ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, June 16, 2013

Rejecting the Lie

A few people, both sympathetic and otherwise, have asked me why I am willing to hold and defend such controversial and upsetting opinions as I have done of late.  And providing more evidence that rabbits simply do not have the capacity to understand not-rabbits, the SFWA is absolutely rife with various theories concerning my supposed mental instability.

After all, who but a deranged lunatic would think to challenge the received wisdom of the warren's long-accepted consensus goodthink?

As it happens, the reason is fairly straightforward.  If you will not stand up for the truth when pressed, you will not stand up for the Truth when persecuted.  Now, I may be wrong about the process of civilizational development and the extended period of time I believe it requires to fully transform tribes of primitive savages into an advanced and civilized culture; I have no problem changing my mind when a compelling case contra my position has been made.  I have, as the regulars here know, done precisely that with regards to free trade and open borders, among other things.  But I have not seen one single person, not one, even attempt to demonstrate that I am incorrect in any way.

I've seen rants, I've seen outrage, I've seen anger, I've seen insults, and I've seen assertions that certain subjects are beyond debate. What I have not seen is anyone make a case, let alone a coherent or compelling one, that opposes the logic and observations I have presented.  This is because the Lie cannot compete with the Truth, it can only attempt to obscure it and silence those who dare to speak it.

But the Lie never wins in the end.  The ongoing controversy somehow reminded me of this passage from Panzer Commander, a war memoir written by one of Rommel's favorite officers, Col. Hans von Luck, which I found moving in the way it showed how even enemies at war can find common ground in the light of the Truth.  More importantly, it shows how even a rage that burns hotter and more violently than the rage of the SFWA's delusional members cannot destroy the hunger of the human spirit for truth and Truth alike.

"Smolensk looked as though it had been abandoned. Destruction in the industrial quarters and of the bridges over the Dnieper was immense. In the midst of the ruins, Smolensk cathedral pointed to the sky. It appeared largely unharmed. I followed the women and the old men and as I entered the cathedral, was deeply impressed by its beauty. It looked intact. The altar was adomed; burning candles and many icons richly embellished with gold bathed the interior in a festive light.

As I went up to the altar with my companions, an old man, poorly dressed and with a flowing beard, spoke to me in broken German.

“Gospodin officer, I am a pope who used to preach here before the Lenin-Stalin era; I have been in hiding now for many years, scraping a living as a shoemaker. Now you have liberated our city. May I say a first mass in this cathedral?”


“How is it,” I asked, “that your cathedral is in such good condition?” His answer surprised me. America in tsarist times bought the church and all its treasures “Immediately after the Revolution, Russians who had emigrated from the Russians who, at the time, were in urgent need of American dollars. The cathedral is American property, which is why everything is-almost-unchanged.” 


I have never been able to verify his statement, but it was not very important to me. Without referring to HQ, I gave the pope permission to celebrate mass the next day, for which he wanted to bring in an additional pope.

The following day, I went to Smolensk again, having informed the divisional commander in the meantime; as a precaution, I took along an armored patrol.


The sight that met our eyes when we arrived was breathtaking.


The square in front of the cathedral was full of people moving slowly toward the entrance. With my orderly officer, I jostled my way forward. Already, there was not a corner left in the cathedral in which people were not standing, sitting, or kneeling. We remained standing to one side to avoid disturbing the service by our presence.


I was not familiar with the Russian Orthodox ritual, but the ceremony that now began drew me more and more under its spell.


Invisible behind the altar, one of the two popes began with a monotone chant, which was answered by a choir of eight voices standing in front of the altar. The chanting of the precentor and the choir filled the vast space of the church. The acoustics gave the impression that the chanting came from above, from heaven.


The people fell on their knees and prayed. All had tears in their eyes. For them, it was the first mass for more than twenty years. My companion and I were greatly moved."

In rejecting NK Jemisin's call for reconciliation within the SFWA, I declared there can be no reconciliation between the observant and the delusional.  Still less can there be any compromise between the Truth and the Lie.

The liars can ban the services. They can revoke memberships, they can deny access, they can reject publications, they can close their eyes, and they can put their hands over their ears. But one thing they cannot do is make their lies real.  And sometimes, it is necessary to imitate the marshwiggle, stick one's hand into the fire, and raise a stink capable of penetrating their illusions.

Labels: , ,

84 Comments:

Anonymous Salt June 16, 2013 10:42 AM  

WAGNER: In your mom's speech yesterday, she also said when women participate in the economy, everyone benefits, because there is truly a ripple effect. I mean, it is not just good for to us have gender equity. It is actually beneficial to the GDP.

CHELSEA CLINTON: So when women's participation in the labor force increased from 37 percent in 1970 to 48 percent in 2009, we added more than $2.5 trillion to our GDP, just from women's increased participation. This is not, as my mom frequently says, just the right thing to do. It is the smart thing to do.



The Warren, it reaches far.

Anonymous RC June 16, 2013 11:05 AM  

If you will not stand up for the truth when pressed, you will not stand up for the Truth when persecuted. - VD

Superb.

