The West is Not Yet Dead

WesternCivilizationby Steve Lancaster7/2/15
Europe is Toast  •  I have followed the discussion of the death of the West with interest. There has been a lot of talk, relevant to the issue, but missing a key point. For nearly 2000 years the nexus of our culture was Europe. Neither Brad nor Kung has considered the shattering of the pagan world in Europe between the 1st and 6th centuries.

The pagan tribes of Europe placed their faith on the continuance of the tribe. The immorality of the individual was placed within the context of the survival of the tribe. The pagan understood that if the tribe was extinguished then his immortal existence is vulnerable.  Man, in the existential sense, cannot abide the concept that there is not a prospect for eternal life; For the pagan it is within the family of the tribe. For the Jew it is within the protection of the law. And for the Christian it is the personal relationship with Christ.

A Jewish philosopher, and existential thinker of the early 20th century, Franz Rosenzweig, compatriot of Martin Buber, writes in the Star of Redemption, the Jew “converts the inner pagan” inside the Christian, such that the living presence of the Jewish people creates a counterweight to the Gnostic impulses in Christianity and, “Before God stand both of us,” he wrote, “Jew and Christians, laborers at the same task” . . . “Christ denotes only the Idea of Man. But the sturdy and undeniable vitality of the Jewish people to which anti-Semitism itself attests opposes itself to such idealization. That Christ is more than idea no Christian can know this. But that Israel is more than an idea, the Christian knows, because he sees it . . . . Our presence stands surety for their truth.”[pullquote]But by the end of this century, 2000 years of western culture in Europe will be as empty as the churches and synagogues are today. Those with even the notion of the culture will have migrated to either Israel or America. If you desire to see zombies, walk the streets of Paris, Berlin or Vienna.[/pullquote]

The conversion of the pagan during the first five centuries of the Christian era must be regarded as one of the most significant events in human history. Pagans have only the efforts to preserve their culture through the tribe, blood and physical procession of land. Life in their view is a constant battle with other tribes and nature for existence. A battle that they will lose, the pagan cannot create genuine human individuality but strives to keep the individual within a compact group be it tribe or state. In the statist view the state is the ALL, all flows from the state, everyone in his place, everyone doing his duty for the good of, and part of the state. There is no room for the individual. There is lots of talk of individual freedom, but a genuine free individual is an enemy of the state.

In the pagans view, his personality is an extension of race and the state. They are one and same. Thus, the pagan risks nothing by sacrificing his life to preserve his culture. In contrast, the Judeo-Christian concept of brotherly love is the soul of human character that restores and rejuvenates.

Christ stood at the abyss with the pagan asking Him, “You see people starving, change the stones to bread and feed them, if you are who they say, cast yourself down and God will save you, if you desire the world to bow to you, then bow to me.” Scripture teaches us that Christ refused these temptations, but not why. The common sense answer is to resist temptation that disguises itself, as something else is noble.

Christ knew that he had power to end starvation with a wave of his hand, yet he elected to allow people to starve. He knew that no heavenly host would allow him to die before his time, yet he did not test God. He knew that he could have all worldly power by venerating the pagan, and he cast it off. He chose instead liberty with all the trials, and tribulations of that liberty. Rather than a fawning man willing to worship anything for food, clothing, and shelter, Christ chose freedom for man.

This is the moment of the birth of the West. The rapid rise of Christianity destroyed the pagan world. The special love of Christians and Jews for the weak, and defenseless is unique to Western culture.

Until the late 19th century Europe was the center of Western thought, philosophy, politics and law. However, the 20th century with its wars and conflict released in Europe an inner paganism, long suppressed, and by the middle of the century church and synagogue attendance was declining, as was the birthrate.

Today the birthrate in every developed country in Europe is below replacement level. In some, such as Italy, it is in danger of reaching levels only known during the great plague years in the Middle Ages. European man opted for the slow death of cultural extinction and the pagans of the Middle East are replacing him. In thirty years the native populations of Europe including Russia will be half its current level. They have chosen to go comfortably to the grave with millions of non-western workers to sustain them. But by the end of this century, 2000 years of western culture in Europe will be as empty as the churches and synagogues are today. Those with even the notion of the culture will have migrated to either Israel or America. If you desire to see zombies, walk the streets of Paris, Berlin or Vienna.

We in the Anglo-sphere are the inheritors of that tradition, culture, and law. As Europe dies it is incumbent upon us to understand that Western customs are under attack by outside and inside forces. However, as Rosenzweig says, “the truly divine God is the God who has revealed himself as logos and, as logos has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf.”

It is possible that Western culture will die someday. From an existential point of view it is inevitable as all things on earth are mortal. In spite of the efforts of our modern day pagans, who have gravitated into universities and government, the core of western thought remains imbedded in our everyday lives. Unless we surrender to our inner pagan we cannot be defeated. We can be bruised, harassed even murdered but the ideas of consensual government, liberty, and freedom are not so easily defeated unless we, like our European brothers, give up.

I have not chosen to address the obvious question of Islam, as that is a much longer debate, except to note that the replacement population in Europe is mostly from the Middle East. However, if Western culture is to survive in the Anglo-sphere, Judaism must survive not only in Israel but here. • (1343 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to The West is Not Yet Dead

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Steve, if we could view this culture from a thousand years hence, I think we’d might call the last century or two “The Pagans Strike Back.”

    Western Civilization is dissolving. It would be one thing if it was just changing from one thing to another. After all, nothing stays the same forever. But this is a sort of a new Black Death, evinced in the below-replacement-rate demographics. Europe could conceivably become an Islamic continent. It’s difficult to say what America will become. But it’s difficult to believe that it will “become” anything when it is so obviously disintegrating.

    Nature abhors a vacuum, so without the defenders of Western ideals of liberty, inalienable rights, productive optimism, and the rule of law, it will likely be some form of tyranny that evolves…taking over directly from the gathering tyranny of the Left or replacing it when the Left has finished its job of destroying all that is.

    I appreciate your optimism. I definitely appreciate your eye toward Cosmic considerations. The gates of hell, and Progressives, shall not prevail against it. Could be. Could be. Hope so. Hope so.

    • Steve Lancaster says:

      The attacks on western culture have been nonstop for the last 1400 years. There were times when it seemed that our unique culture would fall to the barbarians and it seems that way today. The challenge is no greater now than it was from say 1492 to 1648. In the 1490s the Borgia Pope was on the Throne of St Peters. The Spanish had pushed the Moors out of Iberia and then exiled the Jews, with one action securing the kingdom, and dooming it. Henry VII is beginning the process of enclosure which will drive thousands of farmers off the land and as soon as the boats are built will begin a migration that culminates in 1776. These events and many like them did not take place in a vacuum and most of them were opposed by elements within the culture, but each and many others led to our western culture.

      151 years ago today, a great battle was fought on the fields of Pennsylvania in November of that year Lincoln said,
      “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.”

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    That’s a very interesting interpretation, Satan as the embodiment of paganism rather than Evil. I do think Greco-Roman civilization made an important contribution to Western civilization, but so did the Judeo-Christian tradition. It took both of them together, so in that sense you’re right that Western civilization didn’t exist until the worship of Christ began to spread.

    Those European churches and synagogues won’t all be empty by the end of this century. I’m sure there’ll be plenty of attendees at the great mosques of Chartres, Notre Dame, and St. Paul’s (probably mostly under new names).

    • Steve Lancaster says:

      I don’t think that this time there will be much left. The churches will be destroyed either by Europeans seeks to appease Muslim sensibilities or by those very same Muslims in a wave of conquering euphoria.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Those European churches and synagogues won’t all be empty by the end of this century. I’m sure there’ll be plenty of attendees at the great mosques of Chartres, Notre Dame, and St. Paul’s (probably mostly under new names).

      Heh,

      It worked at the Temple Mount and for the Hagia Sofia.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Steve, if I interpret part of what you’re saying correctly, you’re saying the West has been under assault before and it has pulled through. But I wonder if it has been so thoroughly under assault from within and survived.

    Paganism doesn’t bother me, per se, because we’re all basically Pagans to one degree or another. That is what Mr. Kung and I call the “sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll” culture that we find ourselves in now. The problem with that today is that it isn’t just a sideline but seems to be the mainline. It’s one thing to have an occasional Bacchanalia moment. It’s another thing to frame a culture so that is the mainstream.

