This presents a thorny problem for the British ruling class, and it’s getting worse. Despite the thick blanket of indoctrination that smothers the media and the state schools, John Bull persists in holding the wrong ideas about the Religion of Peace. Consigning the EDL to the Outer Darkness — and arresting its members on trumped-up charges — hasn’t had the intended effect.We’re facing something similar here in the United States. As a tsunami of opposition rises against the Ground Zero mosque, the Husseinization of America is failing to inoculate the populace against incorrect ideas concerning Islam. In spite of valiant efforts by CNN and The New York Times, “Islamophobia” remains stubbornly ineradicable.
Our British correspondent JP has a few things to say on the topic:
Dear Baron,
Below is the dirt on the Guardian story you carried yesterday [in the news feed] where three-quarters of those polled in a recent survey had a negative impression of Islam.
To accompany it, here’s a ditty I composed after somber reflection on this stupidity:
I repudiate Islam
I repudiate Islam as a Christian for its heresy
I repudiate Islam as an atheist because of its mumbo-jumbo
I repudiate Islam as a Buddhist because it’s bad for my karma
I repudiate Islam as a Jew because I’m smart
I repudiate Islam as a pagan because where the brook babbles and the flowers grow there is no need of Islam
I repudiate Islam as a Sikh because Islam murdered my ancestors
I repudiate Islam as a Hindu because it is not my way
Altogether now —-
We repudiate Islam because it’s getting up our nose
(Note: the ‘pud’ in repudiate should be pronounced as in ‘spud’)
JP
And here’s the dirt from Harry’s Place:
Stoking anti-Muslim bigotry- - - - - - - - -
Earlier this week, the Guardian reported on a poll, carried out for the Islamic Education and Research Academy (IERA) which revealed high levels of hostility to Muslims and dislike of Islam in Britain.
George Readings, at Left Foot Forward argues that anti Muslim bigotry is fueled by rabble raising groups and a press which fails to distinguish between ordinary British Muslims, and vocal Islamists and hate preachers: people like Bilal Phillips and Zakir Naik, who have been excluded from Britain by the Home Secretary.
However, there’s a twist. George Readings reveals that the IERA is fronted by Greek convert, Hamza Tzortzis: who is himself linked to Hizb ut Tahrir. And two of its advisers are — Bilal Philips and Zakir Naik! I can’t understand how the Guardian could have missed this important information.
But there’s more that George could have said about IERA. Its Chairman is old Ampleforthian and Jesus-impersonator, Abdurraheem Green, who believes that adulterers and gays should be stoned to death, and has been banned from Australia.
Hilariously, the IERA’s study proposes the following solution to anti Muslim bigotry:“Invite people to adopt the Islamic world view”
Readers may spot a certain circularity in this argument. If only people accepted the political perspectives of Tzortzis, Green and Philips then they wouldn’t object so strongly to them. Of course!
Here’s an alternative suggestion. Why don’t Tzortzis, Green and Philips just shut up.
59 comments:
The PC norm is for the elites to betray the people. CNN, the NYT, etc., they are proud members of the self-destructive, self-hating marching morons.
I repudiate Islam as an Asatruar because I am free and the Gods and Goddesses are my kin!
Arius --
"Self-hating" is not quite the correct descriptive term. The elites who are betraying us do not hate themselves; they hate us -- that is, those whom they regard as ignorant, inbred, superstitious fools, the people who have stubbornly refused their enlightened guidance.
Such folk like themselves just fine -- "themselves" being the high-minded transnational cognoscenti who have evolved past the need for atavisms such as the nation-state.
No, they are not self-hating. Not at all.
George Readings, at Left Foot Forward argues that anti Muslim bigotry is fueled by rabble raising groups and a press which fails to distinguish between ordinary British Muslims, and vocal Islamists and hate preachers: people like Bilal Phillips and Zakir Naik, who have been excluded from Britain by the Home Secretary.
Far be it from such wise-beyond-their-years types as George Readings to actually inform us regarding exactly how we should "distinguish between ordinary British Muslims, and vocal Islamists and hate preachers". Apparently that is simply too much to ask amidst the thundering silence on this subject that emanates from all quarters Muslim and that of their appeasers.
What is wrong with 'rabble rousing'?
It is an integral part of my cultural heritage - anyone scoffing at it or putting it down is guilty of cultural bigotry and, probably, racism!
So, I say: go forth and rabble-rouse!
I agree with the Baron. Read the essays The Tea Party vs. the Intellectuals by the author Lee Harris, and America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution by Angelo M. Codevilla. Although they both focus on the USA, there is no question that a ruling Globalist, Multicultural Class has taken over the entire West today. It would be tempting to call them the Traitor Class.
It is true that many ordinary people in the Western world more or less freely make stupid decisions and choices. We have become decadent and reliant on welfare handouts from the all-encompassing Socialist state while enjoying the electronic toys provided to us by capitalism. Even when alternatives are available to them, as in Britain, far too many people still vote for Multicultural parties, including establishment so-called "conservatives," that keep on insulting and dispossessing them. Nevertheless, even in cases where the common people are allowed to have their say, as with the minaret ban in Switzerland, the transnational Traitor Class all over the West will gang up on them. The Multicultural Class rules according to Two Commandments: There shall be open borders, and there shall be no traditional European culture because whites are uniquely evil. Anybody disagreeing with these Two Commandments will be branded as an heretic, attacked and crushed.
Well, Fjordman, there is a simple way to deal with those two rules: agree with them.
"I am an evil person and I will do evil to anyone who comes across that border, btw, doors open."
No, they are not self-loathing. They don't hate themselves, they just hate us. White Globalists attack other whites because they view themselves as a distinct breed of enlightened people separate from the less enlightened masses. They feel no kinship with us whatsoever. We are obstacles to their enlightened programs and/or potential competitors for Ruling Class status that need to be controlled and kept down. The only thing I disagree with in Codevilla's essay is that the Ruling Class are "militantly secular." They are anti-Christian, yes, but also very pro-Islamic. We should apply Ockham's Razor: Islam is global in its aspirations and repressive in its nature. It disrupts and breaks down local cultures. The Western Ruling Class supports the expansion of Islam because it likes all of these traits, plain and simple. Islam is compatible with their anti-European, Globalist program.
Keep up the good work Zenster and Fjordman.
Baron and all, I spotted this at City Journal. Keep an eye out for it.
Coming Soon
Pascal Bruckner
Europe’s Guilty Conscience
Self-hatred is paralyzing the Continent.
http://www.city-journal.org/
There is some Dalrymple at the bottom as well.
One of the reasons “Islamophobia” remains stubbornly ineradicable is precisely because of blogs like the Gates of Vienna.
If the only diet Americans could eat were solely of papers like the New York Times we would be gladly renaming streets in Arabic.
Some interesting ideas here...
Sign & Sight
06/05/2010
When religion and culture part ways
Olivier Roy talks to Eren Gvercin about issues central to the debate about Islam in Europe, from revolutionary milleniarism to Muslim Luthenarianism.
http://www.signandsight.com/features/2025.html
Since you take this from Harry's Place it's worth pointing out a few things about that British blog - it pretends to be a voice of sanity and moderation and critical of the more loopy end of the British Left and their apologetics and support for Muslim
radicalism eg Respect/Galloway, but truth is HP is not much better..HP just goes after easy targets.
HP engages in routine moral and cultural relativism, and took the side of Charles 'chuckles' Johnson in the meltdown and kerfluffles he had with the saner end of the blogosphere (and therefore are by implication anti-GoV). They have been deafening in their silence over Obama's Chamberlain policies and anti-Israelism. HP pretends Islamic radicalism has nothing to do with the teachings of mainstream Islam, and when anti-dhimmi commentators at HP dare to point out the obvious on this front they are routinely shouted down, dismissed as bigots and
"Islamophobes' and HP even censor comments from anti-dhimmis (I have had my restrained factual comments censored routinely so I know) etc. HP has very recently portrayed the EDL as a far-right wing fascist group, you get the idea...
In other words HP is not much better than the Guardianistas they pretend to be so removed from. HP is part of the problem in the UK, and given that their dhimmitude is more subtle than the BBC and the Guardian-types they are actually very damaging since their dhimmitude and multiculti delusions
are fostered in the name of the 'sane Left'. HP tries to reconcile it's Leftism with sanity and fails miserably. It is proof that there is no decent Left at all
really, not in the UK at any rate and I'm no fan of conservatives. Look at the Cameron-Tories, pathetic. Britain is the dead isle.
In hoc signo vinces
@Lawrence,
Look at the Cameron-Tories, pathetic. Britain is the dead isle.
The (neoliberal) Conservatives main agenda is to destroy what remains of conservative consciousness in the UK, to achieve this they must destroy the working class/underclass.
The only visible remnants of conservative consciousness in the UK has found some expression via the EDL that movement undeniabley draws its membership from the working class/underclass this is the social group that the (neoliberal) Conservatives economic policies will undermine and destroy the moral of the most, conservatives in the UK must defend welfare at all costs, the welfare debate in the UK is not comparable with the welfare debate in the US.
I think the most troubling thing is that people today don't feel connected to their history. Maybe its because of all the Euro-hate over imperialism and racism that people are trying to distance themselves from. Whatever the reason there, because we can't take pride in who we were, we can't take pride in who we are. This weakens us in fighting off forces such as these.
NorseAlchemist: I think the most troubling thing is that people today don't feel connected to their history.
That would come as no surprise considering the current crisis regarding the quality of public education in America. How can one obtain a good understanding of history from error-riddled textbooks?
In 2002, for the first time in 11 years, publishers submitted high school U.S. History books for Texas approval … and again the education establishment missed most factual errors. In 1991, we found 231 undetected factual errors in six high school U.S. History books after the state approval process certified them error-free. When this year's process ended, we found 249 still-uncorrected factual errors in four books – more mistakes overlooked in fewer texts.
… No one claims we call ideological differences "factual errors." These 249 are all the "2+2=5" type of mistakes … [emphasis added]
Consider the issues present in their worst rated textbook:
American Nation in the Modern Era (Holt ©2003)
Disproportionate, agenda-driven stress on anti-social history over political and economic themes:
■ Divisive, inflammatory, unprofessional stereotypes of whites as oppressors and people of color as victims, polarizing multicultural populations
■ Fragmentary coverage, incoherent explanations, low prioritization of key terms, issues, and concepts in U.S. Constitutional history
■ Dubious grasp of some topics in U.S. economic history; definite disinterest in questioning old left anti-capitalist, pro-big government prejudices
This text contained the most remaining uncorrected factual errors of these four books. [emphasis added]
Is it any wonder that young students have no grasp of history that might provide them with the perspective needed to grasp our current political and cultural situation?
Now consider that the worst-case example exhibited a "disinterest in questioning old left anti-capitalist, pro-big government prejudices" and what sort of world view might a young pupil carry away from such state-issued reading material?
Furthermore, another GoV reader made one significant point in a previous discussion of historical imperialism. Namely, that World War II's ideological struggle with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan motivated many of Europe's colonial powers to voluntarily repudiate imperialism. This threw an unwholesome cast upon the entire European colonial expansion and remove a significant amount of motivation to more closely examine the root causes of poverty and poor governance thoughout the Third World.
Consider one previous British colony's Colonial Scars™:
■ A relatively functional parliamentary government
■ Asia's finest railway system
■ Widespread English-speaking public education
■ The largest Asian democracy
It is also instructive to examine a recent Transparency International map of world corruption perceptions index.
It is instructive to note that, even the better part of a century after their "liberation", a vast majority of previously colonial Third World countries are still mired in some of the very worst political corruption. The MME (Muslim Middle East) is, in many ways, more than a bit conspicuous due to its immense wealth but a common mode trait of poor governance and human rights abuses prevails throughout the Third World that cannot be explained away by blaming colonialism.
It's long past tea for European and American cultures to shrug off White Man's Burden™ and set about obtaining some genuine clarification regarding where the blame really lies for so much of this world's problems. Islam is a prime example of the pervasive "victim mentality" that characterizes so many of the accusing voices, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, which continue to prey upon lingering White Guilt™ even as they wallow in self-induced poverty and decay.
Finally, while White Culture's Traitor Elite™ may not themselves indulge in self-hatred, they most certainly do their level best to inspire it in all other White people. From all indications, this program of induced cultural suicide is enjoying unprecedented success and its progenitors should be obliged to lead by example in the extinction that they are so eager to bring about.
Sidebar: In case it was not clear, the British colony in question is India. How curious that this vibrant multicultural nation found it necessary to resettle a huge portion of its Muslim population in the name of peace which, curiously enough, it has never obtained.
Few better object lessons could be hoped for with respect to how the West will, one day, also be obliged to deal with its own restive Muslim populations.
In hoc signo vinces
@Zenster,
"Namely, that World War II's ideological struggle with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan motivated many of Europe's colonial powers to voluntarily repudiate imperialism."
Always thought that one of the factors was the United States hostility towards imperial power that was the driver that motivated the end of European Empires after WW1 and more so after WW2.
4Symbols: Always thought that one of the factors was the United States hostility towards imperial power that was the driver that motivated the end of European Empires after WW1 and more so after WW2.
Considering that America had been an imperialist colony itself and, furthermore, had not based its own economy upon colonization (per se), there was ample reason for this posture at the time.
In an era where there continued to persist such a pervasive and wholly mistaken notion as the Noble Savage™, what remained little understood then was how influential cultural infrastructure was regarding societal cohesiveness and overall economic success.
Even now the Liberal meme continues to undermine correct perception of tribalism and corruption as the primary drivers of failed state economies around the globe. All that remains to be seen is how long White Culture can continue to be blamed for all of this world's ills. More important in this is how long White cultures will continue to countenance this ridiculous accusation as the notion of White Man's Burden exceeds its shelf life by the better part of a century.
A bit off topic this but Muslim narcosis is not a joke.
Apparently, the chewing of Khat (a narcotic leaf used by some Muslims) leads to an increased risk of TB and other diseases. Dr Imnokuffar, (Equalities and Human Rights Commissariat and Unite Against Fascism) gives his prescription below.
Chronic use of khat produces undesirable side effects, including sleeplessness, nervousness, impotence, loss of appetite, constipation, nightmares and an aversion to Christians, Jews, Nationalists and what Muslims call "Kuffar". Users tend to worship a pedophile called Mohammed these addicts also have a tendency to worship meteorites and pray to the moon.
Soon after chewing, khat can cause dizziness, rapid heartbeat, and pain in the upper abdomen. These unpleasant feelings are gradually replaced by bliss, euphoria and pleasant energetic pleasant feelings that lead some users to physically beat thier wives as this is thought to prolong the pleasure. Prolonged anorexia associated with khat use leads to malnutrition and increased susceptibility to infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, rabies, syphillis, leprosy, and AIDs. Khat chewing is highly recommended for Muslims by such figures as Dr Imnokuffar and many other concerned Westerners.
Nasher and Associates (1995) found that khat chewing inhibits urine flow, an effect caused by blood vessel constriction which also causes erectile dysfunction. In Moslem societies this problem is usually corrected by the addict having sex of with 9 year year old girls or in severe cases Goats. Furthermore, epidemiological and experimental studies suggest that long term use of khat causes reproductive toxicity leading to mentally deformed people who worship something called Allah. In addition to the neurological effects there are other affects which are physically exhibited by users crouching over and waving thier posteriors in the air and banging thier heads on the ground 5times a day whilst muttering. Consumption of Khat is also associated with reproduction problems in men and women meaning that in order for Muslims to have babies they must have at least 4 wives who are usually paid for by the non-muslim majority.
Khat is easily obtained and should be used by Muslims as part of a calorie controlled diet - with the emphasis on the "die" part according to Dr Imnokuffar.
Dr Imnokuffar is available to answer all your questions for a fee of £25 that will be donated to the BNP. He is qualifed in Islamophobia and gives free tips on healthcare issues to the Muslim community. He is accredited by the EHRC and UAF as a qualified practitioner of Islamophobia.
The US was both an imperial and colonial power, itself, but not to the degree of others (per se).
NorseAlchemist....Bingo! Including the demonization of Christianity.
Lawrence is correct...HP Leftingers are what is known as the Decent Left (many of them have moved on to realize that they are NeoCons...no nefarious Jewish connotation intended). The Decent Left is a small minority on what constitutes the Left these days. They are essentially Anti Communist Democrats....what used to be the core of the US Democrat party back in the 50s and 60s. Many of those became Reagan Democrats as the Democrat Party was taken over by Radical New Leftists between 68 and 72.
But the gist of what Lawrence is saying is correct. Albeit, IF, these Decent Leftists and their thoughts and attitudes were the dominant force on the Left, we would be in much better shape, in crafting policy.
However they arent. They are a demonized small minority, with little to no power on the Left.
PS - UKIP is where sanity lay. Not in Nationalist Socialist BNP.
In hoc signo vinces
Workfare the hallmark idealogical tool of socialist and totalitarian states.
* The BNP will institute a workfare-not-welfare policy.
* UKIP will require those seeking benefits to take part in ‘Workfare’ schemes.
At this time in the UK all the major political parties support the slavery of workfare for subsistence benefit.
Working hard is not a crime against humanity.
In hoc signo vinces
@EscapeVelocity,
No wonder the West is being heavily defeated when those who profess to defend western civilisation only desire is to see millions of their compatraiots enslaved in below subsistence workfare, you miss the point - arbeit-macht-frei.
4Symbols said:
Freedom is Slavery
In hoc signo vinces
@EscapeVelocity,
If under cohersion of having subsistence welfare removed a compatraiot has to sweep the car park of the local mosque then you can say 4Symbols said "Freedom is Slavery" in the UK.
Remove the coercion of subsistence welfare....and then you can be free...but not free from the reality of natural law.
There is nothing degrading about janitorial work. Many people make decent livings providing such services. Cleaning things is good honest work. And remember... Cleanliness is next to Godliness.
Actually, I don't see that the demonetization of Christianity has really been a bad thing. Nor should the re-reinstatement of Christianity be the end goal. Christianity is a Universal Religion. Indeed, it was the first Universalist Religion, with Islam being the second. While Christianity has been useful for holding off Islam in the past, we must keep in mind the horrors that Christianity has brought about, which while on not as grand a scale as Islam, are still great an terrible.
I also don't think Tribalism is a bad thing, nor the reason for the failures of many countries. Rather, I would argue that Tribalism is the key to permanently holding off Islam. If Americans, Brits, Germans, or any other group was fully vested in their tribe, we wouldn't be seeing the elites letting in the Muslims at epic rates, because then even the Elites would feel membership in their tribe and not as part of a Universal, Superior group (and Idea that can be traced back to Christianity, btw.) Indeed, much of the Socialist Ideology (if we wish to call it that) can be traced back to the philosophies of Christ. The religion is removed, but the principles and philosophies are almost the same. The only differences are that now the Kingdom of Heaven is our mortal world, and God is now the Universalist Governments that hold power.
What Ails Us
[Icarus Fallen: The Search for Meaning in an Uncertain World, Chantal Delsol, ISI Books, 325 pages]
By Mark Gauvreau Judge
The author of Icarus Fallen is Chantal Delsol, a professor of philosophy at the Université de Marne-la-Vallée near Paris. Her thesis here is that man has become something of a Sisyphus (my metaphor, not hers). Having pushed the rock of his utopian dreams to the top of the hill, he has had it roll back down over him. The nightmarish ideologies of Nazism and communism, as well as the lesser sins of consumerism and the innumerable other —isms of the 20th century, have all failed to bring happiness. But the longing for utopia still prevails. And unlike previous generations, who lived through wars and depressions and were on close terms with death, modern man has attempted to cocoon himself in a nest of technological and physical comfort. Thus he is appalled when faced with a grim reality: despite all our efforts, human nature has not changed. Tragedy is still a part of life.
Rather than admit this uncomfortable truth, the man of today has erected new orthodoxies: there will be no disappointment, pain, or suffering, or somebody will get sued. Rights are ever expanding and sacred—“we suppose,” Delsol writes, “that anything that is tolerated should be facilitated or even encouraged.” Freedom is not to be curtailed in any way because there is no such thing as behavior that is normative for anyone. Absolutes lead to tyranny. This Delsol describes as a “movement from essential tolerance, based on an idea of the equal dignity of persons, toward a procedural tolerance or relativism, based on the idea that all lifestyles are of equal value.”
Icarus Fallen does not name names; Delsol assumes that the reader will recognize the ubiquity in our culture of what she calls “the clandestine ideology of our time.” There is no need to finger individuals, she asserts, when the theology of political correctness is in the very air we breathe. It is its own orthodoxy, with a specific idea of what man is—a person cut off from and not obligated to any tradition from the past, someone who can pursue any kind of happiness as long as it does not affect others, a man whose entire concept of self-actualization is based on ever-expanding rights. To say otherwise is heresy. “In our societies,” she writes, “there are a certain number of political, moral and other opinions that the individual contests at the point of being marginalized.” One must be for “the equal representation of both sexes in all spheres of power.” We must consider delinquency the result of poverty. We must “hate all moral order …[we] must equate the Catholic Church with the Inquisition, but never equate communism with its gulags.” The virtuous are to be suspect, because “invariably they must be disguising hypocritical vices.” The clandestine ideology “aims to equalize the value of all behavior.”
Faith in absolute personal autonomy, commingled with the endless expansion of rights, is perhaps the most entrenched belief of all in post-Christian America. No one dares question the dogma that the point of human existence is to expand human freedom. But Delsol calls attention to a basic truth that escapes even many conservatives: boundless freedom can actually make us less human. “[L]iberty, when exercised without limits, distorts and disorients the personality. And the individual, when excessively protected, is stunted in his growth …. Growing up with no other limit than the financial capacities of the nation, and in general even beyond them, rights viewed as entitlements ultimately make a society impotent; paradoxically, some gifts eventually impoverish.”
The more we spend on social programs the more the public demands that they be expanded. As a result, people have become not more generous, spiritual and humane, but ever more greedy and closed off. And we have become, according to Delsol, hysterically intolerant of tragedy and even of limits. “When one is faced with danger, one learns why one lives … entire peoples become known for their heroic deeds as well as their acts of cowardice.” Limits point to the ultimate limit, death, which focuses the mind to the importance of life. Yet when the reality of the tragic is denied, and thus too the vitality of decisions made in light of eternity, man becomes “the plaything of circumstance.”
Delsol is no ideologue roughly demanding that we blindly return to the old ways, embracing them without question. She defends, for example, the fear of certainty as largely reasonable, at least when based on the fact that certainties about what constitutes the truth have in the past led to pogroms, inquisitions, and even the Holocaust. Yet she admits that man by his very nature hunts for truth and meaning, for something he is willing to die for. Thus we find ourselves stuck: by nature we long for what Delsol calls “reference points” that direct us towards absolute verities, yet by ideology we are suspect of anything that can provide the answers.
These days, Delsol notes, we would consider Ignatius Loyola and others who forfeited liberty for the truth to be “demented.” In any latter-day liberal democracy, “all that can be said is that nothing is objectively true, since the object of desire resists all refutation, and tolerance has no place where desire reigns supreme. This sacralization [of rights], however, does not establish a truth in the philosophical sense, but rather the certitude of a general and unequivocal well-being.” Democracy as it is understood today “allows only for the certitude of tolerance, which is easily seen as the certitude of incertitude. In other words, democracy finds truth awkward, because truth always creates obligations, while democracy prospers in freedom.”
Delsol’s chapters on political correctness include some of the best writing on the topic ever committed to paper. Who would have thought that anyone could wring new life from the topic, much less make it sing? “Dominated by emotion,” she writes,
[O]ur era overflows with treacly sentiment. It is almost as if the feelings that were once associated with a certain type of piety have contaminated the whole population …. Seeking the good while remaining indifferent to the truth gives rise to a morality of sentimentality. Reactive judgment, deprived of thoughtful reflection, engenders fanatical emotion and an absolute priority of feeling over thought. In fact, it is not actually a question of sentiment, since sentiment supposes a historical and rationally consistent background. We are dealing here less with a reaction of the heart than a gut reaction.
Anyone who recalls the controversy over “The Passion of the Christ” knows exactly what Delsol is talking about. Yet Icarus Fallen has a flaw. It is the same one that afflicted the late, brilliant Christopher Lasch, whose style and philosophy are so similar to Delsol’s: like Lasch, she lacks answers. Delsol and Lasch diagnose modern ills with preternatural precision, yet both are reluctant, or unable, to prescribe a cure. Towards the end of his life Lasch seemed at last to find an answer, or at least a system that embraced man’s fallen nature and the danger of utopian fantasies, in Christianity—at least if his last book, The Revolt of the Elites, is an example. At the end of that book Lasch made an observation that Delsol echoes time and again in Icarus Fallen: “the key to happiness lies in renouncing the right to be happy.”
This could have been written by Ignatius Loyola, whom Delsol favorably cites in her book. The idea points to a Christian acceptance of limits and the notion that, as Lasch wrote, “human happiness may not be the be-all and end-all of God’s plan.” We must, in effect, rein ourselves in. We must realize that we are human, that the reality of death hangs over every life, and that if we deny these things and attempt to achieve utopia by continually expanding rights and accumulating more and more toys we will warp and distort the very humanity we ostensibly are trying to achieve.
The American Conservative Mag
Why work when I can get £42,000 in benefits a year AND drive a Mercedes?
By Paul Sims
April 2010
The Davey family's £815-a-week state handouts pay for a four-bedroom home, top-of-the-range mod cons and two vehicles including a Mercedes people carrier.
Father-of-seven Peter gave up work because he could make more living on benefits.
Yet he and his wife Claire are still not happy with their lot.
With an eighth child on the way, they are demanding a bigger house, courtesy of the taxpayer.
'It's really hard,' said Mrs Davey, 29, who is seven months pregnant. 'We can't afford holidays and I don't want my kids living on a council estate and struggling like I have.
'The price of living is going up but benefits are going down. My carer's allowance is only going up by 80p this year and petrol is so expensive now, I'm worried how we'll cope.
'We're still waiting for somewhere bigger.'
Mrs Davey has never had a full-time job while her 35-year-old husband gave up his post in administration nine years ago after realising they would be better off living off the state.
At their semi on the Isle of Anglesey, the family have a 42in flatscreen television in the living room with Sky TV at £50 a month, a Wii games console, three Nintendo DS machines and a computer - not to mention four mobile phones.
With their income of more than £42,000 a year, they run an 11-seater minibus and the seven-seat automatic Mercedes.
But according to the Daveys they have nothing to be thankful for.
'It doesn't bother me that taxpayers are paying for me to have a large family,' added Mrs Davey.
'We couldn't afford to care for our children without benefits, but as long as they have everything they need, I don't think I'm selfish.
'Most of the parents at our kids' school are on benefits.'
She added: 'I don't feel bad about being subsidised by people who are working. I'm just working with the system that's there.
'If the government wants to give me money, I'm happy to take it. We get what we're entitled to. I don't put in anything because I don't pay taxes, but if I could work I would.'
The couple met in a pub 13 years ago. A year later, at the age of 17, Mrs Davey gave birth to Jessica, now 12.
The full feature appears in this week's Closer magazine, on sale now.
She was followed by Jade, ten, Jamie-Anne, eight, Harriet, six, Adele, four, the couple's only son Tie, three, and Mercedes, two.
'It cost too much to carry on working as we were actually better off unemployed,' said Mr Davey.
In addition to income support, housing benefit, child tax credits and a council tax discount, the couple receive carer's allowance and disability living allowance for Tie, who suffers from a severe skin disorder.
Despite filing for bankruptcy 18 months ago after racking up £20,000 of debt on mail order catalogues they still insist on splashing out on four presents per child at birthdays and last Christmas spent £2,000 on gifts alone.
'Santa is always generous in our house,' said Mrs Davey, who once applied to join the police but was turned down.
She insists her husband would do any job 'as long as we could still afford the lifestyle we have now'.
Mrs Davey, who spends £160 a week at Tesco, says she does not intend to stop at eight children. Her target is 14.
And she adds: 'I've always wanted a big family - no one can tell me how many kids I can have whether I'm working or not.'
The Daily Mail
Escape Velocity --
That's enough of posting full articles in the comments. Cut it out.
That's not what comment threads are for. If you feel compelled to do it, use the news feed posts.
There are, to my knowledge, Four Basic Fundamental Rights: Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit of Happiness. All other rights that exist, come from Mankind's need to facilitate and defend those rights.
EV wrote:
“the key to happiness lies in renouncing the right to be happy.”
Now, there are many paths to happiness. Some work, some don't. But nothing in my life has ever led me to believe that I could be happy by renouncing my right to be happy. If I don't have the right to be happy, then what justification can I have for being happy? If I don't have the Right to Live, how can I justify Living? If I don't have the Right of Property, how can I justify owning anything? If I don't have the Right of Liberty, how can I justify being Free?
Simple answer; I can't. And if I can't justify, then any person or persons who have the power can come in and take from me my Life, Liberty, Property, and Happiness.
EV also posted:
“human happiness may not be the be-all and end-all of God’s plan.”
Maybe not the Christian God, But The Aesir and Vanir, Gods and Goddesses of the Germanic and Scandinavian peoples of Europe who I am proud to call my kin and live with, do wish for the happiness of their people. Yes, there is sorrow, and suffering, and many things people consider negative. But they desire that Their people Live, are Free, keep what they Possess, and are Happy.
Giving up a right is never the way to get it.
In hoc signo vinces
@EscapeVelocity,
You really do not understand the politics surrounding UK welfare or do not wish to.
I really do not think in terms of demographics that the West is in a position to turn its nose up at 8 or even 14 indiginous UK welfare children, they are worth their weight in gold - go forth and multiply.
I agree, better to pay for the Children of Europe than the Children of Allah.
National Socialists.
Better National Socialists than Islamic Shariah and the Quran. The former at least will let us preserve our peoples, and can be replaced more easily.
Yes, but better Christianity than either of those.
Hitler or Jesus?
NorseAlchemist: I also don't think Tribalism is a bad thing, nor the reason for the failures of many countries.
Then please explain away Africa's tremendous head start on the rest of mankind. It was the cradle of humanity but is still subject to the very worst atrocities and abuses known to man.
Tribalism is what gets you your Robert Mugabes and Idi Amins. Tribalism is what gets you your Hutus and Tutsis, your Darfurs and Sierra Leones.
I have no problem with a strong sense of cultural identity. I have no problem with patriotic nationalism. I do have a problem with clannish outlooks that tend to breed enclave mentalities and the intense xenophobia that so often accompanies them.
Muslims are heavily dependent on tribalism and Islam's throwback status is a straight-foward result of it. The endemic internecine bloodshed seen throughout Islam is a direct reflection of this. So is its preference for "strong horse" type of leadership. One need only examine Russia's substantial decline under its Communist kleptocrats and, now, Putinesque oligarchs to see where the strong horse style of leadership gets you.
Yes, it is far more difficult to inspire national identity and get people to hold it dear. Britain is a sterling (as it were) example of this. Tribalism's clannish aspect is incapable of expanding to an adequate degree whereby functional national economies can be made to operate. Again, Africa − Zimbabwe in particular − is the poster child for this particular civilizational motif.
EscapeVelocity: Hitler or Jesus?
Paging Mike Godwin to the white courtesy telephone.
EV, that is a hard choice, because your forcing a choice between an ideology where some people are worthy of life and the rest must be killed or a ideology that says humanity is damned from birth for a sin they did not commit and if they do not become slaves to an "all powerful" god lest they burn in hell for being human beings.
Really now, surely you can come up with better alternantives.
I know I can. Odin. Thor. Freya. Tyr. All the Aesir and Vanir, who live in harmony with their children. There is no need to bow and scrape and beg forgiveness of a vengeful, all powerful entity who claims to know everything, yet for all his power and knowledge, does nothing to hinder "evil" except to demand slavery. Be it under Christ or Mohamed. I will not ask for forgiveness for being a human. I don't need to.
Zenster, it is true that Tribalism has negative effects. However, Europe in its past was as Tribal as Africa, yet we still progressed to far greater heights than them. So the problem isn't Tribalism. That it might be something inherent in Africans (who failed to equal Tribalis Asain, Europeans, or Middle Easteners) is beyond the scope of these comments.
Muslims aren't were they are because of Tribalism, but Islam's inherent nature. Not tribal xenophobia. If Europe were a bit more "xenophobic" I doubt we would really be having this conversation. Because Europeans wouldn't let large numbers of non-Europeans in. Islam isn't a nation, or a tribe, it is an ideology that hates other ideologies, not a tribe that hates other tribes.
You dont understand original sin, at all do you.
Man is imperfectable. A fallen creature. Some say, man's original sin is his animal nature...and that moving from that animalism, the human moves towards God(liness)....but is not God.
Others want to be God, themselves. And that always ends in folly...because of man's imperfection and fallibility.
The Horror of Nazi Germany was the horror of man's fallibility, when he loses his humbleness before God, and chooses instead to be God.
The Horror of Soviet Communism is the same.
I think that divines the choice down very well, Hitler or Jesus? The choice is yours.
Evil is the cohort of free will.
Not asking forgiveness for being human is merely regressing to animal states, natural law. Any action is moral, because their is no morality but what man makes. And that inevitably leads back to animalism or tyranny.
You really are playing in the kiddie pool.
As I said, rejecting 10,000 years of Christian and Jewish philosophy and experience is mindbogglingly stupid. They have survived on this planet for a very long time, your heritage and tradition.
BTW, you have the right to pursue happiness, not to be happy. You probably didnt get that distinction, but luckily, the men that founded the great nation of the United States of America did.
You will have to learn the hard way, I guess. It wont be the first or the last time.
NorseAlchemist: … Europe in its past was as Tribal as Africa, yet we still progressed to far greater heights than them. So the problem isn't Tribalism.
Europe's greatest achievements were not attained in a tribal milieu. It was an ability to make the transition beyond tribalism − with its nomadic and hunter-gatherer roots − that allowed for the elevation of science and technology.
The stagnancy of African cultures cannot be explained away solely by the ease of gathering food in a tropical clime. Even one of Africa's greatest cultures, Egypt, was reduced to beggary through its domination by tribalist Islam as are many modern African nations.
Try to imagine any of Europe's great nation states functioning if its royalty treated every person, object and resource, as African tribal leaders do, as a personal possession. In earlier European times that was exactly the case and it took Fuedalism and the Magna Charta to alter that counterproductive schema.
Closer to home, Christianity's advent was a primary reason for the decline of Norse tribalism even as Scandinavia became one of Europe's most enduring outposts of learning and scientific endeavor.
At the small scale of highly localized genetic preservation, tribalism works just fine. Moving far beyond the accomplishment of mere subsistence level survival requires a much more sophisticated degree of social harmony than tribalism alone can orchestrate.
Muslims aren't w[h]ere they are because of Tribalism, but Islam's inherent nature.
To the contrary. Islam derived rather directly from ancient tribal structures and relies, even today, upon much of that same exact framework to function. It is why Islam's configuration appears (and is) so barbaric to any civilized person.
If Europe were a bit more "xenophobic" I doubt we would really be having this conversation.
There is a difference between healthy distrust of wholly alien cultures and the overwhelming xenophobia commonly exhibited by most tribes, even today. The phobic level of rejection displayed by many primitive peoples at all stages of history inhibited trade and the exchange of knowledge in ways that often stunted growth, sometimes irreparably. Islam is a prime example of this.
Cultural confidence, not xenophobia.
The Brits once had cultural confidence...but it wasnt combined with xenophobia. They were very interested in other cultures and peoples. But they didnt abandon their beliefs, or adopt moral or cultural relativism/equivalence.
Zenster, you raise good points, but what was the Roman Empire, if not tribalism? The only people at the top were Roman citizens (the tribe) and then everyone else. Also, I would recommend you study the nature of tribalism in Europe. It differs greatly from African Tribalism. Christianity didn't lead to a rise from Tribalism, it sent the growing and advancing cultures of Europe into a Dark Age of fear, chaos, and purging. All other points are beyond the realm of these comments.
EV, I do, in fact, understand the concept of Original Sin. I, however, reject it as Truth. You are correct in that man is imperfectable, but that is because man is already perfect. Man is the way the gods created him, and his animal nature is as much a virtue as a vice. It is beyond good and evil. I find it odd, though, that like all Christians who insist your god is perfect, that his supposedly greatest creation is imperfect. You create a paradox, for how can perfection create something imperfect? There are three answers; either man is a perfect creation from a perfect creator, man is an imperfect creation from an imperfect creator, or a perfect creator created an imperfect creation. If it is indeed the third option, tell me, why would a God of Good, do something that leads to interminable suffering on the part of his creation? That sounds rather "evil" to me.
In hoc signo vinces
@Zenster,
Are the political elites not tribal in character, looking to islam as the power structure to rule over the West?
As for this comment,
"Try to imagine any of Europe's great nation states functioning if its royalty treated every person, object and resource, as African tribal leaders do, as a personal possession."
Every person as a personal possession, that is exactly the state of slavery workfare will reduce a large section of the British population to.
As for my playing in the kiddie pool, I find that rather unlikely. Btw, there isn't 10,000 years of Christian and Jewish philosophy. I've studied Judaism. It is very different from Christianity, and is often its antithesis. As for my own religion, its very roots can be traced back beyond the origins of Judaism, indeed to the very origins of humanity. Seems if we are pulling out chronological yardsticks, mine's a bit bigger.
I have learned the hard way. I have learned well.
I also do understand the distinction between Pursuing Happiness and Obtaining Happiness. That said, I do not change my view, as it is based on that understanding. How do I understand it? Because the Founders of America based this nation on European Thought, which is based in the ancient beliefs of the Germanic, Norse, Greek, Roman, and Celtic tribes from their Pagan and Heathen days before the Eastern Cross did begin its war on Freedom and other Gods.
You say that Evil is the cohort of Free Will. Funny, there is another religion that says that; Islam.
To which I have only one response:
I am Free as My Gods an Goddesses Made Me! If that Makes Me Evil, Then So Be It! Burn Me In Your Hell! In What Ever Place Of Damnation You Have! I Am The Son Of Free Men! I Will Live As A Free Man Of My People! I Will Fight As A Free Man! If Freedom Of Choice, Which My Nations Are Based Upon Is Evil, Then We Will Be Evil! But If I Am To Burn In Hell, Than I Shall Do It Laughing, Knowing That I Lived Free And Well And Mocking Whatever Divine Being Sent Me There, Because I Will Have Sent His Sheep To Slaughter When They Sent Me To The Afterlife!
I know the measure of my life and I am proud of it, be it Evil or not. I think no matter what lies after, I can be proud and strong in the face of whatever lies beyond.
Can you say the same, EV? Because it sounds as if you have given up free will. And if you do not have the freedom of choice, can you say you are alive?
Christianity is Judaism.
But alas...
Good Luck with your foolishness NorseAlchemist. In your Man as Perfection folly, there is no reason to better yourself. Just act like a complete caveman....PERFECT!
Human Regression, its all the rage.
You can banish labeling things Evil, but that doesnt make them Not-Evil. You arent the first to try to banish Evil, in fact the Western Left is currently trying to do so. And Evil is walking all over good people.
You will continue your folly, no doubt.
, it sent the growing and advancing cultures of Europe into a Dark Age of fear, chaos, and purging. --- NorseAlchemist
This is just plain false.
Christianity drug a bunch of primitives out of the jungle. The Dark Ages were brought about by the European Barbarians being the only authority left after they helped the fall of the Roman Empire.
Here is your basic Norseman circa 400 AD...
http://www.moonbattery.com/amazon-savages.jpg
It was the Roman Catholic Church who guided and cajoled those primitives, which eventually turned Europe into the powerhouse of learning, science, exploration, technological advancement that it became.
I know that the Christianity is the reason for the Dark Ages, Big Lie, is widely held...as it is propagated by those who are hostile to Christianity, which mainly congregate on the Western Left. They have marched through the education institutions.
But you should know better than that. But, then again, ignorant bigots are a dime a dozen.
EV, I am astounded. Truly.
Talk to Any Jewish Person, living or dead, and they will tell you that Christianity Is Not Judaism.
And you say I am foolish?
You say the "barbarians" caused the Fall of Rome, but this is not true. Rome stood strong, but in about a hundred years of Christianity rising as The State Religion, Western Rome had Collapsed. There have been works on this site that talk about how it was Islam, Not the Germanic Tribes, that truly ended the Roman Empire in both East and West.
Also, read a history book. The Germanic and Celtic tribes were not half naked savages, as your rather, dare I say, racist picture implies. They were a thriving and vibrant culture, that could forge steel and make beautiful pieces of jewelry, have a written language (which many were literate in) and had concepts of freedom, equality, and rights that wouldn't be seen in Christianity until just a few hundred years ago as Christianity Weakened. (but your view that such things are evil probably contributes to your negative view of the proud ancestors of Europeans).
Oh, and btw, there were no jungles in Europe. Also, How much of Latin America is Christian? A lot. Look how that's working out down there. Many African Nations are now Christian. I'm sure my foolish, Heathen, Evil mind just fails to spot the shining Christian Utopias.
So I will continue in my Perfection Foolishness. I am perfect, and that perfection is drawn from me like steel from a forge. Look at Pagan European Societies, like Rome, Greece, and the Germanic and Celtic tribes. They constantly made themselves better and stronger and produced wonders.
But, I suppose, the big world of freedom is scary. It isn't for everyone. I guess we know where you choose to live EV. Have fun there, perhaps someday my Gods will take pity on you and show you how the world really is, and who your people really are.
It's long past tea for European and American cultures to shrug off White Man's Burden™ and set about obtaining some genuine clarification regarding where the blame really lies for so much of this world's problems. --- Zenster
Indeed.
Instead you have Scandanavian Neo Pagans pointing the finger at Christian Civilization, joining the cavalcade of accusers and victimized finger pointers.
Mindboggling.
You are right EV.
It is so much better to live under a system of religious totalitarianism that insists women are second class citizens who tempt men to sin and damned the whole of humanity. That hunts down and suppresses philosophy, science, religion, freedom of expression and will, individuality, sexuality, and everything else western civilization is based on.
A religion that kills the "morally undesirable" like adultery, magic, paganism, heathenism, and many other paths in life outside of its dogma.
That is truly the way to live. Here, let me give praise to Jesus Christ....oh, wait....
I think I just describe Islam. Funny, they sound so alike. My bad. You know, I must have miss understood. Christianity is a religion of Peace, Love, and Salvation.
Hmm, wonder where I heard that before...
Christianity is Messianic Judaism....which is Mainstream Judaism, all the sects of Jews have Messianic Prophecy central to them.
Figure it out.
I have. Studied Judaism (orthodox) for six years, and messianic Judaism for another three before that.
By The Way...someone forgot to tell the Jews.
They don't seem to be Christians to me.
In fact they persecute Christians in Israel.
Christianity, Islam...2 peas in a pod.
Brilliant!
Even Dawkins has given up on that one.
By all means, hold your ancient Norse Mythology dear, do not forget it and celebrate it, but this anti Christianism is self defeating.
BTW, I took an elective class on Norse Mythology, at Uni.
Love it. Great stuff.
Post a Comment