The Axiom of Choice

The story goes like this:
Any choice could be made, whether or not we actually make it. Thus we can speak as if it had been made. There should be nothing surprising about statements that a desired order can be imposed if enough choices can be made. There is an assumption we can make that would make such a thing possible if affirmed (by...?). But that doesn't mean there is such a sequence of decisions made. It should also be unsurprising that an assumption like that would seem to allow orders higher than can be undone by relatively constrained manipulations - puttings together which we have conceived of as fundamentally constrained. This is, after all, the difference we picture between a human's ability to choose, specify determine, and that which is naturally, materially given. The story goes: Nature must obey Laws. Man makes his own Law.
There is a famous paradox that arises as a natural consequence of this assumed difference, named to honor S. Banach and A. Tarski. Pretend you are a number, who, like any upstanding member of society, chooses his friends wisely (one always has the power to choose one's destiny, am I right?). As a rational being, you wish the differences between you and your friends be only rational (that's only rational, right?), and you choose them accordingly. Let's complete our society of rational friend networks by supposing every member of society can choose their friends in this way. Then no matter who you run into, you're either friends with them for rational reasons, or you're not friends with them because the differences between the two of you cannot be resolved by rational means. (What could make more sense?)
When the Senate convenes, (each person represented by a friendly senator), they always find things don't measure up. Just how many of us are there? There are more than none; why do I keep coming up with 1+1+1+1... < 3 ? And before you suggest the obvious, there are too many senators to count!
But we designed it so perfectly... everything made sense.
The divide between the rational and the irrational has been drawn for millenia as straight and narrow. If we seek to verify if a given individual is rational or not, we must find a ratio of whole numbers that is identical to them. What could be simpler? If we try but find we can only get close, we must admit that they are not rational.
But how far do we look? How long do we look for patterns until we admit defeat and declare the sequence lost to chaos? Is it truly their rationality that we have sought to question, or the patience and understanding of those who have power of them? Who exactly has defined which ellipsis means "harmonious" and which means "discordant?" How does one trail off to suggest that all is in order...?
Choice is the last chapter in the Saga of the Transcendant Individual, written in blood, oil spills, and eutrophied lakewater. God has died and with Him, the heroic demideitic status of the king, now a Mr. (master) but with no Majesty. Listen to His story.
Now he is simply another man who makes his way in the world, choosing among options as best as can rationally be done. He chooses the things that are good for himself; everyone does, otherwise bad things happen to them.
This is the right way. How else can you teach people to make good decisions, other than to punish the wrong ones?
Choice defines right and wrong. You either choose the good or choose he bad; you're good if you choose the good, bad if you choose the bad.
If something bad happens to someone, it must have been because they made a wrong choice somewhere along the way. I always make the right choices, of course; I'm just rational like that. I only do what I choose; therefore I can have no responsibility for what I didn't wholly choose. We are all presented choices in the world, and forced to choose among them. If some other man made a choice which hurt someone, who am I to stop him? Rather than denying his freedom, I should only exercise mine, to take advantage of the opportunity he has created. I didn't make America this way, I just take advantage of it and invest in its security and stability.
And if someone makes a choice based on a lie and gets burned... hey, buyer beware, right?
What do you want out of a relationship? Choose the one that best suits you, you transcendant chooser, you!
You see, it's all out of our hands. Someone else is making the big decisions, I just cope with them the best I can. And if I make the right choices, things go well. You just gotta be smart, and you can win, buddy!
We can fix the evils of the world with our choices, too! All there is to it is making different decisions. Produers produce, freighters freight, sellers sell, and choosers choose! We have complete freedom in every aspect of our lives, becase every aspect of our lives is part of the consumer network, which is governed wholly by rational choices.
If corporations hurt the land and dishonor our spirits, we should simply not buy their products. You may have to choose a job with more pay (perhaps a corporate job, I hear there's just tons of money in that), but that's your decision. It's your life, right? So you choose how righteous you want to be. And if I choose decadence over the safety of my neighbours, well, I suppose they have the right to move somewhere else, don't they?
But I must be able to choose which countries I do business in, too! We will move here and employ your people, and if they choose to move off the land instead, well that's their right! But spare me your petty pleas about "forcing you off your land," when you could have chosen to develop it yourself. Why didn't you just choose the right lawyers, who choose to say the right things, find the right loopholes?
There's big money in this, we're turning the whole place into beautiful houses, so people can choose to live here! We've chosen the most economic plan, obviously: we've decided to make the houses identical. But who cares, when you can choose which Ikea products to place in it, and which television channels to tune into! You even get to choose the color of your tooth brush! We've got blue, green, red... oh wait, we're out of red.
You can save the environment! Don't like oil? Just choose a bike! If you need to take 2 hours to get to and from your job, hey, that's your choice! (Otherwise, shut up and drive like the rest of us rational folks... Why should we be penalized for your decision? God, stop acting so stuck up and entitled, like you're saving the goddamn planet).
Don't like plastic? Choose to not use hygiene products, or electronics, or conventionally packaged food! [Actually I'm not sure you can live in a city and not use plastic.. I'm fairly certain it's impossible]
 Don't like factory farms? Just choose organic and free range. (Don't choose vegan, those people are irrational). Never mind that it's more expensive... after all, it's the farmer's choice to honor their land instead of overloading it with nutrients and disinfectants to make up for rapacious technique! We don't choose the economy, but we choose our place in it!
And after all this, you can look down your nose because you've chosen it, and they haven't! You were the stronger, you overcame your selfish desires, and hasn't that been fulfilling? Yes, they should all be grateful that you're saving their planet.
Don't like your job? Choose another! Don't have the skills? Choose education! Still dont' have the experiecne? Choose working your way up the ladder. Don't like your career? Choose another one! Don't like any occupation? Choose, um... liking an occupation!
Don't like the entertainment culture? Just choose a different channel! Don't like any of them? Just choose something else to entertain you. Can't escape the constant media, which is slowly bringing you to a state of psychosis? Choose to ignore it! Or choose to be a hermit, or suicide! Just leave me the fuck alone, I've been nothing but helpful!
Bored? Choose entertainment!
Unhappy, disrespected, feeling like the world's against you, never really listens? Hey, just choose happiness! It only takes two muscles to smile! Remember, you choose your reality, don't you? You're rational, right? Happiness makes sense, because it feels good! Always choose what feels good! Always choose what feels good!
You can always make more money if you're feeling down about consuming too much. You might need to produce a bit more for the guys upstairs, but once you can afford that vacation, it'll all be worth it, right?
Don't like the world? Just choose to ignore it! The obvious solution!
No wonder our people are so stuck up their own ass. They've got nowhere else to go.
When I exaggerate the story a little bit, in order to tease out the creaks in its hinges, you can hopefully see that it lines up perfectly with the gist of popular pseudo-spiritual notions which become the stuff of 12 step devotional algorithms. It's thus perhaps not too surprising that, like modern industrial-capitalist apologist narratives, there is never explication of such principles as "live in the moment" beyond the sentence itself. They appear like slogans in shop windows, "WORK MAKES YOU FREE," iconic and authoritative (even if written in cursive over a backdrop of flower petals and heart icons). 
It almost seems necessary then that young people following such advice tend around a bend into solipsism, which perhaps explain why there's so much doubt among the comfortable that many people actually do live a troubled existence. Their "most people"s inevitably are like them: horny yet timid, prying yet unquestioning, basically bored yet perpetually comfortable (despite the occasional breakup! "Aww girl you're the beautifullest, and he was just a lying meanie! Come, let us buy and drink!").
If our people are to stand up, and not just tweet "standing" emojis from the couch, the stability of those identities must be abolished; they must be capsized.
That's not a moral judgment, but a mechanical one. The choice is ours, of course.