    And that’s where I think we are going. Decency, integrity, honesty, hard work, reason, humility, thrift, responsibility — these are things scoffed at today. And the opposite are upheld as virtues: victimhood, racism (as long as it’s against whites), intolerance (again, as long as it’s against whites or Western Civ), emotionalism (as opposed to self-control), grievance, theft (via various entitlements), envy, and lying.

    A Pagan I could probably deal with. But this New Socialist Man is not a human being I can communicate with. This is a reduced man, unable to reason and who knows only that A) He is due a whole lot of stuff and B) Is the nicest person on the planet just because he says so.

    We’re dealing with a blinkered cult. And that cult has swept across our land and I would say most conservatives have caved to it which is why I have doubts about this site. One thing socialism does is that it breaks up the brotherhood of man. We are set into the mindset of a zero-sum game. We’re all battling to get there first at the State’s teat. This is in contrast to, say, good people in the marketplace voluntarily producing goods and services for each other to each other’s benefit. The more the better. Everyone wins.

    So I’m losing trust in the conservative cause. I don’t believe that most people who say they are conservative are actually acting that way. I don’t think if push came to shove that they would have my back. I know a few here would. And I don’t know what “push comes to shove” means in an online context. But let’s just say I don’t feel as chummy as I used to. I see the writing on the wall.

    What you can garner from this, Steve, is that I’m not a back-stabber. I’ll tell you what I’m thinking when I’m thinking it. You won’t have to guess. And I think warriors such as yourself likely would have my back despite our political differences. And I appreciate that.

    But the New Socialist Man is winning. His is the way the world is parsed now. And his ambitions and appetites ultimately can only be sated by the destruction of all that is good, for once you hitch your wagon to the Bad, you are in the constant position of trying to justify it. This is the evil influence that homosexual behavior has on people, for instance. You’d think victory would placate the fudge-packers. But apparently Mr. Sulu says we ain’t seen nothing yet. And we see the ugliness inherent in trying to make the indecent decent by a mere act of Parliament (the Supreme Court, in this case).

    • Timothy Lane says:

      The problem is that we need to expose this viciousness and indecency. Most people are still decent people — but woefully uninformed. Unfortunately, we can never count on the synoptic media to expose the dark underbelly of their beloved liberal fascists. Conservatives must do what they can to expose this vile misbehavior. The problem is that too many seem to want to wait on the synoptic media, which will never work out.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Most people are still decent people — but woefully uninformed.

        That’s kinda-sorta consistent with Dennis Prager says about Leftists. The problem is, I find that excuse to be wearing a little thin. Decent people don’t align with indecent causes.

        And most people are not decent…also very consistent with what Dennis Prager says. We may be born innocent, but not good. We have to be made good. And with the rejection of the only consistent and proven means to become decent — Christianity — many people have doomed themselves to lives of delusion, forever believing they are the nicest god damn people in the world, and they’ll kill you if need be to prove it.

        The idea that we are inherently in need of moral instruction and improvement is contrary to the hippie-ish, narcissistic, cultish, fruitish belief that we’re all born good, corrupted only by racism, sexism, homophobia, capitalism, competition, etc. It’s a naive view of reality. And once you hitch your wagon to the belief that you are incorruptible and intrinsically better than others, you forego any chance of spiritual and moral development. In fact, the opposite almost always occurs…there is a regression.

        And this culture has regressed. All that’s left to do is to count the beans. As someone quipped in an article about Greece, it’s ironic that the people who invented mathematics will be brought down by it (the need to make the ones and zeros add up).

  4. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    the Jew “converts the inner pagan” inside the Christian, such that the living presence of the Jewish people creates a counterweight to the Gnostic impulses in Christianity and, “Before God stand both of us,” he wrote, “Jew and Christians, laborers at the same task” . . . “Christ denotes only the Idea of Man. But the sturdy and undeniable vitality of the Jewish people to which anti-Semitism itself attests opposes itself to such idealization. That Christ is more than idea no Christian can know this. But that Israel is more than an idea, the Christian knows, because he sees it . . . . Our presence stands surety for their truth.”

