Proved beyond a shadow of a doubt over at Substack.
Category: Wokery
The State of Things When the ‘Leader’ of the ‘Free World’ is a Puppet
I asked Dr. Vito Caiati, historian, whether Donald Trump's being in office would have made any difference to the present geopolitical mess, and this is what he wrote:
As for the present miserable state of the world, I think that had Trump remained in office neither the war in the Ukraine nor the war in the Middle East would have occurred, or if the former occurred, it would have been resolved on the basis of a territorial compromise concerning the Crimea and robust autonomy for the eastern, Russian majority oblasts. Leaving aside the origins of the conflict (US interference in the internal politics of the Ukraine and the expansion of NATO eastward), Trump would have put Zelensky and company on tight rein. As for Israel, can we doubt that the appeasement of the Obama-Biden regime towards Iran encouraged the reemergence of terrorism? Now, the plan is to provide public support to Israel, while privately restraining her once again to conduct the war in a way that would deny the complete victory that she requires. With Trump, the war would have not occurred, and if it did, he would not have tied Israel’s hands.
As for the danger of WWIII, it appears to me that the Ukraine mess is a potential trigger for it. There is no way that the Ukraine can defeat Russia, and I fear that a protracted conflict could lead to further American involvement and the real chance of a great power clash.
With regard to demons and such, I call your attention to what appeared on the Vatican Synod website this week (page 29): “What is a merciful heart? It is a heart on fire for the whole of creation, for humanity, for the birds, for the animals, for demons, for all that exists.” Thus, the diabolical evil that first showed its face with the Pachamama desecration of St. Peter’s advances further in the Bergoglian Church.
I agree in the main, but Caiati's final sentence prompts me to ask: Is Bergoglio proposing mercy for demons in which he believes? Or is the truly Bergoglian termiticism and diabolism due to his tacit denial of the reality of demons?
No doubt demons are creatures, but does Bergoglio and his fellow clerical termites believe in their existence? I don't know but I suspect he doesn't and they don't. How many Catholic priests today believe in the preternatural? I suspect it is a minority. The preternatural is the sphere within which demonic agents operate. It lies between the natural and the supernatural. See Ralph Weimann, Sacramentals: Their Meaning and Use, p. 196: "In the period after the Second Vatican Council, and under the influence of rationalism, it was increasingly considered 'unscientific' to speak about angels and even more unscientific to speak about demons."
At a time when the RCC should be standing as a bulwark against the anti-civilizational forces of Chinese Communism, Islamism, and Leftism, it is transforming itself under the termitic influence of Bergoglio & Co. into just another pile of secular leftist junk.
But how could anyone in this enlightened age believe in such medieval superstitions as the existence of demons? Hasn't humanity finally put paid to this old nonsense? Maybe not. Maybe there is no naturalistic explanation of the depth and depravity of human behavior. Perhaps an adequate explanation must posit the preternatural. See my Substack article, The Holocaust Argument for God's Existence wherein I write:
As a sort of inference to the best explanation we can say that moral evil in its extreme manifestations has a supernatural source. It cannot be explained adequately in naturalistic terms. There is an Evil Principle (and Principal) the positing of which is reasonable. The undeniable reality of evil has a metaphysical ground. Call it Satan or whatever you like.
In that passage I am using 'supernatural' to cover both the supernatural proper and the preternatural. 'Preternatural' would have been the better, because more specific, word choice. But then I would have had to explain 'preternatural' which would have lengthened the piece. Brevity is the soul of Stack and not just of blog.
Now I would like you to take a gander at this Daily Mail article and rub your noses in recent Hamas-Islamist barbarity. Could the source of this evil be merely natural?
Left and Right: Morally Equivalent?
Leftist evil-doers are becoming ever more brazen in 'outing' themselves. I hand off to Hinderaker:
My opinion of leftists is so low that I am hard to disappoint. But I admit to being shocked by the reaction of many leftists and liberals to the Gazan invasion of Israel. In many instances, they feel no obligation even to disavow the Gazans’ mass murder, gang rapes, kidnappings and beheadings of infants. They go straight to denouncing Israel for imagined crimes and, in some instances, attacking anticipated actions that Israel hasn’t even taken yet. People who are so twisted that they witness the Gazan atrocities and can only fault Israel are moral monsters. Many liberals have self-identified as such.
The case of Dr. Mika Tosca can stand for many others.
The Politicization of Medicine
Nothing is safe from politicization by leftists. And you are still a Democrat? WTF is wrong with you? You geezers in particular need to wake up. This is not the party of Jack Kennedy.
Over at Instapundit:
NYC – Dr. Dana Diab is an ER physician at Lenox Hill (@lenoxhill). Dina Diab took to Instagram rejoicing Zionist settlers [aka jews] were murdered, raped, beheaded, and kidnapped by the Hamas terror group on Saturday October 7th. Jewish patients beware.
Rod Dreher on Leftism
Here:
What a clarifying moment this is in the West. We have all seen the jaw-dropping alacrity with which so many leftists, especially within the academy, have rushed to defend the Hamas storm troopers. If you think this is merely about Israel and Hamas, you need to wake up. The people who are celebrating the massacre of innocent Jews in the name of “liberation” are the same people who would celebrate the massacre of you, if they had the chance.
You think I’m wrong? Today, I write in The European Conservative about the situation in 2017 with Tommy J. Curry, a radical black professor who at the time was on the philosophy faculty at Texas A&M. A reader of mine at The American Conservative who was also either a student or faculty member at A&M brought to my attention how the university flipped out about the racist white activist Richard Spencer coming to campus, but tolerated a black professor making racist comments even more extreme than Spencer. I looked into it, and this, excerpted from my TEC piece today, is what I found:
As usual, Dreher makes a number of good points, but in the end, as usual, it is all just talk. The one and only person who can turn things around, Donald J. Trump, he hates and refuses to support. And for no good reasons that I can discern. So what's the point, Rod? Are you just going to float above the fray forever? Which side are you on?
You know it is a war to the death, and yet you refuse to take sides. We scribblers enjoy the hell out of our daily word-slinging. And if you can turn a buck from it, all the better. So I understand why you write, write, write, and then write some more. You're good at it and people value and like to do what they are good it. But how does this cohere with your 'Benedictine' side? What sort of spiritual life can you possibly have given all this frenetic writing that yet issues in no practical commitment? When do you have time to pray, meditate, shut off the verbal flow, and enter the Silence? "Be still and know that I am God." (Psalm 46:10)
Robert Paul Wollf on Benjamin Netanyahu
Substack latest.
In Celebration of Indigenous Peoples
Cuellar Carjacked
Poetic justice. Henry Cuellar is a Democrat. Democrats are leftists. Leftists have an exceedingly casual attitude toward criminal behavior. It's really no big deal to them. Cuellar's main complaint? "They stole my sushi."
If, for whatever reason, you like crime, then I advise you to vote Democrat early and often.
Related: Leftist activist and do-gooder Ryan Carson was stabbed to death in front of his girlfriend in an apparently unprovoked attack. Carson was the victim of the very 'progressive' policies that he himself promoted. So he must bear some responsibility for bringing about his own death. And what was Carson doing out at night on the mean streets of NYC without a weapon?
Cases like this are increasingly common. Unless you are morally obtuse, you will understand why justice demands capital punishment in such cases. That 'progressives' oppose the death penalty is proof positive that they have a casual attitude toward criminal behavior.
Democrats are astonishingly stupid people. They supposedly want fewer guns in civilian hands. So what do they do? They promote policies that incentivize concealed carry! There is no common sense on the Left.
I too want fewer guns in civilian hands. When laws are enforced, civilians will feel safe and won't feel the need to look to their own defense.
White Flight and Racism
Does racism explain white flight? Here is an interview with Jack Cashill. Excerpts:
Your book challenges the conventional “white flight” narrative. In brief, what were whites fleeing, if not black Americans moving into their neighborhoods?
I got the book’s title from a childhood friend, the last guy to leave our block. When I asked him why he left, he said, after a moment’s reflection, the neighborhood had become untenable. When I asked what “untenable” meant. He said, “When your widowed mother gets mugged for the second time, that’s untenable. When your home gets invaded for the second time, that’s untenable, too.”
Newark had become untenable for people of all races. Cissy Houston, Whitney’s mother, writes “Our home no longer resembled the safe haven we had envisioned for our children. After the riots, John [Houston] and I started thinking about leaving Newark.” Three years later, they left.
[. . .]
Is there any truth to the conventional narrative that racial unease drove the exodus?
I did not address the South, but in the Northeast and north-central U.S., attachment to neighborhood was a more powerful determinant than racial unease. The unease rarely caused flight until it became tangibly associated with crime and school disorder. Homicides in Newark increased sixfold from 1950 to 1972. That is a hard indicator to dispute or overlook.
[. . .]
What did you think of the depiction of the 1967 riots in David Chase’s Sopranos prequel, The Many Saints of Newark?
Glad you asked. As a major fan of the series, I was stunned by the clumsiness of the film. Chase grew up liberal deep in the Newark suburbs and rooted for the rioters. The George Floyd mania apparently revived his inner wokeness. In 1967, even Alabama police did not behave the way that he accused Newark cops of behaving. As the son, nephew, and cousin three times over of Newark police officers—one of whom gave me a two-day tour of the city for this book—I register a hearty protest.
Here is a review of Jack Cashill, Untenable: The True Story of White Ethnic Fight from America's Cities. Excerpt follows. Note the references to James Burnham and Simone Weil.
What about racism, though? Surely, some taint of it must have been there, but what role did it play, exactly? We’ll never know because no one ever inquired into the motives of the only people who could answer: Bill and Sandy, Artie and Mario, Hannah and Jack.
All the social experiments instituted for our benefit by our betters—forced busing, urban renewal, public housing, interstate highways—cascaded together in Newark in just a few mind-boggling years. They were ginned up in Washington and sold on the basis of social science. But when you attempt to explain, predict, or alter human conduct on the basis of numbers, you make mathematics into metaphor.
When you’ve finished crunching numbers, you move on to crunching people. Little Italy is flattened and replaced by a housing project that’s just a slum in the making; an elevated superhighway is plunged through the heart of Roseville; and more drugs circulate through the schoolyards than in Bogotá. When, at long last, people find all these conditions “untenable,” they leave. The exodus is then labeled “white flight,” and the people leaving get labeled “racists.” But what label should we affix to the geniuses in Washington who conceived and executed the whole cock-up? We call them “experts.”
The experts never pause to talk to Bill and Sandy, Artie and Mario, Hannah and Jack. Why would they? The experts aren’t really there to protect the interests of the purported beneficiaries of their projects. In The Managerial Revolution, James Burnham wrote that all large organizations eventually come to serve the interests of their permanent staffs. Ronald Reagan said that the most frightening words in the English language are, “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” Here to help themselves, says Burnham. They look on the working stiff not as the object of the beneficent program but as an obstacle to it.
Worse than the selfishness of the administrator is his solipsism. The federal agency hardly notices that Bill and Sandy, Artie and Mario, Hannah and Jack actually exist. Before the managerial revolution arrived, back in 1934, Simone Weil, then a Marxist, wrote an article saying that Marx had failed to foresee one form of oppression: bureaucrats could crush working people at least as badly as the most exploitative capitalist. As Weil wrote elsewhere, “Attention is the rarest and purest form of generosity. It is given to very few minds to notice that things and beings exist.” Members of the expert class seldom notice.
Mom versus School Board
The End of Liberty is Nigh: The Digital Pound and Cancel Culture
And to add insult to injury, irony to outrage, the end of liberty is being ushered in by the mother country. Here:
The digital pound would be a new type of money issued by the Bank of England for everyone to use for day-to-day spending. You would be able to use it in-store or online to make payments.
This type of money is known as a central bank digital currency (CBDC). You may also hear it being called ‘digital sterling’ or even ‘Britcoin’. We call the UK version of CBDC the digital pound.
The digital pound would be denominated in sterling and its value would be stable, just like banknotes. £10 in digital pounds would always have the same value as a £10 banknote.
If we introduced it, it would not replace cash. We know being able to use cash is important for many people. That’s why we will continue to issue it for as long as people want to keep using it.
And you can take that italicized paragraph to the bank! (Italics added.)
In a parallel assault on liberty, the Brits are going cancel-crazy. Dreher:
It’s a country that gave the world George Orwell, but now, it’s a ‘Brand’ new world for free speech in once-great Britain, which these days specializes in doling out the unwelcome gift of Orwellianism.
Dame Caroline Dinenage, the chair of a British Parliamentary committee, has been writing to social media platforms Facebook, TikTok and Rumble, asking them if they plan to follow YouTube’s lead and demonetize the accused sex pest Russell Brand. On committee letterhead, Dame Caroline wrote to express the committee’s concern that Brand will not be able to make money on the platform and thereby “undermine the welfare of victims of inappropriate and potentially illegal behavior.”
Potentially illegal. This Conservative MP is using her powerful position to attempt to crush Brand’s ability to make a living, even though he denies the allegations, and they have not been subject to any sort of trial. This member of the British government is attempting to demonetize Russell Brand himself, based solely on allegations.
If this outrageous intimidation is allowed to stand, no one is safe in Britain. All it takes is for the right people to level fashionable accusations against you—ones having to do with racism, sexism, LGBT-phobia, ‘toxic masculinity,’ and whatnot—and you could see your livelihood evaporate overnight. You could even see your own government persecute you, as the committee headed by Dame Caroline, Baroness Lancaster of Kimbolton, is doing to Brand.
The Anglosphere is lost, and America is no exception. The push-back is too little, too late. But it ain't over 'til it's over.
We fight on in the gathering gloom. No defeatism! On the other hand, don't be a fool who sacrifices his life on the altar of activism. We have but one night to spend in this bad inn. But a night is not nothing. I'll leave it to you to figure out the right mix of commitment to the fight and Gelassenheit. And it is up to you to balance praeparatio vitae and praeparatio mortis.
"So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late."
"War, children, it's just a shot away."
New Yorkers are Getting What They Deserve
They are paying the just tax for willful self-enstupidation. Vote Democrat, get more crime. The morally decent should leave NYC, and indeed every Democrat-controlled craphole. Of course, some cannot leave for various reasons. I feel sorry for them. But they should have done more to prevent their city from being taken over by leftist scum, especially since they knew from experience the Giuliani years.
Here is the graphic video.
New Yorkers are Getting What They Deserve
They are paying the just tax for willful self-enstupidation. Vote Democrat, get more crime. The morally decent should leave NYC, and indeed every Democrat-controlled craphole. Of course, some cannot leave for various reasons. I feel sorry for them. But they should have done more to prevent their city from being taken over by leftist scum, especially since they knew from experience the Giuliani years.
Here is the graphic video.
Rod Dreher on the Ben Op and the Bon Op
One of the few free ones.
“The Benedict Option is not available to us; it is either the Boniface Option or destruction,” he writes. “You cannot run and hide from Trashworld. Our only option is to despise it and to fight back.”
Leaving aside this inaccurate caricature of the Ben Op, what does Isker mean by despising it and fighting back? Though he doesn’t think so, that’s what we’re both after: rejecting what is evil in this post-Christian world, and devising a method of resistance. Having read Isker’s book, and sincerely appreciating what is good in it, my view is that his Bon Op is primarily about seeking worldly power as a means to impose Christianity — his kind of Christianity — on the people. (In this, the Calvinist Bon Op is a dwarfish parallel to the elvish proposals of the Catholic integralists.)
I like the parenthetical remark at the close of the quotation. Compare my Integralism in Three Sentences: Reasons Contra.
Another Day, Another Outrage
Biden DOJ sues SpaceX for following the law. Another example of 'lawfare,' the use of the law to undermine the rule of law. Should 'asylum seekers' and 'refugees' be given the rights of citizens when they are neither, but are economic migrants who have entered the country illegally? Obviously not, unless you are a hate-America leftist out to destroy the republic. Then it makes perfect sense.