Anonymous anon123 June 16, 2013 11:11 AM  

Amen

Blogger IM2L844 June 16, 2013 11:21 AM  

Excellent! This dovetails nicely with Luke 16:15 : "Whatsoever is highly esteemed among men is an abomination to God"

Carnal desires and Godly principles often don't mix well.

Anonymous Fidgit June 16, 2013 11:22 AM  

I don't always agree with you (or your posters), but I love that your blog is not the same old dreary trudge through globally-approved memes and talking points.

You're right up there with the Archdruid Report on my "Interesting, Thought-Provoking and Not-Easily-Categorized Blogs" list ;-)

Carry on!

Anonymous Outlaw X June 16, 2013 11:25 AM  

Amazing:

I had a conversation with Big Bro last week and he said this. "Do you really want to know what people are afraid of?" I said yes what are people really afraid of? He said "The truth." It hit me like a hammer. Then he said "people are in denial."

Anonymous righteous gobbler June 16, 2013 11:33 AM  

"What do you want?"

"I want the truth!"

"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

Sometimes wisdom emerges from unlikely places.

Anonymous MendoScot June 16, 2013 11:36 AM  

What business has the light with darkness?

I read that somewhere.

Anonymous Pete June 16, 2013 11:42 AM  

An obvious mistranslation in von Luck's quote. Russian Orthodox don't have "popes". They have a priest who is called "papa" - Father. Like a Roman Catholic priest.

Anonymous MendoScot June 16, 2013 11:45 AM  

Oh, and happy Father's Day Vox and to the rest of the relevant Ilk.

To the others, get cracking.

Blogger GF Dad June 16, 2013 11:47 AM  

Beautiful story and illustrates your point well, but is it a fair to compare believers hungry for corporate worship, a gathering of the body of Christ and the freedom to do that with censorship by the warren?

Anonymous bob k. mando June 16, 2013 11:53 AM  

Pete June 16, 2013 11:42 AM
An obvious mistranslation in von Luck's quote. Russian Orthodox don't have "popes". They have a priest who is called "papa" - Father. Like a Roman Catholic priest.




hey, Pete. you're showing your ignorance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope
The Pope (from Latin: papa; from Greek: πάππας pappas,[1] a child's word for father)


i mean, damn, i'm independent baptist and even i know that.

Anonymous Scintan June 16, 2013 11:58 AM  

The nordic nations would seem to be a pretty good counter to your civilization theories. How do you differentiate them?

Anonymous kh123 June 16, 2013 12:01 PM  

Not that the warren will listen, or find any and all excuses to disregard what's said here.

But it's worth noting that a majority of the Russians, Ukrainians, and most of all the satellite nations, welcomed the Germans in those opening months, "met them in the villages with salt and bread", the women sheltering individual soldiers and in some cases providing them with more than a night's stay (which they'd later serve lengthy prison terms for it as "German bedstraw").

And not because these Russians, Slavic, or Baltic peasants were Nazis themselves; they didn't believe in Aryan superiority, nor were that many people Quislings in their heart of hearts. The Germans had enough sensibility in those opening months, before the arrival of Einsatzgruppen detachments, to appoint or allow the locals as before to be administrative heads, to allow civil functions to continue on - education being one - sans Bolshevism, the farms minus collectivism; and most importantly for the people - the church, without bureaucratic (atheistic) persecution.

Many of these people, if they did not flee with the Germans westward near the end, were either shot or arrested once the Bolsheviks came back onto the scene during liberation. Decades in prison afterwards for the survivors. Including - and sometimes especially - the teachers. For collaborating with the invaders by continuing to live and breathe just as before, in some cases more freely than before.

It is the same old principal of embracing one extreme - any - to counteract the other. Being driven to any arriving Legion as if to liberators, because your own representative ruling party is a suffocating corpse intent on your destruction.

Anonymous kh123 June 16, 2013 12:07 PM  

...I should probably add: Not a majority per se, but not an inconsiderable number of former Soviets dropped the Bolshevism when they could and welcomed the Nazis. This applies to military as well, those captured or those who simply dropped their weapons the moment their political commissars were killed.

Anonymous Daniel June 16, 2013 12:08 PM  

If there was anything I could do to stand beside you in this, I would, but that is clearly and totally superfluous. Instead, I offer only prayers that the Truth endure, which is, in one sense, equally superfluous.

Anonymous VD June 16, 2013 12:20 PM  

The nordic nations would seem to be a pretty good counter to your civilization theories. How do you differentiate them?

They're not. Do you really think someone who grew up in Minnesota wouldn't know about the process of civilization developing in Scandinavia? They came to it later than the English or the Germans!

Lars Walker has a whole series of fantasy novels concerning an Irish priest introducing Christianity to Norway.

Blogger tz June 16, 2013 12:23 PM  

The more important thing is the exposure. For all the writing about vampires, the authors can't stand any sunlight. Those who want to write the rules of their fictional universe are unwilling to abide by similar rules they write to conduct their organizations.

They are stuck because to achieve what they want, the rules would have to be unfair, unjust, capricious, and otherwise clearly abominable. But any proper and fair set of rules would come down on the opponents and detractors worse than on the alleged perpetrators.

It doesn't require exceptional intelligence to fight injustice, merely exceptional fortitude in the defense of the truth.

There are many both more and less intelligent than me, but that is almost irrelevant. The critical question is whether you have honor and integrity. Only such is worthy of respect.

Liberty will tolerate a lot of evil, but tyranny cannot tolerate even a small good when it exposes the oppression and injustice for what it is.

Mordred's fatal blow to Camelot was exposing Guinevere's adultery. Arthur made the law making adultery a capital crime, so it was kill the queen or kill the law. Laws should show respect for our fallen nature even when they are just - there should be room for mercy as every one of us needs it in vast quantities from the judge of the universe.

The SWFA now has a choice. They can either return to reason and justice (which may be with or without mercy), or become a petty tyranny whose dictator is Gamma Rabbit.

The SWFA makes for a nice microcosm of the debate about why Africa can't seem to get its act together.

The choice must come from the will. Traditional wisdom notes that truth, beauty, righteousness, justice, happiness (not pleasure or contentment, though they follow) and prosperity are a package deal. You can't choose truth but evil, righteousness and injustice, prosperity and lies. Reality is not a cafeteria. Peter Kreeft notes both the Demons and we are insane since we know that choosing truth and doing the right thing will bring about the best result, but we choose the alternative - sometimes when there is no pressure or suffering involved in the right choice.

Anonymous Scintan June 16, 2013 12:24 PM  

They came to it later than the English or the Germans!

Of course they did. That's the point I was making.

Anonymous Glossy June 16, 2013 12:26 PM  

"But the Lie never wins in the end."

Not true. People love telling themselves comforting fairy tales. It's the human default. A desire to look for uncomfortable truths is a very rare exception. At any point in time most of what's believed by most people can be classified as self-serving lies. If the end comes tomorrow (an asteroid strike, a nuclear war), it will catch us mostly believing in lies.

I'm rooting for Vox in his battles with N.K. Jemisin, PZ Myers, etc., but Vox's religious belief looks like wishful thinking to me, like a comforting lie that he's told himself. And I'm sure that I myself believe in some self-serving lies to which I'm blind. As I said, it's the human default. "The lie never wins in the end" - that phrase itself seems like a comforting lie to me. Wouldn't it be nice if THAT were true?

Blogger Lovekraft June 16, 2013 12:28 PM  

When one searches for, say, good sci-fi books to read, they should do some basic research. Look up respected sources for recommendations. This site is one such example of a source that gives one a better understanding of how the world works today.

Of course, sheeple will flock on masse to whatever Ophah and New York Times pushes, but I think, as stated in this blog installment, the best will eventually be recognized.

Anonymous Godfrey June 16, 2013 12:31 PM  

"But one thing they cannot do is make their lies real." - VD


Man wars against reality, but reality is unmoved.

Happiness is living in harmony with reality.

Anonymous kh123 June 16, 2013 12:32 PM  

""The lie never wins in the end" - that phrase itself seems like a comforting lie to me. Wouldn't it be nice if THAT were true?"

Seems no more a comforting statement than saying that gravity will win out over flapping arms.

Anonymous Scintan June 16, 2013 12:35 PM  

When one searches for, say, good sci-fi books to read, they should do some basic research. Look up respected sources for recommendations. This site is one such example of a source that gives one a better understanding of how the world works today.

Once you get beyond a basic writing proficiency, the rest is personal preference. All the recommendations in the history of literature don't mean a thing if Heinlein isn't your cup of tea.

Anonymous Gen. Kong June 16, 2013 12:38 PM  

Very eloquent. As Solzhenitsyn stated: Live not by lies! The thing I've noticed about those who reside in the warren of lies is their quite fanatical devotion to their lies - their precious, so to speak. These folks make the wildest Musloid whirling dervish look like a slacker. There is literally no limit to what they will do, who or how many they will kill, to keep feeding their insatiable lie.

Anonymous VD June 16, 2013 12:38 PM  

Of course they did. That's the point I was making.

And how do you think that contradicts anything? They came into contact with civilization later and they became civilized later. Exactly as one would expect.

Anonymous VD June 16, 2013 12:40 PM  

Vox's religious belief looks like wishful thinking to me, like a comforting lie that he's told himself.

Not in the slightest. You think it is comforting? I never wanted to believe. I'm a hedonist by nature. The Light burns with a fire that is hotter than any Hell.

Anonymous Glossy June 16, 2013 12:42 PM  

"Seems no more a comforting statement than saying that gravity will win out over flapping arms."

The average person believes in his own lies. He's convinced himself. He thinks he says the truth. When the average person says "the lie never wins in the end", he means that his own beliefs, most of which aren't true, most of which are equivalent to flapping arms, will win in the end.

Anonymous kh123 June 16, 2013 12:49 PM  

"most of which aren't true"

And how does one determine this.

Blogger IM2L844 June 16, 2013 12:51 PM  

"The lie never wins in the end" - that phrase itself seems like a comforting lie to me. Wouldn't it be nice if THAT were true?

Seems like the ultimate truth to me. If it's not true, I'll be no worse off than anyone else in "the end". If it is true, I could be vastly better off in "the end".

It's cost me nothing to place my bet. We'll see.

Anonymous Glossy June 16, 2013 12:56 PM  

I mean, it depends on what we mean by the truth winning. If a bit of truth about human history, for example, is completely forgotten in favor of a lie, has it lost in the end? I'd say yes. I'm thinking of a situation where the victors in some conflict have written their self-serving version of history and expunged all others. After the passage of a few generations the victors' version is the only one that survives. Both the losers' version and the truth (which may or may not have lied in the middle) have been lost. No amount of effort will recover it, ever. I'm sure this has happened a million times.

Anonymous DCM June 16, 2013 12:56 PM  


Bravo

Anonymous Matthew June 16, 2013 12:59 PM  

"I'm thinking of a situation where the victors in some conflict have written their self-serving version of history and expunged all others. After the passage of a few generations the victors' version is the only one that survives."

E.g. what we think we know about the Spartans derives almost entirely from their enemies.

Anonymous Steveo June 16, 2013 1:06 PM  

Well said...
and here's to the ilk of the Father's type.

Anonymous Scintan June 16, 2013 1:07 PM  

And how do you think that contradicts anything? They came into contact with civilization later and they became civilized later. Exactly as one would expect.

Because it still took them less time than it took the Brits and Germans.

Blogger Glossy June 16, 2013 1:07 PM  

Glossy: "most of which aren't true"

kh123: "And how does one determine this."

Well, let's take religions. I don't think that any one of them holds a worldwide majority right now. Regardless of who you think is right (Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists), you will think that more than 50% of humans are wrong on this issue.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza June 16, 2013 1:21 PM  

There is no war because the truth has already won.

Also, people are jealous of SB: she is an examples of faith, honor, beauty and intelligence.

Honor and truth are lost arts but honor, truth and beauty will win.

Blogger El Borak June 16, 2013 1:41 PM  

VD: Now, I may be wrong about the process of civilizational development and the extended period of time I believe it requires to fully transform tribes of primitive savages into an advanced and civilized culture...I have not seen one single person, not one, even attempt to demonstrate that I am incorrect in any way.

I began one in the original "A Black Female Fantasist" thread, though admittedly it was late so you probably didn't see it. My understanding of your argument (please correct me if I'm wrong) that your argument has been that because it took 10 centuries for the Brits and Germans to become civilized once they were exposed to it, we should not expect (and cannot believe) that it would happen in half the time for Africans.

While I agree that it takes a long time (and in the case of Brits and Germans, I'll accept your thousand years), let me propose a couple factors whereby that time might be shortened or lengthened:

1) immersion in a culture rather than living on its edge. One of the reasons that the Brits took so long to become Romans is that they lived in the edge of civilization and not in it. They were not wholly cut off from the source of their uncivilization and so could retreat to Scotland to sing in their native tongue and paint their asses blue. An African, forcibly removed across the ocean, broken via whip, given a new language, and sold to a family in Missouri, is wholly cut off from those influences. Hell, my African kids (I have 2) are almost indistinguishable in actions and attitudes from my French/Polish kids and my German/Irish ones precisely because they've been cut off from their uncivilized family.

2) Force of arms or direction of government. Say what you like about Peter the Great, but there can be no doubt that Russia after him had made incredible strides toward European-style civilization. It took so few years because he directed it by force. Russia is a nation (if we believe them to be coivilized) made the change in less than 1000 years, and using punctuated equilibria, for lack of a better cliche.

3) Continuity of exposure. The Brits (45ad to ~383) and the Germans (starting ~12bc and lasting only until Teutenburg Forest (9 ad?)) had exposure, but it was not necessarily long-term, and was broken by a long interregnum in which barbarism reigned fully. It is very hard to argue that German in 1000ad was civilized because in 12bc they were exposed to Roman civilization. There are lots and lots of other factors, including invasions into Rome and missionaries from it that are better causal factors for why some Germans were building arched bridges and speaking Latin in the 11th century.

So all that said, I think we can agree that there are a number of factors that can speed or slow the growth of civilization within a culture. If that's the case, the argument that it takes 1000 years, or even did in 2 specific cases, does not necessarily apply to other cultures with different circumstances. This is not to argue that Africans are civilized, but that the clock by itself is not necessarily evidence against it.

Anonymous bw June 16, 2013 1:49 PM  

..the day is coming when you will not worship on this mountain or that mountain...but in Spirit and Truth

Anonymous Will Best June 16, 2013 2:07 PM  

The problem in the US is in the 1960's we stopped discriminating against blacks and started discriminating against whites. Between that and the social safety nets the steady progress being made in the black communities came to a halt, and has even retreated some. If the Government would have left well enough alone Blacks would be fully integrated sometime this century probably in the first half of it.

OT

If I see any more happy Father's Day to single mothers doing it all I think I am going to vomit.

Blogger El Borak June 16, 2013 2:10 PM  

Germans (starting ~12bc and lasting only until Teutenburg Forest (9 ad?)) had exposure

This is badly stated on my part. The German exposure was of course longer than 20 years. That was the period during which Rome actively attempted to rule over the Germans, by extension trying to make them into Romans. One can see in Tacitus' Germania that more than a century later the Romans were still studying the Germans, though very few of the Germans were becoming civilized (or taking on Roman vices, in Tacitus' opinion). By ~400, the Germans had taken on enough of those vices to kill Rome. But your average German, even after 4 centuries, would never be confused with your average Roman.

Anonymous Glossy June 16, 2013 2:17 PM  

I think that blacks have had LOTS of exposure to civilization throughout history. Their failure to pick it up is damning.

The ancient Egyptians dealt with the Nubians since the earliest times. In 3000 BC, 2000 BC, 1000 BC more blacks than nordics lived just outside a leading center of civilization. The areas that are now Ethiopia, Sudan, Somalia were as far outside the Roman Empire as most of Germany, Scandinavia, Eastern Europe. The Arabs, starting before 1000 AD, had colonies all over the east coast of Africa. Western Europeans started setting up colonies in West Africa in the 15th century. The failure of blacks to pick up civilization from others is a running theme throughout written history.

The most famous example of meteoric, lightning-speed pick-up is Japan. Of course, being smart, the Japanese already had a civilization of their own when that happened. All they had to do was learn foreign science and technology. In the spheres of government, interpersonal relations and art they were already civilized through a combination of their own efforts and borrowing from China.

Blogger El Borak June 16, 2013 2:24 PM  

All they had to do was learn foreign science and technology...

Which brings up an interesting question: what are the attributes that make up civilization? I don't necessarily want to delve into the subjective sciences here, but if we are going to say that England is civilized and Syria is not, we ought to have some sort of objective metric by which to justify that.

Rule of law is certainly a huge factor. Literature, including a written language and an accurate recorded history, ought to follow. The Arts must be included. Perhaps technology must be or perhaps not. Monotheistic (or at least not animistic) religion? Just as the Romans would disagree with us on what makes a man civilized, so would the 17th C Japanese disagree with both.

I think the Japanese were civilized, though not really knowing Asian history I'm open to correction. But throwing their culture so quickly into modern technology had some very barbaric results. Same is true of the Germans, imo.

Anonymous Anonagain June 16, 2013 2:28 PM  

Now you have liberated our city. May I say a first mass in this cathedral?”

While Truth may never be extinguished, it can certainly be suppressed. Note the circumstances under which Truth was finally allowed to be expressed.

Shit happens, Truth must be fought for.

Anonymous charles June 16, 2013 2:30 PM  

Aaslaaaaaan!

(Loved the marshwiggle reference; here quoting from the BBC version)

Anonymous Wanderer June 16, 2013 2:32 PM  

I have read that book and also noticed that passage.

I wonder when people will start thinking about the NSDAP and reject the distracting name NAZIs and the propaganda that continually spouted by certain groups.

Anonymous Glossy June 16, 2013 2:38 PM  

I see civilization as a continuum. It would be stupidly arbitrary to draw a line anywhere on that continuum in order to say that everything to the right of that line is civilization and everything to the left of it is barbarism. But I think that most unbiased observers, when presented with two random societies, would know which one is more civilized than the other, which one is further away from absolute barbarism on a continuum.

Blogger IM2L844 June 16, 2013 2:57 PM  

Why is it the very cake eaters who insist that science has proven beyond any reasonable doubt that humans are nothing more than another highly successful species of animal also refuse to admit humans can be sub-categorized in the same manner as all other animals of the same species are with various inherent physiological as well as psychogenic attributes and predispositions? And why isn't it blatantly obvious to everyone that this is precisely the situation?

It's really, really simple. You can't have your cake and eat it too! Either humans are more than just animals or they're not. Pick one and stick with it.

Anonymous Stickwick June 16, 2013 2:58 PM  

If I see any more happy Father's Day to single mothers doing it all I think I am going to vomit.

Relevant to this and to today's topic, I notice more than one mainstream media outlet acknowledging Father's Day by showing a black father (see Google's main page for an example). Don't know whether this is supposed to be encouragement or just wishful thinking, but either way it's rather silly to acknowledge a special day for dads by highlighting a group of men who are failing to participate in fatherhood in record numbers.

Anonymous Cheddarman June 16, 2013 3:05 PM  

The only sacrament for the delusional is the sword!

Sincerely,

Earl Ragnar Cheddarman

Anonymous Wanderer June 16, 2013 3:14 PM  

Christians are only useful to Hollywood in order to get their money?

Anonymous Huckleberry - est. 1977 June 16, 2013 3:26 PM  

The problem, well one of them, is that everyone here is assuming that it's just the SWPLs/SFWAs of the matter are simply too stupid and too overly emotional to see the facts as they are, because they don't want to admit there is a bug in the system.
The "bug", the trifling little issue of the obliteration of Western Civilization, is a feature of the plan.
They're not pissed because because VD has the audacity to dismantle multicultural orthodoxy. They're pissed because he's threatening their clean getaway.
It's like a thief with a prized diamond under his shirt, and he's almost out the front door, and here's VD suddenly alerting the rest of the house to the fact that the diamond's gone missing and the thief may still be in the room, and its probably that shifty looking bastard inching toward the front door.
The guilty are the ones who most vociferously protest.

Anonymous Anonagain June 16, 2013 3:28 PM  

Leftists are allergic to the truth and will break out all over in lies. Continued exposure to truth will make them rabid and violent.

Anonymous Jack Amok June 16, 2013 3:34 PM  

Now, I may be wrong about the process of civilizational development and the extended period of time I believe it requires to fully transform tribes of primitive savages into an advanced and civilized culture...I have not seen one single person, not one, even attempt to demonstrate that I am incorrect in any way.

Well, I suppose I disagree with Vox's 1000 year requirement, but I'm not terribly moved to disprove it or attempt to put together a coherent counter theory. Primarily because whatever disagreement I may have with how civilization happens, Vox and I are in strong agreement that at the moment there are significant segments of society that are not adequately civilized and pretending they are is incredibly, stupidly, dangerous.

But perhaps it's worth exploring a counter theory anyway, since ultimately our problems today stem from failing to understand the process of civilizing not just other people, but our own children.

Anonymous kh123 June 16, 2013 3:39 PM  

" you will think that more than 50% of humans are wrong on this issue."

Depending on the subject at hand and to varying degrees, a higher percentage than that I can assure you, much of that within one's own denomination. How does one come to those differing conclusions though.

Blogger "1951" June 16, 2013 4:24 PM  

If the truth is racist, an honest man must be racist as well.

Anonymous Just_Michael June 16, 2013 4:25 PM  

VD,..

Your blog is much more interesting than typical when you make commentary about current events in your typical, non typical manner. (even when I disagree with you)

But all of this emphasis on vendettas from some obscure, writers fraternity leave most people cold.

Sorry to be such a wet blanket, but with the exception of maybe a dozen people, nobody cares.

You're limiting the potential of both yourself and this blog by devoting so much attention to such nonsense.

Anonymous VD June 16, 2013 4:44 PM  

You're limiting the potential of both yourself and this blog by devoting so much attention to such nonsense.

Do you have any idea how often I hear that about pretty much every subject I address? I used to hear that all the time about Game. Now it's a reasonably trafficked blog in its own right.

I just write about whatever I feel like writing about at the moment. Sometimes it's important. Sometimes it's petty. It's what it is.

Anonymous Catan June 16, 2013 4:55 PM  

But perhaps it's worth exploring a counter theory anyway, since ultimately our problems today stem from failing to understand the process of civilizing not just other people, but our own children.

Well, the problem with our children is simple: Parents have bought the leftist myth that humans are 'good natured at heart' and so all you have to do to raise a good child is puff up their self-esteem and give them what they desire.


Blogger RobertT June 16, 2013 4:59 PM  

A saying that's pretty popular with politicians is, "Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the trainload." That worked against me when I found myself up against the msm, but in your situation, it could work in your favor. They may paint you like a dork, but you're a formidable opponent - you're intelligent, you have a powerful blogging network, you're telling the truth and you will never - ever - back - down. The best defense is a shot to the mouth - sudden irrational violence. Sooner or later, these dweebs will quit screwing with you.

Anonymous John Strong June 16, 2013 5:01 PM  

This certainly helps me to understand what you're trying to accomplish. And thank you for the German's account. That was very moving.

Blogger RobertT June 16, 2013 5:07 PM  

"You're limiting the potential of both yourself and this blog..."

VD isn't limiting his potential. He's seeking his potential. People who cower in the shadows limit their potential. Too many people go through life cowering in the shadows, seeking peace at any price. Think of VD as Churchill, think of yourself as Chamberlain.

Anonymous fnn June 16, 2013 5:22 PM  

I've seen rants, I've seen outrage, I've seen anger, I've seen insults, and I've seen assertions that certain subjects are beyond debate. What I have not seen is anyone make a case, let alone a coherent or compelling one, that opposes the logic and observations I have presented.

That's the way the Israel Firsters behave in this thread.

Anonymous Anonymous June 16, 2013 5:36 PM  

@ PETE 1142 AM

joetexx here:

Von Luck's use of 'pope' is not a mistranslation. 'Pope' is a direct, literal translation of 'papa'.

It's a poor translation because the extreme literalism confuses. In Western languages including German 'pope' refers to a single individual, the Roman pontiff. It's possible the mistake is due to Von Luck's English translator.

The use of the term 'mass' is an out-and-out error. No Eastern Orthodox Eucharist is a Mass. This refers specifically to the Western Roman rite and is named from the dismissal or 'missa' at the end of the service.

A valid Orthodox Eucharist is a 'liturgy'.

Blogger IM2L844 June 16, 2013 5:38 PM  

with the exception of maybe a dozen people, nobody cares.

I'm curious to know the fundament for this assertion.

Anonymous tiarosa June 16, 2013 6:00 PM  

So, more are upset about Vox's "racism" than his "misogony?"

Anonymous wcu June 16, 2013 6:11 PM  

I concur...its usually the male or female who is raising the most hell who is guilty of the crime...especially if they are black

Anonymous Cruel to be kind June 16, 2013 6:13 PM  

"The problem in the US is in the 1960's we stopped discriminating against blacks and started discriminating against whites. Between that and the social safety nets the steady progress being made in the black communities came to a halt, and has even retreated some. If the Government would have left well enough alone Blacks would be fully integrated sometime this century probably in the first half of it."

Those are some good points. My observations are that native/1st generation Africans are more civilized than American blacks by and large. They speak their native tongue and have pretty strong family units that are traditional in nature which binds them into a distinct culture instead of the ghetto mess that many American blacks subscribe to. Logically it appears homogeneity encourages civilizational development among the different racial groups. VD had a post awhile back with a study that proved diversity was bad for communities. Diversity weakens civilizational development as clay mixed with iron - Daniel 2:43

Anonymous Ctbk June 16, 2013 6:56 PM  

When you combine two elements to make an alloy the two or more elements are already very similar in structure thereby combining their good qualities leads to a strengthening of each other but when the elements in a compound are dissimilar it produces weakness instead.

Anonymous Preacher June 16, 2013 8:10 PM  

A word to the discerning Christian white male...

"That is the wisdom of God, spiritual wisdom that a father is supposed to teach his son, is able to deliver you from the strange woman. Well what does the word strange mean? Foreign. Why do you have to worry about a foreign woman? Because she's away from home. Well what does that mean? Well she's away from her husband, she's away from her family, she's away from her friends, she's away from accountability and so being...she's the out‑of‑town woman, if you will. And it's real easy for her to act any way she wants because the constraints are off. You beware of that roaming woman who is away from the point of her responsibility. Beware of the adulteress who flatters with her words, that leaves the companion of her youth...that's her husband...and forgets the covenant of her God...that's her marriage vow." - John MacArthur

And also don't forget the lesson from Solomon because of his many foreign wives.

Anonymous zen0 June 16, 2013 8:54 PM  

Just_Michael passes judgement: Sorry to be such a wet blanket, but with the exception of maybe a dozen people, nobody cares.

You're limiting the potential of both yourself and this blog by devoting so much attention to such nonsense.


Do you not have a pulse?

this is a real-time demonstration of the mechanics of liberal fascism. Once you see the pattern, you will be able to identify it whenever it pops up.

Remain ignorant as you wish. Knowledge is power, not ignorance.

Anonymous Why Rabbits Rage June 16, 2013 9:24 PM  

Sonnet 147 My love is like a fever, longing still

My love is as a fever, longing still
For that which longer nurseth the disease,
Feeding on that which doth preserve the ill,
The uncertain sickly appetite to please.
My reason, the physician to my love,
Angry that his prescriptions are not kept,
Hath left me, and I desperate now approve
Desire is death, which physic did except.
Past cure I am, now reason is past care,
And frantic-mad with evermore unrest;
My thoughts and my discourse as madmen's are,
At random from the truth vainly express'd;
For I have sworn thee fair and thought thee bright,
Who art as black as hell, as dark as night.

Anonymous dh June 16, 2013 10:15 PM  

VD, in your theory of civilization then, is the idea of race primary or secondary? Meaning, could two civilizations co-exist even if differing in races, in the same political organization, assuming they were both equally civilized?

I've been thinking on your theory of race relations. I believe, (I supposed, as all leftists must) that the low-classes are inherently different, and yes, less civilized, than the middle and upper classes. I am leftist in that I have no moral or other problem with the low classes being the low classes - living together, hopefully having some sort of productive existence but mostly likely living off the productivity of others, and generally scraping by. I would prefer they rise, but most realistically, staying even with the last generation is the best we can hope for. Do you ignore or discount the possibility that class plays a role in the level of civilization? I suppose this the "Trading Places" question writ large.

I have never thought long on whether the low classes are actually different from the rest of their racial cohorts. Are the relatively few African, black, mulatto, or other minority families with strong traditions of success genetic outliers, cultural outliers, or some mix of the two?

Secondly, I am always highly skeptical of those, including many here, who are convinced that we are a society in net decline, becoming less civilized. I don't think that is necessarily the case. I am concerned about the areas we appear to be backsliding, and also the way in which our culture appears to be falling further, and further behind others. I don't see the areas of decline as that worrying, or all together that dark. I have come to view our present economic situation as worrying, troubling, and a mighty test that we probably will fail.

It probably goes without saying that I don't believe that the United States has a manifest destiny to be great, that there is a real thing called "American Exceptionalism" or that we ever were the greatest civilization. Having our currency devalued, having our military rendered less-effective, and having to clean-up our domestic problems are not, in my view, evidence of decline, but rather, evidence that reality has repegged the country where it should have remained.

Anonymous BoGo June 16, 2013 10:20 PM  

"It would be stupidly arbitrary to draw a line anywhere on that continuum in order to say that everything to the right of that line is civilization and everything to the left of it is barbarism."

Especially since the flagship Western Civilization passes 1.2M of its progeny through the fire to Molech.

Anonymous Holla June 16, 2013 10:24 PM  

Toynbee dispatched your racialist theory of history many years ago.

You're basically a part of a dialectic (modernist infighting) that has been ridiculous for more then a century.