    Steve,

    Before I make any comments on the article, I would like to know if the above is quoted correctly. It seems to me, something has been left out or some word is wrong. Could you pls check and advise. Thanks.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      a counterweight to the Gnostic impulses in Christianity

      This isn’t all a criticism of Steve (and even if it was, I think he could take it). But I honestly couldn’t tell you what the definition of “Gnostic” was. It is occurring to me that it seems to be one of those sliding definitions such as “social justice” or “unsustainable” that are impossible to pin down as to exact meaning.

      Am I a Gnostic because I wish to circumvent what I see as a lot of baloney in organized religion and somehow, however tentatively, know God myself? It’s unlikely I’ll ever claim to have the One True Knowledge or form some kind of Mickey Mouse Club based on a supposed better reading of the bible or the Creator’s intent. Whatever “Gnosticism” I have is therefore fairly benign. But look at the heaps of excrement being stacked up by the people who are mindlessly following ill-educated and perhaps ill-intentioned religious leaders. Maybe a little “Gnosticism” is just what the doctor ordered, especially if that means gaining knowledge outside the generally weak and corrupt religious institutions.

      Regarding the Jew/Christian split, the Jews have nobody to blame but themselves. Like Catholicism today, apparently it was getting pretty corrupt and off-track 2000 years ago. And, completely in the Jewish tradition, a man (god/man?) came along and gave some criticism and is murdered for it. Perhaps unfairly all Jews were labeled as “Christ killers,” something that never made a whole lot of sense to me because Christ himself was a Jew. And the whole Christian movement could be called “reformed Judaism” to some extent. But Judaism then, and now, is way off track.

      So although I think Jews brought a lot to the table, and indeed very well could have been (and continue to be) the Chosen People, they are so off track today as to be nearly insignificant. That’s sad but likely true. And Christians seem to have a penchant for following them into irrelevance. Both Jews and Christians are messed up, and mostly for the same reasons (faithlessness, substituting the Religion of Leftism for their own).

      I thus don’t find all that much to get hot and bothered about regarding differences in Jews and Christians. The second is wholly dependent upon the existence of the first, and the first is wholly dependent on the existence of a benevolent and involved Creator. I would say most Jews right now are wandering in the desert…the desert of liberalism. It wouldn’t due for Christians to follow them. It would be good for both of them to return to their orthodox faiths, can the bullshit, and get on with the task of nurturing one’s moral spirit to align better with that of the Creator (and not Marx, Obama, Pope Francis, global warming advocates, the Democrat Party, or any other false god).

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        I thus don’t find all that much to get hot and bothered about regarding differences in Jews and Christians.

        Speaking only somewhat tongue in cheek, I have often said that Protestant Evangelical Christians are really Jews, but they don’t know it.

        Of course, there is that small theological difference that Christians keep saying the believe God was made flesh in the person of Jesus Christ who died and was resurrected for the salvation of mankind.

      • Steve Lancaster says:

        Brad,
        We could write a library and still struggle over what is the proper revealed religion.

        So to keep it simple about the gnostic philosophy my suggestion it to take the Nicene Creed of 381 and turn it upside down and you have gnosticism in a nutshell. Everything that is stated as fact in the creed is now maybe, could be, never happened or never could happen.

        In Rosenzweig’s philosophy the gnostic views Jesus as a man before he became one with God, instead of God who becomes a man.

        Yes, we see a rebirth of gnostic ideas all the time. In the church and in society. For example the Dan Brown books dealing with the Holy Grail are gnostic in every way. In the 4th century Brown would have been declared heretic. If you like that kind of speculative fiction you can read it and not be brought unto a modern day inquest.

    • Steve Lancaster says:

      Good morning Mr. Kung
      The Rosenzweig quotes I must apologize for to a certain extent anyway. They are from a grad school seminar on Jewish philosophy from about 20 years ago and the edition I used I no longer have. However, my understanding of Rosenzweig is that there are only two Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Christianity and that the continued existence of the Jewish people gives proof to the validity of Christianity.
      Rosenzweig holds that Islam is completely pagan and thus fits the model of, “just because the cat has kittens in the oven they are not biscuits.”

      I was first introduced to Jewish existentialism in TA during the 73 war, or rather the conclusion of it. We were waiting transport back to Langley and spent several days just lazing about. A friend in Mossad took us to his shul for Shabbat and we spent the few days with he and his Rebbe.

      We talked about the similarities between Christians and Jews and the differences. The Rebbe who bore a number on his arm said(paraphrase ), “Christians and Jews are the sides of the same coin, we claim our faith to the same God and live by the same moral standard there is one large difference. Christians have a deep emotional relationship with God, so emotional that it is difficult for them to get along. Jews, on the other hand have a less emotional relationship, but instead focus on how people can live together peaceably in society” . To the extent that both succeed it is possible, I believe, to not only maintain western culture but expand it to the rest of the world.

      I hope that answers your question, philosophy often makes my head hurt 🙂

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        that the continued existence of the Jewish people gives proof to the validity of Christianity.

        I would be interested to hear Rosenzweig’s rational for this thesis. Of course, this idea is not compatible with Christian thought. From a Christian point of view, with Christ’s death and resurrection came a new dispensation for the world and the old Law was superceded by a new one. The the goal would be to gather all Jews into the Christian fold.

        Furthermore, there would seem to be some sort of dichotomy in Rosenzweig’s view, as if Christianity is “valid” then the Jews must be practicing a false religion. I would be surprised if Rosenzweig is of this opinion. If Rosenzweig means that both Judaism and Christianity are equally true in a religious sense, then again, this cannot mesh with a Christian view.

        if Western culture is to survive in the Anglo-sphere, Judaism must survive not only in Israel but here.

        Why is this so?

        • Steve Lancaster says:

          Kung,
          I suggest you read Star of Redemption, rather than ask me to speak for Rosenzweig. I think I have given you the basic concepts, but I am not a philosopher or a Christian. He comes from a uniquely enlightenment Jewish tradition that is now only a memory. Remember also that he is writing in the early years between the wars, when the very concept of the holocaust would be unthinkable.

          As for your other question. Israel must exist as a viable state to remind the world that “never again” must have meaning. A strong Jewish community in the US is insurance that Israel, in spite of the Moslem in the White House, will have not only a physical ally but a philosophical one.

  5. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Neither Brad nor Kung has considered the shattering of the pagan world in Europe between the 1st and 6th centuries.

    It is not clear to me what this has to do with the thesis put forth in my piece, “The West Is Doomed”. To be clear, my thesis is that the West is build on Christianity which is a revealed religion. Once the belief in the veracity of that revelation comes into question, or at least is questioned by a significant number of people, the West begins to fail unless the questioning can be held in check. It cannot spread throughout a significant percentage of the population without the civilization, as we know it, collapsing.

    To be sure if correct, my thesis does not preclude Christianity from surviving. But it does preclude the survival of the Christian West.

    As an aside, I would like to know what you mean by the “shattering of the pagan world in Europe between the 1st and 6th centuries.” Who were the pagans and how were they shattered? Do you just mean the conversion of Western Europe to Christianity?

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Neither Brad nor Kung has considered the shattering of the pagan world in Europe between the 1st and 6th centuries.

      Well, whatever the case may be, Mr. Kung, we are seeing the shattering of the Christian/capitalist Western World. What the shattering of the Pagan world has to do with this, let alone what the Pagan World actually was, I’m not sure.

      Thank the Jews (and God) for bringing to the table the idea that men are not to be satisfied with being vulgar monkeys but ought to try to raise himself to be worthy of being amongst the specially created. Most Jews have lost this in their pursuit of “social justice” and their eternal grievance with Christians.

      When the Steelers started their post-Super-Bowl winning season of 1976 with an one-and-four record, Coach Knoll said “We’ve got to get back to basics.” He started to emphasize blocking, tackling, catching, and throwing. The team had gotten overconfident and sloppy. They had lost touch with what brought them to two consecutive Super Bowl wins.

      The Jews and Christians face the same problem. Having taken on flights of fancy with “social justice” and embracing all kinds of extra-biblical nonsense (including homosexual marriage), they need to get back to basics: faith, the bible, prayer, humility, Grace, and a willingness to carry one’s cross (the opposite of the namby-pamby feel-good, non-confrontational, non-judgmental good time rock-n-roll Christians who are predominant today).

      That’s a tall order. In order to do so, people must care more what God thinks about them than what other people think about them. A tall order indeed in this age of ego, narcissism, exhibitionist compassion, “niceness,” and a whole host of deceitful conceits and foci.

      • Steve Lancaster says:

        Brad,
        I suppose that I might hope to clear your confusion. My intent on stressing the transformation of pagan culture in the early years of Christianity is to stress that we often do not see all that is happening. Many of us have viewed the face of true evil on the battlefield, at home or sometimes just walking the streets of Seattle and I think it often blinds us to the realities below the surface.

        I don’t pretend to have any kind of crystal ball about the future, however, as a historian I have some pretty good ideas about what has happened and some thoughts about what might happen. Much of the cultural change you seek, if the people will, can be turned about almost overnight.

        By about 300 CE (Christian Era) there was no doubt that Christianity would turn the west in an entirely different direction, if that can happen in less than 300 years how much less time to turn the US around?

        The fastest growing portion of American Christianity is the evangelicals, who have a birthrate almost double that of most Christians. The fastest growing portion of Judaism is the Hassidism, the ultra-orthodox, again with birthrates exceeding their fellows in the reform and conservative ranks. Interesting sidebar, there is a very active Hassidic congregation in Salt Lake City. It started with just three or four families and is growing rapidly among the Mormons.

        I take both of these trends with a great deal of hope. People who see a future for themselves tend to have more children.

        I don’t know what the event will be, when it will happen or what form it will take but I am sure that Nature’s God has an interest in the US.

        BTW, Yes I’ve got your back. But it gets lonely on the wall and at 67 standing post is not as easy as it used to be.

        I guess I need a bigger gun. 🙂

    • Steve Lancaster says:

      Mr. Kung,
      The pagan would in the 1st to 6th centuries was a civilization that had existed in Europe for several 1000 years. Lets say from the beginning of organized society sometime in the bronze age. Christianity shattered that familiar and comfortable life by offering eternal life within the embrace of God through faith in Jesus.

      This new religion broke the security of the tribe by making salvation only dependent on the individuals relationship with Jesus and not the continuance of the tribe. I believe the quote from scripture goes, “I have come to turn son from father. . .” that was the beginning of the end for paganism until the 20th century.

  6. Timothy Lane says:

    There’s an interesting article by J. P. Moran available at Human Events on challenging the Left, especially regarding the lack of free expression at universities. He suggests ways that the Left’s own methods could be used against them. Particularly if these efforts were made public, it would at least by very embarrassing for them. The main problem is that some of these efforts might involve lying — and conservatives, unlike liberals, actually have ethical standards. Still, for those interested, the link is:

    http://humanevents.com/2015/07/08/turning-the-tables-on-campus-anti-free-speech-codes/

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      One of the problems with such an approach — and I would agree that we should try Moran’s approach along with several others — is that it requires a certain level of rationality in the other.

      Now, before you or anyone else thinks I’m dripping better-than-thou elitism, I am not. I do not assume, on average that those on the Left are any dumber than those on the right. In fact, a kind of high, sociopathic “social intelligence” aids and abets movements based on radicalism. The Left could even be smarter, on average.

      But terabytes of computer RAM and gigaflops of processing power mean little if the programming is junk. And that, I believe, is precisely what separates normal people from those indoctrinated in any kind of cult — and the Left is indeed a cult. The cult mind’s capacity to weigh things according to measures, data, and facts is severely reduced. The cult mind, once programmed, is programmed to work on a narrow range of emotional bullet points.

      So as much as it makes sense to you or me to exploit the Orwellian speech codes of a typical university by claiming to feel uncomfortable or threatened by certain Leftist topics, this would be lost on the Left because, by definition, those Leftist topics are non-threatening, good, and just.

      This is what a lot of conservatives never seem to get. The Left is indoctrinated into a set of specific values and beliefs that they see as normal and natural. They believe that anything contrary to them is automatically bad. In fact, they are typically taught that it is a sign of some type of malevolence or dysfunction if anyone believes differently than they do. That is the entire purpose of the idea of “white privilege.” It’s a way to rationalize away anything that confronts their beliefs. And such rationalizations don’t have to be true or to particularly make much sense. That’s why I commonly say that the Left engages in “bumper sticker thinking.” Their entire platform is made up of little more than slogans.

      Still, it’s possible that some might react positively to the suggestions that Moran makes. But the problem is that such suggestions don’t dig down to the moral arguments that must be made (which does indeed require a certain degree of rationality). The Left is expert at sophistry and they can, and will, easily parry such techniques as Moran gives…with the end result actually being to strengthen what the cult already believes.

      In fact, when you encounter someone online — Facebook, a forum, or whenever — who is obviously a fruitloop from the Left and is engaging you, you need to understand that the only purpose you serve in the conversation is to reinforce what the cult member from the Left already believes — that you are a racist, sexist, homophobe, care only for money, are a polluter, a global warming denier, or whatever.

      I suppose the trick would be to catch these people before they are indoctrinated into the cult. Once indoctrinated, no slapdash rhetorical trick stands a chance of changing their minds.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        This is why I generally ignore trolls. What can you do with psychopaths who want to be hated to justify their own prior hatred of you (for disagreeing with them)? Still, making use of publicity would at least expose liberalism to people who mean well but don’t know what’s going on (and have no real wish to learn, but might respond properly if reality is forced on them). Certainly it’s better than just sitting around and moping about how evil liberals are (no matter how accurate that assessment is).

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Timothy, my solution to this problem on university is one that is straightforward, would work, and that no one likes: Fire the Leftists and replace them with conservatives or other competent teachers who don’t hate America.

          [Listening intently.] Nope. I didn’t hear a single person here fall off their chair. But such is the power of liberal indoctrination that such an idea is rejected by most, even if they don’t particularly like the Left. The idea is that this would be interfering with “academic freedom.”

          This message — a powerful one that the Left has used — has been extremely successful. By crying wolf each and every time their excesses have been countered, they have worn down the opposition and have equated in the public mind ousting these scoundrels with an attack on “academic freedom.” In practice, “academic freedom” means the complete freedom to indoctrinate Leftism without a contrary opinion.

          This is where we’re losing the culture war. Few (although Reagan did) have the balls to confront these ideological bullies and point out to people that they are indeed ideological bullies.

          This kind of indoctrination is what the Left lives on. Yes, it helps that they are willing to lie to advance their cause. (Dennis Prager says that truth is not a left wing value, and he is correct.) The right has just not been willing to engage these battles for a variety of reasons. (And if I could hand out writing assignments, that would be a vitally important topic to clarify and expose.)

          Most tragic off all, and central to what fuels the Left, is that a generation or two of red diaper doper babies — or just your typical hippie or hippie wannabe — has come to equate “liberal” with anything and everything the Democrat Party wants to do. I don’t really know why people are so blind. Reagan caught on early and realized he didn’t leave the Democrat Party. They had left him. He, and some others, understood the radical kooks who were taking it over … until we come to this day when John Kerry, who lied to Congress and smeared his fellow soldiers, is Secretary of State, let alone that we have the president that we do.

          It’s as if the attraction of the forever-juvenile sex-drugs-rock-n-roll utopia that they had in mind way back when has never really been dropped as a cause.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            For public universities, it might be possible for state governments to take over personnel decisions. In Democrap states this would be no worse than the existing refusal to hire conservatives, but in states run by Republicans, new hires would be much better and various other liberal policies could be eliminated.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              This is why winning the culture wars is so important. Well, no one ever wins completely. But the fringe must remain the fringe, not the mainstream. And we’ve allowed the fringe to become mainstream by being so easily bullied.

              We have to decide if the point of education is one of two things:

              + To indoctrinate guilt, to lower the perceived value of Classical Western Civilization, to raise the novel and the foreign because of a belief in the victimhood of all that isn’t Western, to espouse atheism in the form of Marxism and other dogmas, and to treat the individual as a cog to be manipulated into the Big Machine to fulfill a political purpose.

              + To elevate the human heart, mind, and soul by impressing upon a person the best of Western Civilization, and other civilizations throughout history, in order to fulfill an academic purpose with the backdrop being the integrity of the individual. They are not to be used as mere props for crank or faddish theories or to be mere subjects of a professor as he works out what should be his private psychological or emotional issues.

              Surely there are better ways of stating that. But I think that’s the essence of it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *