, self-flagellation (both mental and physical) came into vogue, and the open and wanton destruction of Western art (the tools of white supremacy), scientific advancements (which were considered racist) and culture (also racist) became the order of the day.

As much as the old sitcom Seinfeld was about nothing, this bonfire was lit by self-destructive and baseless perceptions that “systemic racism” (Michael Brown and George Floyd) was to blame for all things black, that a lack of “inclusiveness” caused rage, inequality created division, and anti-science beliefs (covid mandates and questioning the vaxx) was wrapped around it all was created by a class of laptop jockeys and pseudo-intellectuals who couldn’t explain the emptiness in their lives, so they blamed inanimate objects and other people.

Since this period was based on nothing, I therefore choose to call it the Bonfire of the Inanities.

So, as the left warms itself by this bonfire, it really should come as little surprise to the rest of us that it has produced the most vacuous, inane, malleable, cipher of a presidential candidate in the history of, well, history. Kamala Harris is perhaps the most complete avatar for the Bonfire of the Inanities period, she appears to say nothing, believes nothing, and produces nothing. She is for and against any given thing at any given time.

And this is what makes her the most dangerous candidate of modern times.

Her oft repeated phrase "What can be, unburdened by what has been" has meaning, whether she (or we) realizes it or not. It resonates at the same frequency of themes found in communist revolutionary movements, including Mao’s Cultural Revolution, by suggesting a radical break from the past is necessary to envision a new future.

Every revolution wants to break from the past – without that, there is no need for revolution.

History is a funny thing. For some, history liberates, for others, it binds. For some it is an educational tool that informs and guides, preventing the repetition of mistakes and serving as a ladder to the future. For others, it is a prison – an explanation for failure and an excuse for who they have become.

“Being unburdened by what has been,” the willful abandonment of history, has the same liberation/binding dichotomy.

Ignorance of history can be liberating in a way, it allows people to live in the moment and to judge everything by contemporary standards, not in the context of the times. It can lead to mythmaking as a defense mechanism against people’s own failings, but perhaps worst of all, it can allow both beneficial and horrific actions of the past to be either be elevated or dismissed as the current need demands.

When history is forgotten, people become bound by myths and myths make people easier to manipulate.

There is good news and bad news – the good is that Harris represents the acme, the culmination of the bonfire. It will never burn as hot as it does today and there will never come a time when people stoking the fire are as obvious about it. If we keep our heads about us, defeating their Queen of Inanities defeats the movement.

The bad news is she has a chance of being coronated.

The havoc she can wreak if she wins is something from which, in my belief, is unrecoverable short of armed conflict.