As Ex Cathedra has said before, all those name-changes were part of a larger Cultural Marxist push to delegitimize everything done by Evil White Male Capitalists (aka Western Civilization) up til the 60's when Light Shone In The Darkness, and to make the EWMC's internalize that message of shame by altering their acceptable speech --and thought-- patterns. I don't go out of my way to insult people --unless they deserve it-- but I gave up having my speech patterns corrected by people who hate me. Know wha'am sayin'?
The funniest line, from National Treasure Jesse "Hymietown--I Wanna Cut Off Obama's Balls--Thank God Those Aren't Black Teens Following Me" Jackson. Explaining why they need to be called African Americans even though they (and all their ancestors since at least 1820) have been born here.
"If a chicken is born in the oven," Jackson said, "that doesn't make it a biscuit."To show you how far I have come, back in the 70's I would have voted for him for President. Really. I had to settle for Jimmy Carter.
2 comments:
Who could have predicted that with a view to the ideal "With malice toward none" the white heteronormative male would become the shadow-bearing "none"? ... Karma-shifting needs malice.
And yet how surprising that any white males become "conservative" at all -- since the liberal white male is in no way in the crosshairs of malice or hatred for haters. One is a white male only qua Republican, low-class white Christian, Creationist, orientation-changer, etc. Simply saying that oppression and exploitation etc in the Western world was wrong is enough to exculpate all one's karmic guilt -- except on the further fringes of "radical" blogging, etc. No anti-colonialist academic demands the removal of all white hetero males from academe.
The "progressive" white male is in a way an honourary subaltern. ... Abraham Lincoln was a white male when he spoke of his confidence that blacks are not culturally the equal of whites, but not really a white male when he condemn'd slavery.
Is mere allergicness to bogusness the motive for rejecting the progressive "calling for social change" escape from inheritance. If the standard-issue angry lower-middle-class white male is going to bear all the rejected karma (and certainly "he has no beauty so that our progressive eyes can look upon him in value-free theoria"), why prefer to become such a Christ?
Formerly in order to accept free remission of sins, one had to put forth a lot of effort -- while also crediting all that effort to inspiration by the holy Spirit, the sacraments of the Church, etc. For instance, Luther says following John 6:29, faith is the work that saves, and walking this walk of faith without trusting in moral efforts of goodness as meriting salvation is a very difficult path. Catholics who eschew'd religious life (sc religion is poverty, obedience, chastity [real chastity, not mere marital chastity]) had to accept that tons of time in purgatory was the result. Any and all suffering could be "offer'd up" for this or that deceased relative in purgatory -- and one hoped that one's own future sufferings in purgatory would be off set by sufferings offer'd up by younger relatives.
But now one only needs to declare that Western civilization has been a system of oppression, and the only good things within the West are protests against the West (the RCC is wrong qua RCC, but right qua protest movement against border-based citizenship).
It's as if in Christian faith one simply said "Thanks, Jesus!" for His salvific atoning suffering, and one went about one's worldly business serving Mammon, building bigger barns, sending one's children to the right schools so that they could have affluent careers as money changers in the temple, etc.
Admittedly, the lower-middle-class white heteronormative male isn't innocent. (Girard is wrong about that: the victim isn't innocent, though the victim is surely a ninny [cognate terms].) So making him the sacrificial chump isn't offensive.
Meanwhile the Democratic president has bail'd out Wall Street and won't "socialize" "health" "care" except in ways that increase income to the medical-industrial complex, and the flowering of armaments continues without accounting (without karmic reckoning).
And the protest culture leaders are okay with this. I saw recently in the NYT that pop music composers (owners of copyright in the capitalist system) will sue Republicans, not Democrats, for using their music as rallying tunes. Because Democrats support social change and cultural Marxism.
Actually, to our lower-middle-class white male karma-bearing chump, we don't even say "Thanks, Jesus!" and go about our merry karma-denying ways and means. We do those things while we revile him, without even conceding that he bears our stripes and transgressions (Isaiah 53). But it is his guilt to indignantly deny his "white privilege" and "male privilege" (plus also cis-privilege, hetero privilege, etc) -- even in the description "negatively privileged" used of old by social scientists.
Post a Comment