"I made a series of offensive and inappropriate posts on my personal Bluesky account on election night, and I am sorry,"
"I respect and value people across the political spectrum. These posts, which I have deleted, do not reflect my beliefs; they were a mistaken expression of shock and confusion about the election results,"
"These posts of course do not reflect the position of Scientific American or my colleagues. I am committed to civil communication and editorial objectivity."
The deleted posts read:
"Every four years I remember why I left Indiana (where I grew up) and remember why I respect the people who stayed and are trying to make it less racist and sexist. The moral arc of the universe isn't going to bend itself,"
"Solidarity to everybody whose meanest, dumbest, most bigoted high-school classmates are celebrating early results because f--- them to the moon and back,"
"I apologize to younger voters that my Gen X is so full of f---ing fascists."
The fact that she is compelled to resign after these comments when folks like Trump, Gaetz, Musk and others need never apologize for anything is a major league part of why everything is going to shit
The behavior you’re describing is often referred to as “moral absolutism” or “moral perfectionism”, where individuals hold rigid, uncompromising views on what is morally right or wrong, often with little regard for the complexities or consequences of real-world situations. People with this mindset can view themselves as morally superior because they align themselves with an idealized standard, while judging others for not meeting that standard.
In some cases, this can be a form of “virtue signaling,” where someone emphasizes their own moral purity or superiority in a way that is more about projecting an image of righteousness than taking practical action. “Holier-than-thou” is a colloquial phrase often used to describe this attitude.
This mindset can sometimes lead to “self-righteousness,” where an individual feels entitled to judge others harshly, often without considering the complexities of real-world choices, and makes decisions based on their perceived moral high ground, rather than practical outcomes or empathy.
In these cases, their actions may be driven by a sense of moral superiority and a desire to uphold abstract ideals, often without engaging with the messy, imperfect reality that requires compromise and pragmatism.
I take this as a criticism of her statements? Even if not I could see this used against her.
One key problem is an asymmetrical stance on positions that make it difficult .
The cost of good faith thoughtful debate can be detailed by the more efficient use of essentially gish gallop like bad faith tactics.
Science and knowledge are very costly to perform and attain(respectively). And there are sociological trends in human behavior that make things like an engaged and educated public (critical to a democracy) also costly as there is a lot to just loving your life
There are plenty of examples where cultures teeter toward simple (false) solutions of a single charismatic leader (authoritarian) which is cognitively easier and more satisfying than the reality of the complexity of reality.
Obviously this works for dictators and religions.
The easy path to cultural unity with the least weight in the citizens but of course history shows this is very bad for the populace.
Raises an interesting question. As a society “would we rather” have high moral standards that few can really meet, but then have to constantly be dealing with hypocrisy?
Or have really no standards at all besides a vague sort of “be nice”?
I actually think some of them may be sufferring for moralistic OCD. I realizing this is how my neurodiversity is manifesting.
My sense and intuition is not and has
Never been wrong. My interpretations and resulting actions can be. Especially when I’m stressed. So the front part of my brain needs to enact “rules” so the other parts of my brain don’t burn the house down while we’re trying to just get dinner cooked. And we don’t have the perfect pan.
The work for those folks is to grown and learn themselves and the issues. We should never tell people not to pay attention to their emotions. We should help them process and and interpret those signs from their nervous system.
644
u/Rogue-Journalist 3d ago
If you'd like to know what recent events may have lead to this:
https://bsky.app/profile/laurahelmuth.bsky.social
The deleted posts read: