Category: Culture

I listened to a lecture a couple days ago and a wonderful observation about walled cities was made. The lecturer’s point was that Walled cities kept like-minded people segregated and safe from those who were different mind and that with the removal of walled cities what increasingly happened is that individuals have built their own psyscho-emotional walls that works to keep the stranger and the alien out. So, walls are an inescapable category and it is never a matter of walls or no walls unto the end of segregation but it is only a matter of how walls are built. They can be built in a community context where like-minded people can gather or they can be built psycho-emotively by each and every individual against every other individual in communities that are characterized by manufactured and unnatural diversity. I was reminded of Robert Putnam’s work “Bowling Alone” where similar observations are made.

Sociologist Robert Putnam brought out in his book “Bowling Alone” that radically diverse societies, such as America is becoming, lose their sense of Weltanschauung and communitarian continuity. Putnam insisted that the more diverse communities become the more individuals in those societies become islands unto themselves. Massive communal heterogeneity is not conducive to the creation of healthy individuals. This societal manufacturing of the socio / psycho path personalty is accelerated even more with the grinding breakdown of the family as a cohesive cultural sub-unit. With the breakdown of the family and within this macro atomized, disintegrated milieu, sociopaths and psychopaths — individuals who have no sense of belonging or responsibility to others — are created and thrive. They thrive not only because of the interpersonal isolation that is created by heterogeneous social orders, but also by the lack of communitarian brakes on the behavior of the socio-path / psycho-paths. Oddly enough, a point is arrived at where scoio-pathic behavior is rewarded and valued in the hyper heterogeneous social order. Such order normalizes the socio-path and begins to view the person who has larger family and community ties as the “other,” and the “strange.”

Such an inverted view where the familial and community connected are seen as the “odd” is what is to be expected where “good” has become “evil” and “light” has become “darkness.” In an upside down inside out world only the right-side up in-side in are considered upside down and inside out.

We should add here that the creation of such hyper diverse cultures where the socio / psycho path is created is in the interest of those who desire centralized Government. Once a social order can be atomized enough the only thing that can hold the unrelated parts together is force and force is what Government is. As such, heterogeneity and balkanization is desired by Centralized states because such atomization is job security for the tyrant class. The Criminal Government has a interest in creating a criminal people.

Friedrich Hayek in his book, “Road To Serfdom” has a chapter that interfaces with all this. Hayek has a chapter on how sociopaths are drawn like moths to a light to Tyrannical Governments. Hayek contends that in Tyrannical Governments you’ll always find some of the most egregious socio-paths. When you combine our hyper heterogeneous social order with the insights of Putnam and Hayek the prospects for our culture are not particularly promising.

Returning to the lecture referenced at the beginning the lecturer said that this removal of walled cities has been translated anew into gated communities where segregation can work again in a pseudo walled context and where community can at least potentially be rediscovered. At some level, man desires to live among those who are like him — who share a common Worldview, heritage, and culture. Community that refuses to be homogeneous is the community of the sociopath.

Hat Tip —

Sociopathy Is Increasing In America

I’ve consistently told the people I serve that when the culture lets the Sodomites out of the closet, the corresponding inevitability is that Christians will take their (the sodomites) former place in the closet. It is the Christian and their love for the Lord Christ that will be shunned in and by the public square. It was said of sodomy, once upon a time, that it was “the love that dare not speak its name.” Now, it is the love that won’t shut the hell up and the Biblical Christian’s love for the Lord Christ is the love that dare not speak its name.

When Robertson’s GQ statements hit the press yesterday I had a friend contact me saying that this might reverse the sodomite tide. I told him, “Robertson will be fired within days.” I should have said “hours.” My friend dissented, insisting that A & E would never fire because of much money they would lose. I just said, “wait and see.” I’m not a prophet. I don’t see into the future. It is merely a matter of knowing which way the cultural winds are blowing. When a social order embraces a worldview, money alone, will not be able to halt the progress of that (in this case — Sodomite) worldview.

A & E is only and their corporate base is only confirming that two antithetical worldviews can not co-exist unless one of them is willing to live as considered Taboo in the Public Square. So, now we are at the decided point where to speak publicly of our great Liege Lord, Christ, and His standard is now considered worthy of being publicly sanctioned. The sodomites now hold the whip hand and they are determined that they are not going back into the closet and that Christians will stay in the closet.

