Philosophical and Political Worldviews

We often view the world through a limited perspective and fail to see the larger narrative, the foundational differences in world views. A liberally inclined person may look at some conservative ideas and see totalitarianism. A conservative invariably does the same, they see authoritarianism at the end of socialism. Neither is absolutely wrong, but it is also unlikely that when a person right or left speaks these words or has these thoughts that they understand why this is true.

Within the umbrella of the philosophy of the Enlightenment, within the context of millennia of Western political, philosophical and theological thought, both left and right, conservative and liberal ideas of freedom, economics and government exist side by side. They are complementary, they share the same basic world view. Conservatism and liberalism, left and right, in the Western tradition, are based upon realism, rationalism, and acceptance of truth - this is Classical Liberalism.

The image above represents the various ideations of thought that derive from the Enlightenment. Obviously there is a vast swath of difference across this spectrum but at the core the most rigid forms of republicanism and the most liberal forms of scientific socialism share in common an acceptance of materialism, rationalism, realism and objective truth. From right to left, there is a difference in agreement as to what constitutes objective truth but everything that is true to the Enlightenment, everything above the 'cut line' agrees on the foundational world view, there is an agreement that truth exists.

Postmodernism

The Enlightenment itself was subjected to a counter-revolution, beginning with Immanuel Kant and continuing through philosophers like Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche and finally to the modern era and postmodernism. The counter-revolution was a slow but steady assault on the ability of men to know truth and finally of the existence of truth at all.

This shift perverted the classical liberalism philosophical spectrum. Without an understanding of the nature of man, universal truths, natural moral law, and natural rights the poles of the spectrum devolved into dangerous ideologies. Far-right republicanism gives birth to statism, far left progressivism gives birth to pseudo-marxism and totalitarian communism. Finally, a third way was born to address the inadequacies of perverted classical liberal ideologies, fascism, a phenomenon that can exist on the right and left of the spectrum below the classical liberal cut line.

The great political divide we observe at almost all levels of the process is a direct result of the abandonment of truth, or perhaps agreeing that truth exists. No longer does the definition of liberal or conservative reach across the spectrum to some degree as it did under a classical liberal view, no longer is there a middle. To be certain, there are still those that term themselves conservative and liberal but almost all on each side have succumbed to various postmodern ideological influences. This must invariably lead to some sort of totalitarianism, a form of fascism.

Postmodernism is an intellectual stance or a mode of discourse that rejects the possibility of reliable knowledge, denies the existence of a universal, stable reality, and frames aesthetics and beauty as arbitrary and subjective. It can be described as a reaction against scientific attempts to explain reality with objective certainty, recognizing that reality is constructed as the mind tries to understand its own personal circumstances. It is characterized by an attitude of skepticism, irony, or rejection toward the grand narratives and ideologies of modernism, often denying or challenging the validity of scientific inquiry, or declaiming the arbitrariness of the aesthetics of artistic works or other artifacts of cultural production, or questioning various assumptions of Enlightenment rationality.

Postmodernism relies on critical theory, an approach that confronts the ideological, social, and historical structures that shape and constrain cultural production. Common targets of postmodernism and critical theory include universalist notions of objective reality, morality, truth, human nature, reason, language, and social progress. Postmodernist approaches have been adopted in a variety of academic and theoretical disciplines, including political science, organization theory, cultural studies, philosophy of science, economics, linguistics, architecture, feminist theory, and literary criticism, as well as art movements in fields such as literature and music.

Wikipedia

Why This Matters

Everything that derives from postmodernism is poison to the Western tradition, right reason, morality, and ethics based upon truth. Critical Theory, as applied to Critical Race Theory, has divided the populace by reigniting racism. Feminist Theory has destroyed the family. It has slipped into traditional organizations such as:

  • Most of mainline Christianity in the form of Social Gospel
  • The Southern Baptist Convention and the acceptance of Critical Race Theory
  • The core ideology behind the formation of the megachurch growth, seeker-sensitive and emergent church movements - Peter Drucker, the Leadership Network The Gospel Coalition and others.
  • Almost all of academia.
  • Neoconservatism, neoliberalism and progressivism - meaning most of the Republican and Democratic parties and most of the organizations and individuals that advocate in the public square for either are affected in some way by postmodern ideology.

My daughter asked me recently, "how can two sides look at the evidence and issues related to Trump's impeachment and see the facts so differently?" The answer is simple: people are incapable of thinking from first principles and agreeing on the existence of universal truths. And so it is, so long as the vast majority are mired in bad ideology the situation will persist and intensify.

A Peak at the Authoritarianism to Come

Virginia is poised to be a test case of sorts, a formerly ‘red’ state with historic roots of respect for natural rights to life liberty and property and a large gun-owning population now under the control of radical progressives. The incoming legislature, buttressed by a progressive liberal governor is foaming at the mouth to test the limits of its power. Virginia Senate Bill SB 16   “It is unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, purchase, possess or transport an assault firearm” and makes such actions a Class 6 felony. (The American Spectator) The definition of “assault weapons” is pretty broad meaning that many Virginia citizens, law-abiding citizens might find themselves faced with surrendering their property or losing their liberty, both violations of natural rights protected under the Constitutions of Virginia and the US.

This is no small matter.

Already there is posturing in Virginia and in Washington with bellicose words and subtle threats. 75 counties in Virginia have passed ordinances or resolutions stating county police and sheriff departments will not enforce laws that violate the right to bear arms. This is a direct plea to the common law principle of the sheriff acting as an intermediary between the people and other powers. Under common law, the sheriff had a duty not only to enforce the law but to protect the people from external oppression and tyranny. Many that hold to the concept of natural rights protected under the Constitution have theorized for years that a fight such as this might come down to good sheriffs performing their higher duty.

This inconvenient historical fact has not escaped the radicals either in Richmond nor Washington. Some are suggesting that the governor use the National Guard to carry out confiscations, others have advocated defunding sheriffs departments that do not toe the line. The governor mentioned recently curring off the power and water to those that do not comply.

Of course, all of this is premature. If SB16 passes, which it probably will, it will be tied up in court for months or years. That is really not the point of all this. The radicals know they will not be grabbing any guns come March or April of next year. This is really a show of force. They are forcing the issue in a state where such talk was once unimaginable. They are forcing real Americans to react, to become afraid and to show their hands. Talk of empowering sheriffs departments to resist bad laws is important and necessary but it brings the topic to the surface and allows the radicals to attack the notion long before the court cases are settled. They now know exactly which counties and which sheriffs might actually stand up, they have a target list.

In Retrenchment, I discuss Saul Alinsky who essentially wrote the rule book for the radical progressive movement in Rules for Radicals.  There can be no reprieve to the traditional viewpoint he advised.  Radicals must press the issue deep, ridicule, isolate and ostracized opposing views until the revolution is complete and the opposition silenced. He pointed out that Lenin was happy to use the ballot box as long as the other side had the guns but that Lenin was pleased to consider bullets once his side had the guns.

Alinsky also preached polarization, isolation, and ridicule as methods the left should use. Now that county boards and sheriffs have stood up to identify themselves the radicals know who to individually target. It is all an almost perfectly applied strategy out of Rules for Radicals.

Another point that Alinsky made was that the leaders of the progressive revolution must always find new targets to assault so that the mobs and supporters do not get bored. Alinsky did not have a lot of confidence in the base supporters of radicalism to really understand the issues, he thought leaders needed to help them. One method to help was to always present new issues and new fights and to focus on wins.

Gun control, a historically hotly contested issue, is an easy win for the radicals at this point. They have already won as much of the culture war as is possible at the moment, it is too soon for the next stages of that fight. But gun control, that is something they can push with a vengeance.

Even if SB16 ultimately fails in court, this test case will move the ball forward. They are frontally assaulting a former red state and hundreds of thousands of real Americans living there that cherish their rights. It is bold, audacious and just the beginning.

What we should find most disturbing in all of this are the words the radicals are using. They carelessly toss about the notion of using the National Guard, which is not the militia but is really just the part-time Army at this point. And using this army to go to the homes of citizens to enforce the law and take property. Let that sink in for a moment. These people are saying this out loud and without shame. They are willing to send an army to private citizens’ homes, potentially to do violence. We fought a revolution over that issue among others, now the radicals have come to see the power of the Government and of violence as a positive good. A tool they may use to complete their revolution.

