Wednesday, April 09, 2014

Purge.


I've been busy the past few weeks so posting has been very light.  This article by William Saletan which I read in Slate today (Hat tip Ray Sawhill), should give all serious Conservatives some pause for concern.


Read it and understand.

I'm a tolerant guy, what people do in their bedrooms is really up to them but I think its pretty obvious where the whole Gay "tolerance" lobby is going.  The whole gay lobby is not at all about tolerance, its about unquestioning enthusiastic endorsement: everything else is to be purged. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Brendan Eich discriminated against any gay employees, his problem was that he wasn't pursing the party line.  Brendan Eich committed thoughtcrime.

If the article is to be believed, most of the push for his firing came from that soft underbelly of masculinity, the IT crowd. In my experience, with a few exceptions, it's a collection of beta nerds and sperg's and it's no surprise that Asimov's emissaries of a Star Trek universe should be pushing so hard for sexual ambiguity. Spock had no heart, they have no balls. Enthusiastic acolytes for their own gelding.

The late Christopher Dawson, taught me a lot about tyranny. Everyone imagines the Soviet Gulags or the Nazi Concentration camps, but Dawson recognised that even tyranny has a certain cultural flavour and Anglo tyranny will be unlike anything else. There will be no slaughters or death camps (though a few notable individuals may be sacrificed as examples) rather, there will the progressive ostracism of any individual who doesn't follow the party line.  Loss of job, loss of status, exclusion from cultural institutions, forced education and so on. Imagine being a Catholic in Georgian Ireland and you'll get the picture. In Nazi Germany it was more extreme version of the same.
It quickly became clear that [Hitler] intended to imprison the Catholics, as it were, in their own churches. They could celebrate mass and retain their rituals as much as they liked, but they could have nothing at all to do with German society otherwise. Catholic schools and newspapers were closed, and a propaganda campaign against the Catholics was launched.
It's gonna get ugly, really ugly.

Conservative Protestants, for years you have pilloried, disenfranchised, persecuted and subordinated us. The smarter ones amongst you can see that now you are about the get the same.

Welcome to the family, my brothers.

31 comments:

MarcusD said...

That article reminds me of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung

The Social Pathologist said...

Yep, the Gaystapo is Gleichschaltunging us.

de ti said...

"There will be no slaughters or death camps (though a few notable individuals may be sacrificed as examples) rather, there will the progressive ostracism of any individual who doesn't follow the party line. Loss of job, loss of status, exclusion from cultural institutions, forced education and so on."

Good post, slumlord. This is the money quote right here. And this is how it will go down in the West, and especially in the United States.

There will be a "virtual gulag" in which dissidents are excluded from society. They lose their jobs and can't find any work other than subsistence work, if that. They are excluded from churches and places of worship. They will be banned from public accommodations such as restaurants and hotels; banned from doing business or purchasing goods and services. It won't be official. It will just be that word gets around about who the dissidents are, and no one will do business with or socialize with them at all. They will starve to death, literally, in plain sight.

The Social Pathologist said...

de ti

The aim will be for a soft totalitarianism with minimal victims. The dumbest thing for any such regime is the creation of martyrs who inspire others. Social ostracism is a better form of political isolation than the Gulag are far easier to police.

mdavid said...

SP, what writings of Dawson do you recommend on this issue?

I think Christians could get along fine in this world even with soft persecution if they just stuck together. Supported each other with their business and the like. I'm not saying persecution is fine, but that we need to wake up and start banding together. I don't see many people doing this.

TSP's . said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Social Pathologist said...

@mdavid

Start with Dawson's Understanding Europe.

As for persecution, no more. I'm for putting the heat on others. Too much Christian blood has been spilled.

No more running. We take the battle to them.

Novaseeker said...

It was clear from the beginning that this was never about legal equality, per se (although that was an important part of it), but rather about social equality – that is, forcing everyone to treat same sex couplings the same way they do opposite sex couplings, under penalty of severe social sanction if they do not do so.

There is a template for this – the template that was used for race, and the template that was used for sex. It’s just being applied in a new context, but the template is the same, and that’s why it will work. It has a track record of working, after all. In 20 years, if not sooner, these kinds of discussions will be viewed the same way as discussions about race that took place in the 1950s-70s – anachronistic, bigoted, and something worthy of eye-rolls and headshakes.

They’ve won, folks. On this issue, they have won – it’s going to be treated like being an open racist or an open sexist – in other words, severe social and professional sanction, all unofficial of course, but powerful all the same. It will have the effect of stamping it out. Just like with cigarettes. It’s the way we do things here – slap a scarlet letter on it, and stamp it out through social sanction.

We will be permitted to have dissenting views, but only privately – as in, not expressing them in public, not outside of our homes, not outside of our churches. Not in the professional sphere, nor the political sphere, nor the extended social sphere. Over time, this will lead to the ideas dying out, slowly, over time, other than for a committed radical core. Which will be seen as being radical and fringe.

Of course, that’s not a call for surrender. They have won for the time being, but no merely human victory is ever eternal. Their star will wane eventually, and we must be ready when it does. But for now, it’s a time to consolidate, to reflect on what went so badly wrong, and to protect to the extent that we can without making ourselves martyrs needlessly.

deconstructingleftism said...

Orwell wrote about this in his essay on "Gulliver's Travels", talking about the horse people. The English upper class has a culture of consensus, in which certain ideas and subjects are taboo. They aren't going to put you in jail for violating it, but you will be a social outcast.

MarcusD said...

@Novaseeker

Just like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_of_silence

The Social Pathologist said...

@Nova

But for now, it’s a time to consolidate, to reflect on what went so badly wrong, and to protect to the extent that we can without making ourselves martyrs needlessly.

Agree.

We really need to sit down and nut out what went wrong and what we can do to fix it. Traditional explanations have failed and what is needed is a new analysis and subsequent program to reverse the tide.

David Foster said...

Actually, I've generally observed software people to be on the average *less* politically-correct and more free-wheeling in their opinions than many other categories of corporate employee. My reaction to the Mozilla affair wasn't "yeah, it's the tech people, what would you expect" but rather "EVEN the tech people."

Höllenhund said...

"Traditional explanations have failed"? Isn't all this a sign of cultural decline, which was closely examined by Oswald Spengler and Sir John Glubb, just to name two?

Dr. Φ said...

Why do you hate Protestants, especially conservative Protestants? We have been allies for decades.

The Social Pathologist said...

Hollenhund

I don't know much about Glubb but Spengler doesn't do too much for me.
I'm more of the school of Dawson, Chambers and Barnett.

@David

My experience here of software guys is that they drift to the left, sure, there are exceptions but the majority are "progressive."

The Social Pathologist said...

Dr Phi

Why do you hate Protestants, especially conservative Protestants? We have been allies for decades.

I'm sorry that I gave you the impression that I hated Protestantism. I don't at all. In fact, in my opinion, Catholicism would be a lot better off if it incorporated some Protestant ideas.

But to be fair, the Protestants in the U.S. and England did give Catholics a lot of grief and regarded them for a long while as Second class citizens. The "Know Nothings" and Clansmen being particular examples. I can't make that history go away.

http://mattforney.com/2013/07/02/americas-four-hundred-year-war-against-the-catholic-church/

What I find ironic, though, is that the Protestant culture is now about to consume itself, with the Left wing branch of it going to war with the right and, unfortunately, the Left is the dominant Establishment strain.

So when I say you're about to cop the heat that used to be reserved for Catholics, I'm trying to be objective about things.

But when I also called you my brothers, I meant it. In a certain way, I'm glad that there is finally a rapproachement between our two faiths in the face of a common enemy. Should that enemy be vanquished I would still hope that the old enmity would never return.

You've gotta understand that when I critique Protestantism, I don't do so out of malice. God knows that Catholicism has its faults and needs its reforms but I'm trying to understand how it achieved dominance and my own reading of the subject has lead to the conclusion that Protestantism is intrinsically tied to Leftism. It's a view that many others, Catholic and Non-Catholic share.

I think that many Protestants are highly resistant to the notion that their religion has facilitated the rise of Modernism ,which in turn has lead to the rise of the modern PC state. The really scary thing is that, when Protestantism is considered as a "System", this "reversion to the left" is inbuilt even amongst Conservative denominations. Once again, this is a statement based upon the study of the system: Malice has nothing to do with it.

But believe me, I don't hate Protestants. I'd rather a good Protestant in the family than a bad Catholic.

MarcusD said...

Another purge: http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/04/08/kickstarter-abortion-movie-gosnell-mozilla-ceo-column/7478239/

Dr. Φ said...

Thank you for your measured response. Let me begin by acknowledging that there is a definition of modernism by which the Reformation was its initial salient. Jacques Barzun took this very position. But there is something troubling about a philosophical geneology that says, "Protestantism begat Leftism" ("Leftism" in the relevant sense meaning cultural Marxism) when most of the alleged begatters vociferously opposed the begotten. In that same sense, Catholicism begat Protestantism! So it's really your fault!

More seriously, you write that there is "finally a rapproachment", but that rapproachment isn't new. On the contrary, it's as old as Roe vs. Wade. Yet it is only in the last few years that I come across diatribes like Forney's that, I dunno, seek to restart the 30 Years War or something.

Parenthetically, while I like Forney in general, his foray into this is especially weird, given that he has never avowed any personal religious faith to my recollection. (And given his oeuvre, it would be hard to take seriously if he did.)

Lastly, I want to point out that this thumbnail history of anti-Catholic persecution is pretty one-sided. It only works in England by counting Anglicans as Protestants, an affiliation a lot of Calvinists like myself would dispute on theological grounds. It doesn't work at all in Europe, where Catholics gave as good as they got. And it works in America only by neglecting to mention that Protestant anti-Romanism was (mostly) in the context of opposition to a massive wave of non-Nordic immigration and the urban, corrupt, vice-ridden culture they helped sustain.

I only mention this by way of defense. In truth, I'm not interested in stirring up old battles in the face of new ones. It's unproductive.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Dr Phi

Thanks

"Protestantism begat Leftism" ("Leftism" in the relevant sense meaning cultural Marxism) when most of the alleged begatters vociferously opposed the begotten. In that same sense, Catholicism begat Protestantism! So it's really your fault!

Good reply. In fact, when I've got some time I'm hoping to do a response to this very argument which I first saw articulated here.

http://www.aimlessgromar.com/2014/02/11/the-folly-of-blaming-protestantism/

I was sad that this post did not gain more commentary at the time because I feel this is one of the "meatier" issues for neoreaction.

More seriously, you write that there is "finally a rapproachment", but that rapproachment isn't new.

No, I disagree. Roe vs Wade made us uneasy allies, but I think, now, there is something else happening. I think a real "reach out" is happening amongst the more conservative factions of each denomination which is based upon more than just a desire to defeat a common enemy. I think a genuine sense of understanding is there. As is a desire to bury the hatchet.

Forney writes for his audience but I feel he is actually a deeper thinker than people give him credit for. I don't think he is trying to start a war. It just that there is a link between Protestantism and Modernism, and the anti-Catholic bias is just one "tradition."

I suppose that one of the frustrations some Catholics have with regard to Protestants is that they gloss over the past. But the past is vital for understanding the present, and hence, the Protestant understanding of modernity seems in, my opinion, to be flawed with regard to its own part in its genesis.

It's true, that for many years, the Catholic Church was blind to its own faults, but there does seem to be more introspection amongst some members of the Church, much to the consternation of the Traditionalists.

Samuel Gregg over at the Acton Institue is one such guy. John Zmirak wrote this piece:

http://www.aleteia.org/en/politics/article/illiberal-catholicism-6333360653729792

with got him a lot of heat from the trads, but it's one I pretty much agree with.

Both Catholicism and Protestantism have their strengths and failures. I think its high time we took a collective look at our histories and see where it all went wrong.

You know, it's funny. The trads think I hate Catholicism and the Protestants think I hate them.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Jack

Good links

Serious pushback is required.

Jack said...

It appears that my comment and the articles attached to it has disappeared. (?) Perhaps the publisher of the original article put the kibosh on my link?

One was Charles Krauthammer's piece titled, 'Thought Police on Patrol'. The other I am still searching for.

Hazel said...

You've got a good website here. I enjoy your work. Unfortunately, your understanding of US history is lacking. Catholics were not necessarily social inferiors in the antebellum South (see "Gone with the Wind'). And whatever tyranny our future holds, it couldn't be any worse than the dictatorship of Reconstruction that White Southerners, Catholic and Protestant alike, were forced to endure.

In the 1884 US Presidential election, the Democratic Party's unofficial slogan was "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion" to reflect the political alliance of Northern Catholics and Southern Protestants against Yankee WASPs.

Of course, LBJ and JFK completely betrayed the members of that alliance. So it goes.

Libby Rose said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jack said...

The other was 'Aiding and Abetting Evil'. Walter Williams, April 11, 2014.

The Social Pathologist said...

@jack

Thanks Jack, I'll have a look at them. (Still busy with other things though)

@Hazel.

Where did I say anything about the South?

My Understanding of the ante-bellum South was that it was far more tolerant of Catholics than the North. It was also far more culturally diverse with some regions being more tolerant than others.

If I remember correctly, Lee's family were looked after by Catholic nuns after the war. (I could be mistaken here.)

And I do know that the Southerners were treated quite badly after the war.

And I'm also aware that Southern "racism" is far different to the Northern version. The Southern version being far less malign in my opinion.


Samson J. said...

I think Christians could get along fine in this world even with soft persecution if they just stuck together. Supported each other with their business and the like. ... I don't see many people doing this.

I agree. To me this is one of the weirdest parts of our current situation. How bad does it have to get before you see Christians playing completely for Team Christian? I think we have some lingering, erroneous, Anglo-Saxon sense of "fair play" or something.

@NovaSeeker:

They’ve won, folks. On this issue, they have won... It will have the effect of stamping it out. Just like with cigarettes.

No. Stop being defeatist over this. It'll be more like abortion - Christian views aren't going anywhere.

@Hollenhund:

"Traditional explanations have failed"? Isn't all this a sign of cultural decline, which was closely examined by Oswald Spengler and Sir John Glubb, just to name two?

My thought exactly. I don't mean to sound like an ass, but I really don't see what's difficult about all this.

Samson J. said...

To clarify and expand: analogies involving race and sex are made all the time, but they're never quite right. Scripture and tradition just ain't as passionate about those things as about homosexuality.

This time around, firing someone, e.g., for being "against homosexuality" is going to be tantamount to firing them for being Christian. This won't hold up forever. Yes, they've been getting away with it so far, but the next phase of war is for *us* to go on the offensive by promoting "freedom of religion" laws, e.g. Success may be modest or mixed, but I predict some wins for us - just like we've seen some modest anti-abortion wins.

jual benaka murah said...

wiil be allrigth

jual benaka murah said...

evryting ok

jasa seo murah said...

good book

Whitey Joe young said...

You god-humpers are very tiresome. Little babies who can't conceive of nothing to come after death. The very thought of that yawning void scares the literal bejesus out of you, you can't help but crump into a quivering pile of fawning genuflection. And you call IT guys a bunch of, what was it, "betas" Holy f@ck you are just so manly I want to take a dump on your pussy little head.