Unless Islam comes to play as a worldview social order contestant, the decided opposition of the social order will be for either Sodomites or for Christians. Never for both. The worldview war in favor of sodomy is a war against Biblical Christianity.

This reminds us that the whole “tolerance” thing that has been screamed for decades now was just a ruse. It is always so when worldview transitions among a people are taking place. Those who initially scream for tolerance and understanding (in this case the sodomites) don’t really wan’t tolerance long term. They merely plead for tolerance in order to give them time to marshal and build their momentum to the day when they can practice intolerance against their enemies. The plea for tolerance is the ploy of the minority who intends to one day become a majority which will shut down any opposition against them.

Do you and your children a favor. Put the sodomites back in the closet.

And I do agree with Phil Robertson. There is something seriously demented and twisted about a man who thinks that another man’s orifice — an orifice that produces excrement — is more alluring than a woman’s orifice that issues life.

Postscript – Keep in mind that R2K tells you that the Church must not speak on sodomy in the public square because that is not the Church’s job. If Phil Robertson were to attend a R2K church he would find no support from the R2K Ministers and Elders because there could be people in the congregation who opposed Phil Robertson and who do, themselves, see it as reasonable that in terms of public square legislation men might prefer other men’s anuses over women’s vaginas. R2K is all for pluralism. And of course R2K Churches would never want to weigh in on something so controversial as whether the public square should support anuses and vaginas each in their proper place.

Three stages by which Muslims conquer. This technique has been used for centuries.

Stealth Jihad

Muslim numbers are small percentage wise in a new country where a foothold has been gained. Taqiyya (deception) is a large part of this phase. Muslims falsely befriend the infidel with false friendship. Publicly they put on their “Islam is a religion of peace” nonsense. They advocate for tolerance. They love playing the victim here in order to gain sympathy and in order to give credibility to their diabolical religion.

Defensive Jihad

At this point Islam’s numbers have increased. They continue with both Taqiyya and the victim role. However their numbers percentage wise is greater now and as such they feel safe in denouncing and attacking those who seek to bring to light the history and danger of Islam. Organizations like C.A.I.R. and other Islamic friendly organizations take up the plea for special rights. Sharia Schools and Mosques begin to pop up. Islam begins to bar its teeth while still insisting that it is the other guys fault. If only poor old Islam would be left alone they could live in peace. At this point Islam begins to incipiently attack enemies.

Offensive Jihad

Here the numbers are now in Isalm’s favor and they begin to attack and persecute at every opportunity. The community of Dearborn Michigan is beginning to see Offensive Jihad. Here laws are passed in order to put down the infidel. As this accelerates it becomes illegal to speak out against Islam to denounce it as pagan Anti-Christ. For Islam this is the time to establish their hegemony over all areas of life. As this accelerates the non Muslim people of the book are forced to pay the jizya and become hewers of wood and drawers of water. Non-Muslims who are not people of the book face a far worse eventuality.

These United States are moving towards stage II. Europe is moving towards stage III. There is no stopping Muslims once they gain a toehold.

The below article expands this general outline a bit and deals with concrete numbers.

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/Islam_is_not_a_religion.shtml

“By Revolution I do not mean one of the many events whereby a Government is overthrown. Nor do I just mean by it the storm of upheaval that has raged in France. Rather, by Revolution I mean the whole inversion of the general spirit and mode of thinking that is now manifest in all Christendom.

By Revolution ideas I mean the basic maxims of liberty and equality, popular sovereignty, social contract, the artificial construction of society by common consent, — notions which today are venerated as the cornerstone of constitutional law and the political order….

The consequences of the Revolutionary ideas cannot be combated with any success unless one places himself outside their influence, on the ground of the anti-revolutionary principles. This ground is beyond reach, however, so long as one refuses to acknowledge that the foundation of justice lies in the law the ordinances of God. Bonald has expressed this truth in the concise and pregnant words, ‘The Revolution began with the declaration of the rights of man; it will end only with the declaration of the right of God.'”

Groen Van Prinesterer
Unbelief and Revolution — Lecture I — Introduction

The Revolution that Gr.v. Pr. speaks of we call “modernity.” It is the unfolding of a whole scale skepticism wherein God’s Word and Law are overthrown in favor of autonomous man’s fiat word and law. Modernity, is the social order and cultural filth that all of us have been swimming in for our whole lives, as our Parents, Grandparents and Great Grandparents swam in it for their whole lives. Because we have swam in it our whole lives we cannot envision anything else. Indeed, when someone comes to us championing the overturn of modernity we rail and scream because modernity, as Van Prinsterer describes it as become our mother’s milk and our way of life. Indeed, it is so much our way of life that it is actually championed as the norm in most “Christian” Churches. This is evidenced by the fact that most of our clergy corps dedicate themselves to helping the rank and file laity fit in and adopt to Modernity as if the worldview of Revolution is the norm of the Christian.

Quite to the contrary I would contend that our Christian Churches should be training centers for identifying the Revolution worldview that Van Prinsterer puts his finger on. As ministers we need to be teaching God’s people the anti-Revolutionary principles that Gr. v. Pr. speaks of. This can not be done apart from returning to the foundation of justice which lies in the ordinances and law of God. As ministers we need to be teaching God’s people the art of successful protest and resistance against the Revolutionary principles that have seized the day.

Gr. v. Pr. was not the only one who recognized this problem. Writing over 100 years later after Gr. v. Pr, Erik von Kuehnelt Leddihn could write in a very similar vein,

“The French Revolution is still with us in every way. Not only are its ideas ever-present, but there is much in its historic evolution that can teach us — in North America no less than in Europe. Its initial period began with the undermining of traditional values and ideas, coupled with the demand for moderate reforms. With Voltaire a whole series of scoffers, facile critics, and agnostics in the literal sense of the term made their appearance. They subverted religion, convictions, traditions, and the loyalties on which state and society rested. The process of decomposition and putrefaction always starts at the top — in the royal palace, the presidential mansion, among the intellectuals, the aristocracy, the wealthy, the clergy — and then gradually enmeshes the lower social layers. In this process it is interesting to notice how the high and mighty develop a sense of guilt and with it a readiness to abdicate, to yield to expropriation, to submit to the loss of privileges, in other words, to commit suicide politically and economically. For this masochist act, however, they are well prepared by the ideological propaganda coming from their own ranks…. The members of the nobility who took active part in the intellectual or political undermining of the ancien regime and then participated in the Revolution are very numerous, without their support the French Revolution is well-nigh unimaginable…. One is inevitably reminded of the fact that, statistically speaking, the natural death of states and nations as well as of classes and estates, is not murder but suicide. However, this act of suicide is usually preceded by a period of delusions and follies. Quen deus vult perdidi prius dementat.

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Lefism — pg. 88

I would only add here that before political and economic suicide can be committed that theological suicide must first be committed, since politics and economics descends from Theology. I would also observe that when Leddihn speaks of “ideological propaganda,” as Christians we should understand that such ideological propaganda is but a form of theological propaganda.

Leddhin’s observation in this quote supports Christopher Lasch’s, inked 20 years after Leddihn, in his book, “Revolt of the Elites.” In that book Lasch lays the deterioration and decline of the West squarely at the feet of the cultural elite. Lasch cites chapter and verse on how the cultural elite had become the cultural despisers of Western tradition and values. Lasch contends that the overthrow of the West was not orchestrated by the masses, contra Ortega y Gasset’s, “Revolt of the Masses,” but that we have been damaged from within by our cultural gatekeepers.

Morris Berman’s book, “The Twilight of American Culture,” also factors into this theme. Berman, like both Lasch and Leddihn, sees the unraveling of American culture although Berman is inclined to lay the fault at the feet of mass-produced cutlure. Still, that mass-produced culture that Berman speaks of, I would contend, comes from those elites that Lasch excoriates and that Leddihn puts in the dock and which first started with the French Revolution.

Our problem in the West today is that our best and brightest no longer believe in what made the West the West. Groen van Prinsterer, and Leddihn teaches us that the “Un-Westing” of the West began with the French Revolution and has continued unchecked as Biblical Christianity has lost its power to challenge the various incarnations of the French Revolution that have propelled its agenda of “anti-Reformation,” for each subsequent generation.

The Christian church in the West is failing its calling when it refuses to identify at every turn how our current culture is but the successful incarnation of the anti-Christ principles of the French Revolution. That the Church has not figured this out is seen in its inviting the enemy into its bosom via the music we play during worship, its embrace of the whole concept of “social justice,” the way we divide up our families in worship and in a host of other ways.

If we desire Reformation we must first understand that it will never come to pass until we first put off the worldview of the French Revolution.