If they so callously believe this is ok in this case do you believe for a moment they will not apply the same logic to future brilliant ideas they codify into law? Religious liberty, free speech, freedom of association? Do you honestly believe any of those notions are sacred and sacrosanct in light of these developments?

We are on a perilous road toward authoritarianism. The loss of the Cultural war by traditional America was never about marriage or monuments, it was about principles. It was a fight against one side saying that good ideas and intentions ought to outweigh natural rights and common-sense. It was a fight against one side telling everyone else what to think and believe. Now they show their full hand and their willingness to do violence against those that oppose them.

Polygamy, Pedophilia, and Bestiality

In the off chance you think the implications I predict for the cultural war are either far fetched, alarmist, or just not possible in your life-time consider the change to Twitter’s recently updated policy regarding pedophilia:

“Discussions related to child sexual exploitation as a phenomenon or attraction towards minors are permitted, provided they don’t promote or glorify child sexual exploitation in any way,”

Twitter policy

If one follows the line of logic from – “Love is Love” and “all points of view matter and all have equal value” and combine that with the prevailing view that no universal truth exists what do you end up with? If you add in the progressive tendency to call any idea and that disagrees with the above hate and anyone that holds such an unacceptable notion a bigot it seems only natural that all three of the sexual persuasions listed in the title above will soon be legal and accepted.

Think about it, following the LGBT logic it would be impossible to say that a person cannot marry two people, why not three of four even? If the state were to tell them “no” what would be the grounds for saying no? Legally we have already set the precedent that no real truth exists and everyone has the right to define their own happiness. To say “no” to a polygamist would acknowledge some truth exists, meaning maybe it also existed when same-sex-marriage was legalized; saying “no” to a polygamist would open up an uncomfortable can of worms for the left; so they will not say no, polygamy will be championed.

What of pedophiles? We already allow children to go through sex-change operations, we allow teenagers to get abortions, why not allow them to choose to participate with a pedophile in a sexual relationship? Twitter has just said it is ok to discuss this perversion in the public square? On what basis can anyone deny them the “right” to practice their desired sexual tastes? The left’s own logic says it must be allowed.

Bestiality is no different, up until 2014 bestiality brothels were legal in the Netherlands, they were legal in Germany until 2012 and were only closed because of international pressure. It was perhaps a bit too early for those sorts of people to come out loud and proud. But their time will come. Based on the progressive ideology, how can the state tell them “no”.

There are historical precedents for all three perversions being accepted by societies at various times. It is neither far-fetched nor unrealistic to posit that these things will soon enter the public square and the legal system in the United States. It is not unreasonable to suspect they will be accepted in some way.

I present the above as a concluding argument to my position that the cultural war is lost. Politics and politicians cannot and will not fix the ship. Big business is firmly on the side of making money – which means not offending the loud progressives. We are indeed headed for moral dark ages and there is little we can do to stop it. Only a miracle could prevent what has become of us turning ever darker.

Not all is doom and gloom, however. There are things authentic Christians ought to be doing right now to help keep the fire going and to equip our children and their children with truth. The main culture in America and the West is lost to us, and perhaps that is a good thing. Christ never promised that we would rule nor that moral and just societies were our lot in life. Since the 6th century, Christianity has held great influence and a positive effect on society and culture but those days are long gone.

There is no silent moral majority any more but there are enough authentic Christians to make a difference for the future if not for today.

I will not make the argument here again (for a while) that the cultural war is lost. It took me almost six years to accept this truth from the time real evidence was first presented to me. Words alone cannot convince someone that is not yet ready to hear. My latest book, The Philosophy of Commonsense, is about how we got here, my next two are about what we need to do now.

To those that simply say it is ridiculous to assume the bestiality and pedophilia must follow from the ideology of LGBT and perhaps accuse me of making an alarmist slippery-slope argument I ask simply – on what basis would society say “no” to these things. Every possible permutation of “no” relies upon some acknowledgment that there is some greater truth, some principle that says such would not be good. To rely on such would be an outright admission that ultimate truth actually exists. The leftist ideology cannot stand long once ultimate truth is acknowledged – therefore they will never admit such.

To those that say my view that authentic Christians will be viewed with growing disdain and eventual hate is overstated I ask you how two polar opposite visions of truth can exist side-by-side without animosity. To an authentic Christian there exists a metaphysical reality that we can only fully know through God. What we do see and what we can know of the cosmos, is but a part of the greater reality, but it is also reality itself. In such a reality one can no more deny the existence of the Sun and Moon than the existence of gender. Both exist as part of reality, to deny either is false, foolish and misinformed. Authentic Christians cannot deny such and remain real Christians, the Christological understanding of metaphysics is grounded in reality.

There will be those that call themselves Christians that make life much harder for authentic Christianity, social gospel types and those that are really just moralistic deist are at this very moment making great strides to separate themselves from the Christian view of the metaphysical reality and to proclaim to the world and culture that they are just like them, the nice open-minded Christians, not the “bigots”. These sorts have infiltrated the mainline denominations, they exist in many of the pop-church mega-churches, they dominate some seminaries. They will control millions of dollars of church property when it is all said and done, and represent something that resembles Christianity, the religious trappings, but will be nothing close to the real thing.

Real and authentic Christianity will find itself in a precarious, and perhaps dangerous position in the coming years. Other, wiser and smarter men said this long before me. I did not listen, it took a lot of convincing and more evidence. You do not have to believe me now, but you ought to at least consider these words and evaluate the trends for yourself.

Mob Violence as a Tool of the Left

Mob violence, the threat of violence and intimidation of individuals by large groups is a core operational tactic of the radical left in the Cultural War. If you are like me, it is difficult to imagine that the activities in the videos and stories below really occur.  If you are aware of them, you assume, as I did for a long time that these are small isolated activities.  Surely, this cannot represent the nature and the character of an entire movement - yet it actually does. The mainstream media does not cover this in much detail, if at all.  When they do cover it they portray is as counter-protests to right-wing hate.

Three facts are important to understand.

First - there just does not exists a large and organized right-wing equivalent to these left-wing groups.  Yes, there are young groups on the Alt-Right that seem willing to take to the streets and get directly into the face of groups like ANTIFA, but they are small when compared to the left.

Second, the organization of the left is enormous.  The so-called ad hoc gatherings of students at campuses around the country to harass, assault and intimidate those that dare have ideas different than what their ideology holds dear are not nearly as random as the news media that covers these events would lead you to believe.  The left employs paid organizers and paid protestors to coordinate and facilitate these events and pass along best practices to ensure maximum success.

Third, and most important.  The radical left is proving through direct action that they have no respect for persons, property, liberty nor even life - the core principles that have made Western Civilization great.  In the videos below you will see individuals punched, spit upon, cursed at, property taken and destroyed and all manner of other things, all in the name of silencing people that disagree and denying others the right to speech free movement and peaceful assembly.

You will notice, these radical progressives perform these actions in the safety of a crowd, often punching and kicking people when their backs are turned.  They apparently believe in the power and justice of the crowd over that of the individual.  I imagine the same sort of attitudes prevailed during the French Revolution as people were denounced, "tried" and guillotined. This is the same sort of behavior that occurred during Chinas Cultural Revolution with Struggle Sessions and executions.   We have in existence the same sort of mob mentality, the same sort of ideological hate and the same level of individual cowardices that existed in France in the early 18th-century and China in the 20th.  Millions of people have been killed in the past because of mob violence.

When I write about the very real dangers the radical progressives pose, these are not theoretical or hypothetical arguments - these things are happening, and the brazenness of the mob is growing.

The videos below contain violence and crude language - but you need to see them to fully understand the gravity of this growing mob mentality.

I am posting the first video again. After having seen the videos above just imagine if the young lady in the video below was your daughter, just trying to attend a campus event and hear a speaker.

Cowards you say?  The videos bear this out. I suspect few if any of these people in black hoodies and masks would all alone get in the face of most regular Americans.  That is not their modus operandi, they are only emboldened by a large group, often attacking their victims from behind or from the sideThis does not make them less dangerous, perhaps more soWeak, feckless and confused people that feel powerless to act on their own, are conditioned to groupthink and feel the power in the mob are apt to perform collective acts that in history have proven to be murderous.

The notion that there is a moral superiority within the mob itself, a superiority that debases the humanity of individuals that disagree with the mob is a significant problem.  These people are learning the wrong lessons, lessons they will apply to politics and the public square for years to come.