Blogger Brad Andrews June 17, 2013 3:16 AM  

One thing that is often missed is that humanity has been descending since its creation (Adam and Eve). We have learned (relearned?) some technology, but we are not necessarily headed to the scientific paradise seen in Star Trek and such.

Could we build a pyramid to the same specifications today?

OpenID herenvardo June 17, 2013 7:19 AM  

Vox, that post just sang.

Congratulations on being a marsh-wiggle, and being willing to burn your foot! ^__^

Anonymous Steve June 17, 2013 9:38 AM  

"Having our currency devalued, having our military rendered less-effective, and having to clean-up our domestic problems are not, in my view, evidence of decline, but rather, evidence that reality has repegged the country where it should have remained."

Leftist to the very end.

You haven't considered the possibility that we achieved the right stock of people and the right mix of liberalism and conservatism around 1777 and that's the reason behind our meteoric rise (and subsequent decline)?

Look, I know it goes beyond everything you believe in,but isn't it at least possible that a dramatically scaled back form of liberalism,racial homogeneity, and ascetic/simple living is the "progress" you keep talking about? Is it possible that when using your "x marks the spot" approach you have walked about ten paces too far "forward",assuming that "forward" always means "closer"?

OpenID ZT June 17, 2013 9:55 AM  

The part I find fascinating in all this is how many Liberal books and movies talk about dealing with other social groups. My Sociology professor in collage advocated similar dealings with other cultures because it was dangerous to give the various tribes men knives that seemed to never dull while the tribes were still hell bent on using clubs and flint spears to right a wrongs from 20 generations ago. Geography doesn't change the tribes man until he learns to live in that new place. And even then that process will take many generations. Purposeful transitions can speed the process but that is the exception not the rule.

I saw Superman over the weekend and much of the Superman myth follows this line of thinking. The savages are not ready to walk in the sun yet. Superman has technology and power so far beyond the capabilities of the humans yet he loves them, protects them (even from them selves at times) but he lets them learn. When possible he stays out of their way and he is frank in telling them that they are not ready as a society to deal with various technologies and knowledge he has.

OpenID ZT June 17, 2013 10:06 AM  

VD Said:
You're limiting the potential of both yourself and this blog by devoting so much attention to such nonsense.

Do you have any idea how often I hear that about pretty much every subject I address? I used to hear that all the time about Game. Now it's a reasonably trafficked blog in its own right.

I just write about whatever I feel like writing about at the moment. Sometimes it's important. Sometimes it's petty. It's what it is.


Yeah, I still miss all of the World War II and other various war discussion revolving around logistics, politics and the like. But be side you, Nate, possibly Bane, and my self I'm not sure anyone else even cared.

Anonymous dh June 17, 2013 10:33 AM  

You haven't considered the possibility that we achieved the right stock of people and the right mix of liberalism and conservatism around 1777 and that's the reason behind our meteoric rise (and subsequent decline)?

Look, I know it goes beyond everything you believe in,but isn't it at least possible that a dramatically scaled back form of liberalism,racial homogeneity, and ascetic/simple living is the "progress" you keep talking about? Is it possible that when using your "x marks the spot" approach you have walked about ten paces too far "forward",assuming that "forward" always means "closer"?


I am more inclined to believe that we were closer to the ideal in 1777 than we have been in the last 100 years. The US of 1777 was militarily weak, with a weak central government, a weak currency, and a weak union. This is far closer to the liberal ideal than the conservative one of today. The conservative ideal of today has us exporting democracy, invading foreign lands, engaging in a currency war with China, running a centrally controlled currency, and generally acting like we own the planet.

Anonymous Susan June 17, 2013 11:15 AM  

ZT

You would be surprised how many visitors that lurk only and not comment would disagree with you. Check the sitemeter, upper left corner for example. Nate and Bane were just two of the braver souls who took VD and others on, on the subjects you have mentioned. Expert horse beaters both.

I think what I miss most is the quality of the anklebiter trolls from back then. ChuckE and Moron of the Lake and beezlebub were my favorites. Watching the regulars abuse them like a chew toy was high entertainment. The trolls now are really pathetic annoyances for the most part.

Blogger WATYF June 17, 2013 2:05 PM  

Well, let's take religions. I don't think that any one of them holds a worldwide majority right now. Regardless of who you think is right (Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists), you will think that more than 50% of humans are wrong on this issue.

So your argument rests entirely on an Appeal to Popularity fallacy?

WATYF

Blogger Joshua Dyal June 17, 2013 3:15 PM  

I am more inclined to believe that we were closer to the ideal in 1777 than we have been in the last 100 years. The US of 1777 was militarily weak, with a weak central government, a weak currency, and a weak union. This is far closer to the liberal ideal than the conservative one of today. The conservative ideal of today has us exporting democracy, invading foreign lands, engaging in a currency war with China, running a centrally controlled currency, and generally acting like we own the planet.

I see you're making the classical liberal error of confusing Republicans with conservatives. Most republicans, until the rise of the Tea Party and libertarian themed personalities amongst them, have not been conservatives in a long time. The entire Neocon movement was a progressive movement, through and through.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts