The View From 1776

Europe: The Dark Continent

The light of God’s truth has been snuffed out in Europe, now the least Christian and the most secularized and socialized part of the western world.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 04/27 at 07:31 PM
  1. Since no one can be humble as an ignorant act of the will, the superiority of Judeo-Christianity has not been well-communicated nor perceived. If its superiority were well-commnicated it would have been perceived and chosen on its worthiness.

    The carnal-ego and its appetites breeds guilt-needs and self justification, which man-made philosophies offer. Such offers are couched in socio-political collectives affording camouflage from Reality and personal value & responsibility. It is a cheap drunk!

    Multitudes will dscover Reality only by hitting a rock bottom catastrophe. If the regression is slow, many will see light. If the regression is fast, it may be too late...

    Remember: This present life is only Prologue. The real thing has yet to begin. First, there must be a separating of sheep and goats. The goats and the sheep are self-chosen - self-elected. Choose wisely. Psalm 25:12 kjv

    semper fidelis
    vincit veritas
    a follower of The Lion of Judah
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  04/27  at  11:19 PM
  2. Jim--Speaking of goats and sheep reminds me of the story about how an American tourist asked Edith Piaf, the legendary "little sparrow," the seductively beautiful Parisienne torch singer, what she thought about French men. She reportedly answered that "all the brave ones died in the wars; the smart ones went to America; and we have what's left." The remaining mass of Europeans have been won over by their leaders's populist and socialist message--ever since Bismarck introduced social security to placate his people and get then to trade liberty for security. They have become the "sheeple" that Michael Savage talks about. And, as Thomas points out in this posting, a good part of the populist message has been based on the Enlightenment philosophers' failed vision of a secularized people, supposedly freed from the "superstition" of Faith, and allowed to chart their own course strictly based on their Reason. Now, while I am a champion of the common men and women, I am under no such crazy illusion that they can get by with no direction, no moral beliefs, and no absolute "do-nots." This moral and spiritual need was best expressed in Koestler's "Darkness at Noon" when the condemned communist functionary, Nicholas Rubashov awaits execution, after months of torture, inquisition, soul-searching: "Looking back over his past, it seemd to him now that for forty years he had been running amuck--the running-amuck of pure reason. Perhaps it did not suit man to be completely freed from old bonds, from the steadying brakes of 'Thou shalt not' and 'Thou mayst not, and to be allowed to tear along straight towards the goal. . .And perhaps reason alone was a defective compass. . Perhaps now would come the time of great darkness." His interrogator, the loyal communist, expressed the other side of the argument: "One may not regard the world as a sort of metaphysical brothel for emotions. That is the first commandment for us. Sympathy, conscience, disgust, despair, repentance, and atonement are for us repellant debauchery . . God is an anchronism. . . When the accursed inner voice speaks to you, hold your hands over your ears." All the totalitarian regimes that inflicted mass slaughter on the world during the 20thC shared this atheism, denying any inner voice that cut through the brialliance of their belief that the end justifies the means. (If you're an atheist, consider the company you keep--Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Marx, Hirohito) Koestler was one of the few intellectuals to recognize the horrors of the communist "experiment." It took many of the Western intelligentsia another thirty to forty years to convert their beliefs from pro-communist to anti-anti-communist, and eventually, in a few rare cases like Norman Podhoretz, to an actual anti-communist stance. But many have still not accepted defeat, and are now trying to tear down the Ten Commandments that have for so long provided the moral compass that forms the heart of Western civilization.
    Posted by bill greene  on  04/28  at  02:13 PM
  3. YES, Bill,
    Guilt makes a terrible master. The truth of it is obvious for all of us, especially, those who persist in their humanistic logic and powers (sic) of reason and driven need for an excusing and persistent self-justification. IQ?

    Logic and reason are no better and rise no higher in quality than pre-chosen criteria. Locked as each one is in a carnal-ego, no one can invent criteria greater than self, to do the job. Transcendent Criteria is not man-made. It has been created by the only GOD and appears in His Word, The Bible. For Openers see: Psalm 119:1-176

    The mediocre-makers are welcome to try. No takers. Losers.

    P.S. Bill, Every individual is unique & rare - uncommon. The Common Man is a collectivized term and is totally inaccurate. DNA says, "one-of-a-kind." You are the only you in the history of the universe. Me too. Uncommon men! Good intentions...but...

    semper fidelis
    vincit veritas
    a follower of The Lion of Judah

    + + +
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  04/28  at  04:22 PM
  4. It is true, Jim, that every human being is a rare and valuable individual--that is the legacy of our Judeo-Christian heritage that gave status to us all no matter how humble. And it is our love and gratitude to our God that, in George Weigel's words "innoculated us against the authority of earthly kings and tyrants," because if God is number one, Caesar can't be. However, history has not very often observed this concept--indeed, most people throughout history, in almost every land, have been subjugated by tyrants. In their struggle to obtain rights, those subjugated people (a collective term I find hard to avoid) have had to do battle with the established aristocraces (another collective). In this age-old battle for rights it has generaly been those at the bottom against those at the top. There have been dozens of "Peasant Revolts" against their lords and masters, and in each war, each individual peasant has played a vital role, inspired by the more adventurous individuals who led them into battle. In tracing history's progress it is difficult not to generalize without referring to such groupings. I would be interested in a better way of doing it because I do agree with your point. I have sometimes used the term "ordinary people" instead of the "common men and women" in order to distinguish such from the aristocracy. These liberties were taken to demonstrate that it was those unrecognized individuals that actually contributed to history's advance as compared to those who got in the way. Victor Davis Hanson uses a similar approach in his book "The Other Greeks." There he argues the excellent point that the Greek miracle of Athens did not spring suddenly from the urban atmosphere of city-states. Instead, he argues that earlier, in the countryside, where the majority of the Greek citizenry lived, it was the farmers, vinegrowers, and herdsmen of ancient Greece that formed the backbone of Hellenic civilization. "It was those fiercely independent agrarians who gave Greek culture its emphasis on private property. constitutional government, and individual rights." Each farmer was part of a culture that shared a common heritage and set of beliefs that worked because it recognized the individuality and worth of each participant. The life experiences of those agrarian family farmers contributed to the legacy that has been passed on to us through the few free societies that followed the Greeks. The problem may be one of word association: under communism, a "collective farm" is one where all the participants share the production equally (bad!) whereas under free enterprise, each individual is motivated by the conventions of private property (good!). When I refer to the ordinary or common people of America I do not disparage their individuality--indeed I believe that America is great only because the citizenry who built the country were fiercely independent individuals. Indeed, I agree with Cato's remark that "The people, when they are not misled or corrupted, generally make a sound judgment of things. They have natural qualifications equal to those of their superiors; and there is oftener found a great genius carrying a pitchfork, than carrying a white staff."
    Posted by Bill Greene  on  04/28  at  10:36 PM
  5. YES, Bill,
    The use of collectivized terms is entirely acceptable as 'verbal convenience' as long as its reality is vested in individual persons - and not used to define human value and non-value. Collectivists make no such distinction. In fact, they give plural words more value-meaning than rare & unique individual persons!

    You reminded me of a favorite piece out of history. In an ancient country, the leaders of several communities met and discussed ways of improvement. They finally reached agreement on a premise of progress. Said premise determined that all pay for teachers should be reduced. The follow-thru meant that many left their positions and went to other employment. The dedicated, student-first educators, stayed and produced what has come to be known as The Golden Age of Greece.

    The lack of character on the part of the NEA, AFT, and UTLA teechur unions, meant that true educators left the public schools, incl me.

    The resulting toilet-bowl experience for individual public school children was birthed and drags on to this day!

    semper fidelis
    vincit veritas
    a follower of The Lion of Judah
    Posted by Jim Baxter  on  04/29  at  10:18 AM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Next entry: The Inflation Tax

Previous entry: Cheap Grace