White Supremacy and Other Woke Lies

The Diversity Masquerade in the current issue of The New Criterion taught me a most useful and wonderful new word: irrefragable (I must pause to say how excellent is this publication, edited by Roger Kimball). It appears thus:

“The elite monoculture currently abets the negative ethos of woke culture. It can seem irrefragable and unappeasable”.

However accurate is the author, I must quibble with his understated assertion that “it can seem”. The ethos he describes is demonstrably and aggressively irrefragable and unappeasable. Ask any whose lives have been ruined for use of a single ‘wrong’ word or pronoun. This approach is actually central to the leftist project. Have you ever known them to go away? To just stop?

This polemic is therapeutic - to relieve cranial pressure which threatens cephalic RUD. It has been called forth by the above article combined with the marionette-in-chief’s recent insistence that “the most dangerous terrorist threat in the U.S. is white supremacy” (you know, like parents attending school board meetings to object to their children being taught inflammatory lies like critical race theory). That such a lie can be stated publicly and emphatically by the president (sic) of the formerly united States and taken as gospel by the so-called media, would, not long ago, have set mouths agape. No longer; it is merely one tip of many woke icebergs, whose growth beneath the surface - in universities mainly (as the cited article outlines) - was nurtured over many years during the march through the institutions…

This strategy announced by biden (sic) is actually treasonous. His administration has launched upon an unprecedented attack on all political opposition and at the same time continually oppresses opponents and dares them to respond. With its accomplices in the MSM and big tech, wokers have been censoring opponents beginning during the Trump administration. They are intentionally provoking half the population - by silencing dissent, criminalizing opposition, giving their antifa (sic) and blm (sic) thugs free passes to do violence, stealing elections - at minimum by illegally changing election laws and likely by more direct means. Their allies in the FBI are actively suppressing biden family corruption, as they suppressed obvious serial Clinton felonies. If you are provoked to any action whatsoever by such obvious treason, you become an enemy of the state. However corrupt it is now, we were warned by the same all-but-embalmed mouth: the state has the F-15’s. Can they drone the audience section of the school board auditorium without collateral damage?

Now surfaced, the woke icebergs have congealed and already locked in sheet ice the state’s ubiquitous agencies, big business (especially big tech), non-profit foundations i.e. virtually all institutions of societal import and influence. At base, this big lie successfully “re-imagines” Marx’s class struggle by substituting heterosexual white males for capitalists and everybody else as exploited workers (like antifa and blm, whose ‘workers’ work at nothing else, yet seem to have lots of money). This has created an utter conformity which is nonetheless marketed as diversity. One big lie begets another bigger one. The Diversity Masquerade makes that exquisitely clear.

Thesis: the entire political power of the democrat/neo-marxist/woke party rests upon an intentionally-fostered artificial coalition of aggrieved identity groups (intersectionality), the heat of whose anger must be continuously stoked by the arsonists who masquerade as political leaders. These perpetrators have cynically, intentionally and relentlessly worked over several generations to sharply divide the US population by superficial and actually unimportant distinguishing characteristics like skin color. The fact is that the number of “racists” or “white supremacists” in the US is vanishingly small. The simple truth you would never know is that most citizens wish their fellows well - all of them. Period. It seems to me that the prevalent belief among the woke is clearly discriminatory: “POC cannot succeed in society without “help” (mainly in the form of slandering and maligning others, who believe POC indeed have equal opportunity); the belief that their received wisdom provides them with the ability to enforce “equity”. Note that unlike equality of opportunity, equity is an arbitrary determination of what is “fair” according to a self-appointed, obviously biased elite.

The ability to discriminate among such superficial differences as skin tone, sex or clothing, now utterly unimportant in modern culture, had undoubted survival value for our ancestors. Being able to quickly discriminate between male/female, like/unlike, same (tribe)/other, was by default a matter of life and death for the majority of humanity’s existence. Obviously today’s putative leaders are working diligently to re-establish such barbaric conditions. For example, looking beyond the MSM propaganda, one can easily find reports of racially-motivated vicious assaults and murders, but they aren’t white on black. Statistical evidence as to members of what group assaults and kills members of what group - known by all - is universally suppressed by the MSM. The truth constitutes “hate facts” or “misinformation” (the new graffiti for inconvenient actual facts and truth).

Astoundingly, members of the aggrieved groups, “POC”, people of color (which very obeisance is curious indeed; “white people” is not offensive; why is “colored people”?) are legally disqualified from committing so-called “hate crimes”. This can only be because the victim deserved it, according to received wisdom of the woke, simply because of “whiteness”. This is how today’s criminal law works. At the same time, we are incessantly told that bias and racial motives lurk behind every word uttered and move made by hetero- white males. Virtually everything they say and do is “racist”, or “something-or-other-phobic”.

Is it really shocking that humans of all varieties notice differences between themselves and others at first glance - especially when they are bludgeoned with continual reminders of how essential these differences are? Must we deny biological science? We know that the very structure of the human nervous system has evolved to recognize patterns and to discriminate between things and persons observed. Neurologically, individuals of any race or sex cannot help but be aware that given individuals of other races or sexes are different from themselves in some ways? That is the nature of human biological hardware.

Now cognitive software acquired during the Enlightenment is a different matter. We notice those differences and, in the past, before civilization ameliorated and improved behavior - based upon fear or hate, suggested by unfiltered hardware, terrible consequences often ensued. Such acts were based solely upon these observed superficial differences. Enlightenment understanding resulted in centuries of ongoing self-critical examination of human behavior and it began to improve. One might say that elimination of slavery in Britain and then the US were important inflection points in ameliorating inbred discrimination, of which racism is a sub-category. The improvements in law did not, however, end the problem. Slavery and misogyny, for example, are still practiced in parts of the non-white world, accompanied by MSM and political silence. Why is that?

Equality of opportunity has been an ongoing struggle and a great deal of progress has been made, though you might not know it, given the shrill complaints about “micro” this or that. Macro- , on the other hand, barely exists! The goal posts, you see, have been moved. Now strict equality of outcome is required - except in entities like the NBA or the NFL. Why is that? Like biological evolution, social evolution takes time (Do you get the impression that progressives are deeply offended that our society was not perfect from the instant of its inception?) One would hardly know there has ever been any progress at all from the president’s (sic) and his party’s continual bald-faced lies. Though you could hardly see it through the endless venom, the simple fact is that - outside the democrat party - the vast majority of citizens’ ethos, like mine, is “live and let live”. It is noteworthy that those with such tolerant attitudes are at an automatic disadvantage politically, as they have no desire to band together to coerce anyone else to do or think or say anything; we need not strike poses to advertise our virtue. Today’s left, by contrast, never goes away, never ceases in some daily effort to “change the world” and that in reality, is so they can feel better about their own control-freak narcissism and racism.

“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule”. H.L. Mencken

It seems odd, to say the least, that the purported “white supremacists” have not only elected a black president, but adopted large swaths of what was traditionally black culture and language. Conventional wisdom, after all, does say something about imitation and sincere flattery. Black entertainers (Oprah, one of the richest women in the world; Samuel L. Jackson and many more actors), commentators (conservatives are denigrated), writers (Alex Haley, Shelby Steele), athletes are esteemed, even revered by many. Their overwhelming majority of their financial success comes from white audiences and admirers. How racist! The words of most any movie or video include innumerable examples of traditionally black words, idioms, even body language and dance moves, because they have been widely adopted into the culture. More evidence of racism? Oh, no! It’s appropriation! No way to get it right; irrefragable!

At the same time as whites, as a rule, actually do accept blacks and wish them well, there are some problems within black culture which cause many of the problems blamed on discrimination, but remain unmentionable. These problems - again, known to all, but unspoken for fear of the social (or even physical) death penalty - are mostly related to socialization of young black males. Facts like crime statistics are likely accurate. Since they come from the FBI, they may even be understated. However, they are a prime example of what are called hate facts. If you cite the facts about this problem, which is crying for solution, you face unemployment or worse. The federal government, you see, in its infinite wisdom, has crafted financial incentives since the ’60’s which have created multiple generations of fatherless black children and single black mothers. Again, these are well known facts, however sad and disheartening. Unimaginative attempts at remediation - like organized after school basketball and other programs - make no impact, because they do not address the root problem: absence of male guidance, fathering (a dirty word to the left).

As foreseen by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, this has literally decimated the black family which, despite financial hardships resulting from racism prior to the ’60’s, had only 20% out of wedlock births. Today it is 67%. Whether or not a moral problem, this has been nothing less than a social disaster. Crime statistics for young black males are truly horrifying and, given the large number of generous social welfare programs in place, not easily ascribable to poverty, regardless of the preaching of our betters. The fact is that, given the requisite social skills, anyone of any color, from anywhere can “make it” in this nation and enjoy the plaudits and esteem of the notorious white population for doing so. Here, I have committed blasphemy, no doubt!

The very sad facts are these: young black males commit violent crimes at a rate about triple their representation in the population. The fedgov answer is to reduce prosecution and incarceration and to discontinue any effort by schools to discipline black children; these are deemed racist. The failure of these government schools to educate children (at huge expense, thanks in part to radically progressive teachers unions) has been going on for generations and is, again, known to all. Even any modest attempt to fix the problem is extirpated through fear of being called racist. Writ large, this societal cancer results in what can be accurately described by a single word: Chicago.

Over the years, I have had several African friends. Most were visiting for extended periods, as students, for example. One was a Roman Catholic priest from Nigeria. I got to know them pretty well and had some open discussions, usually over dinners in my home, sometimes with a few additional guests of mixed race. A theme recurred. My African friends reported they were shocked by the warmth of their welcome in the US. They came expecting the worst, because that is what the MSM propaganda portrayed. In fact, they felt that their skin color was irrelevant, that their treatment as a guest in the country seemed no different than other foreign guests they knew in similar circumstances.

When it came to their view of the African-American community (I think the word “community” is over-used in this regard; maybe it is in the same mode as saying POC, rather than colored people, an obeisance of sorts), my friends were completely baffled. They simply could not understand the black American culture and themselves experienced numerous episodes of hostility and rejection from African-Americans. They were accused of inauthenticity and/or acting white. Every one of them sadly concluded that most of the racial problems were attributable to black culture and behavior, rather than racism. The antidote prescribed now, though, is not to attempt to make black culture less dysfunctional. No, it’s all white supremacy and people like me are in the wrong for being hard working, polite, punctual and considerate; this is the the new deviancy.

In furtherance of such endless crazed schemes, it is revolting and disgusting that vintage Alinsky - “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it” after millions of iterations - is still going strong. This is still aided and abetted by the MSM. Indeed, it would not have been possible to divide the nation as it now is without their active connivance. It is beyond denying that journalism is dead, as the MSM has become the Stygian mouthpiece of the democrat party. The current tactic, the president announced, is to criminalize all disagreement with him and his woke religion. Disagree? You’re a domestic terrorist in waiting. You will be surveilled. Your facts don’t correspond to “my leftist revealed truth”? They’re “hate facts”. You cite scientific articles and raw scientific data that don’t conform? That’s “misinformation. In other words, you will be excommunicated, unemployable and possibly jailed. Conviction is unnecessary. Mere formal accusation will financially ruin anyone. Ask General Flynn.

This excommunication of infidels is merely the most politically dangerous characteristic of the woke religion. There is no doubt that this is a religious movement. It is zealously enforced by the state’s most ardent and powerful priests. Modernity’s grand inquisitors, the DOJ and FBI, you see, are wont to appear at dawn. Their altar is your front stoop; sacramental raredos, your front door. Traditional crucifix or surplice - spiritual accoutrements - instead take the form of kevlar/ceramic amulets affixed to the chest afore and behind. Rather than crucifers, acolytes bear battering rams and automatic weapons charged with scores of hollow point cartridges- you know, the kind which are banned in warfare. And this ritual has been performed repeatedly for those “accused” of political or financial wrongdoing - not violent offenders, mind you. Violent offenders are treated with the utmost respect and released on recognizance - no bail. Why might that be Mr. Soros?

All the other usual religious rites are practiced as well by the zealous: Gaia is revered as godhead; confession of belief: environmentalism, global warming abortion on demand; forgiveness of violent crime, drug use and dealing, shoplifting, breaking & entering, robbery, theft; saints are elevated, sanctified and worshipped as martyrs - George Floyd, for instance. Is there any doubt that woke marxism has replaced more traditional opiates of the masses? Well, that is only partly true because, in reality, fentanyl is the opiate of the masses.

it is noteworthy that the omniscient state - which dictates precisely how you and I must live to the smallest detail, on pain of being crushed and bankrupted - is powerless to do anything effective when it comes to this particular drug plague of truly diverse young people. Among the few remaining mortal sins under Gaia, are whiteness (white politeness and punctuality are mere venial sins), fossil fuel combustion, apostasy (conservatism) and declining to accept Vax Americana. There are even indulgences as of old, in the form of carbon credits and sufficiently large and well-aimed sub rosa democrat political donations. Ask Bankman-Fried. Q.E.D.

Essential to the woke project is denial of various realities, including biological. For example, it is truly settled science that abilities between individuals and between groups, range in a normal distribution. A casual observer might observe that individuals of African descent tend to be genetically gifted when it comes to athleticism and physical prowess. That is also scientifically validated. This observed fact is acceptable, even welcome, by our censors, who presume to decide what constitutes “misinformation.” Now, in contrast to the characteristic of physical abilities and prowess, there are high-quality studies which reveal racial differences in intelligence.

Merely acknowledging the existence of this knowledge, however, is verboten! While it is hardly surprising that such differences exist, the value attached to measures of intelligence, I suggest, is misplaced. Our leftist betters, besotted with their own supposed intelligence - in their reflex racism (they know, you see, that POC absolutely need their help; that POC are incapable of conducting their lives successfully without massive progressive assistance) - automatically equate IQ with value as a human being.

In saner times, we knew we were all of equal value in the eyes of God. If one simply believes all of us are of equal value - simply by virtue of our common humanity - we must then enforce genuine equality before the law, as was our common aspiration until recently. Were we to do that now, many of our social troubles would ameliorate promptly. Interestingly, it is the accused “deplorable/supremacist” segment of the population which most fervently believe in this fundamental principle of equality - not the fake “equity”, which is the real supremacists (the left) arbitrary idea of “fairness”.

This misbegotten project of societal destruction ushered in by “The Great Society” has also made it necessary to re-define deviancy. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s 1992 essay “Defining Deviancy Down” was indeed prophetic, deeply demoralizing and well worth reading (re-reading). In sum, it says that societal resources to quell deviancy are limited and when those resources are overloaded, some deviant behavior is re-defined as acceptable. As an example, Moynihan reveals the societal effect of unwed motherhood having been normalized. Not long before, the vast majority of black babies were raised by married parents. The removal of stigma, plus “Great Society” economic incentives have led to the current catastrophe.

And then there is the biology of sex. On that formerly binary and simple topic, I begin with the theory that, if the left can remove all objective meaning from the words “man” and “woman”, then they may define any word as any thing. Babel. In confusion, where chaos reigns, people will accept any authority with the power to restore order. Knowing this, the left - seeking power above all else - has installed acceptance of the ability to change sex as the keystone of the great woke cathedral project. Without the pinnacle, the keystone, the entire structure collapses.

All the vehemence about sex change and pronouns fails to address a basic biological reality. The major surgeries required, when fully successful and without complication, are purely cosmetic. What is called “gender affirming medical care” means the physicians take a fully sexually functional individual of one sex and castrate:

  1. To remove the testicles of (a male); geld or emasculate.
  2. To remove the ovaries of (a female); spay.
  3. To deprive of virility or spirit; emasculate.

Physicians then use healthy bodily tissues and exogenous implants to fashion faux external genitalia (and certain secondary sexual characteristics like breasts). These permit merely some simulacrum of normal sexual intercourse for those putatively cured of their gender dysphoria. How satisfactory is this approximation of sexual congress is an open question. However, creating the conditions for it to occur involves major surgery, risks of severe complications (including death, which have occurred) prolonged healing, lifelong hormone supplementation; all this requires use of significant and costly medical resources. Normally, health insurance does not cover cosmetic surgery. As well, it forcefully declines to cover experimental or ineffective treatments.

The entire notion of insurance fails when it comes to health. That is because the purpose of insurance is to indemnify against risk. Health expenditures, by contrast, are not a risk but a certainty a certainty; the longer one lives, the more certain is fruition of risks. In this context, then, our health “insurance” is actually a means of socializing the costs of healthcare. That subject is large and beyond the scope of this essay. The salient point is that there are increasing clamors for coverage, despite the normally disqualifying nature of the surgery as either experimental or ineffective or both.

The only longer term study of outcomes of trans surgery, from Sweden and covering only about 150 cases, showed ongoing severe psychological problems and a suicide rate 19X the general population. All the bandwagon effect in favor of quick and “easy” trans surgery is based on zero scientific evidence. The “science” available reduces to thinly veiled ideological polemics, printed in formerly scientific journals. In other words, the medical establishment is fully “onboarded” in the juggernaut of what will one day likely be understood as the equivalent of lobotomy for what may well eventually be understood as a mental illness, a delusion of ”being in the wrong body”.

There are powerful basic and emerging reasons to go slow. If for no other reason, the sudden large increase and clustering of cases of “gender dysphoria” in an almost epidemic nature, shows that we have little understanding of the pathology at work. This is by no means to be taken as failure to recognize that individuals are suffering or that they are not in need of medical help. They surely merit our sympathy; it is undoubtedly very confusing to have ambivalence about one’s own sex.

Our medical efforts and basic humanity surely require our sympathy and help. Traditionally, medical help has abided by the dictum “first, do no harm.” Even that principle is explicitly under attack today from the left, in service of this juggernaut. Medical practice has been and must remain governed by a basic humility. As there is minimal to no science to support what is now clearly taken as a revealed religious gospel, the medical profession ought to pull up the reins and slow to a trot

I also think we must refuse demands for required speech. To my way of thinking this is a crass effort to mind-f’#^ the rest of us. I am perfectly used to treating everyone I encounter kindly and respectfully. This applies to trans people, to the extent I am even aware of that status. I will not, however, bow to demands that in order to interact normally I am required to use compelled speech. I am not a ventriloquist’s dummy and I refuse to allow anyone or the state, to transform me into one. People are regularly being fired over this abominable issue. Compelled speech is no different from demanding a loyalty oath. By the time it reaches the supreme court those standing upon their own fundamental human dignity will be bankrupt; the perpetrators count on this to enforce their totalitarian dictates; -“by any means necessary”. They have been telling us that for a long time now. The law no longer matters as the left controls most all the enforcers (Soros again).

The fact is that those who civilly question radical and irreversible medical procedures - especially of children - do not receive answers. Rather, they are personally attacked and professionally sanctioned! In addition to this attempted reversal of all recorded history’s understanding of human sexuality, this unconscionable response to legitimate questions and hesitation from many professionals (and the general public, which is horrified), is more than enough reason to slow down. We ought not go down the road we have with other issues. Once he left achieves acceptance of whatever behavior was formerly considered deviant, mere acceptance or silence is insufficient. One must then polish one’s fides by publicly celebrating it. Witness drag shows. One must not only acquiesce to their performances at elementary schools, one must celebrate it openly and explicitly and enthusiastically.

When it comes to children “transitioning” without parental consent, “expert opinion” is so incoherent and wrong that it must be discounted, if not ignored completely. Activist “scientists” argue that minors should not be subject to criminal sanctions because their brains are still immature. These very same wizards confidently announce that “gender dysphoria” of children under 10 - this particular mental illness - magically trumps brain immaturity and somehow confers the capacity to consent in the same individual who cannot be held accountable for any bad behavior at all. That is irrational, if not nihilistic and anarchic., It ought to be dismissed and ignored, not acquiesced to.

Why on earth is this issue so important to the woke left and receiving such inordinate “news” coverage? The newest supreme court (sic) justice cannot define the word woman, but is now empowered to define all the other words in the English language insofar as they constitute the law. That’s not very reassuring to those of us who believe there exists an objective reality as well as a few objective ethical and moral principles which must be operant in order to have a decent, functioning society. State governance requires a population capable of self governance; self-governance requires a few bedrock principles, applicable to all at all times in all places. History suggests there are ten or fewer of these.

In sum, we are living through a Maoist a.k.a. woke revolution in a country which is already in decline by all important measures. If you think democrat/marxists actually care about their aggrieved clients, think again. The aggrieved are merely pawns, levers of power, vote fodder. How the latter works is via well-timed visits from activists prior to election day, who “help” voters fill out requests for mail in ballots. Some time later, return visit and an exchange of a few Zuckerbucks (or some equivalent dark) donor, the activist returns to “help” complete and gather the ballots. These are the “votes” we can reasonably surmise. The visitors’ job is considerably easier if their wards are continually fired up emotionally and furious at all those “white supremacists” and “trans phobics”.

My home, in Allegheny County (Pittsburgh), is emblematic of big city politics like these. No Republicans hold any countywide offices, so the winner of the democrat primary is duly elected. There was a nineteen percent turnout in the primary a few days ago. A Soros-funded DA beat out a longstanding and reasonable democrat DA. That took very few votes to accomplish and the radical tail wagged the acquiescent dog. This is what happens in all the (dem) cities. Where lawlessness generally prevails, why would anyone expect it to not extend to the preparation, mailing receipt and counting of votes (the same people control the voting machines)? The only new thing under the sun is lining up significant numbers of illegal aliens who are registered and vote. In the lawless (dem) cities, who is there to know? The police? Who is there to object? Observe dem voting at your peril (2020 election, Philadelphia). Who is there to prosecute? The woke DA? Do you see why Soros has bought up all the city prosecutors??

Thus, we can see the import of the ever-revolving clients of the dem vote-manufacturing machine. At the moment, the tiny transgender population is being wielded with great media leverage. Trumped-up outrage (yeah, him too), the polluting, toxic fuel of dem politics, is continually stoked to motivate pliant city voters - legal and otherwise - where votes are harvested and the democrat political machine counters do the rest. In swing states, this city “vote” suffices to shift the entire state at 4am. With the trans issue, the bonus is control of language, to boot.

With words unmoored from meaning, legislative or Constitutional language becomes infinitely malleable. The judiciary is then in the bag with the deep state. As we learned during the Trump Administration, forum shopping for a sympathetic district court (the lowest federal court) judge can stifle most any executive order, or for that matter legislation, nationwide. For years, as well, activist organizations have waged lawfare to stymie any and all regulation (they object to few, actually, since all administrative agencies have been staffed by the most radical leftists for years) they dislike. Consent decrees are actually the bane and antithesis of democracy - which we haven’t had here for several generations. Consent decrees are another subversive tactic, about which much has been written.

Consistent with unmooring of words, the “white supremacy” and consonant lies are being propounded to further groom already-weaponized agencies (check the list of federal agencies with their own SWAT teams) to crush political opponents under color of law, by merely publicly calling them terrorists. This cynical, unprincipled administration, typical of Maoists/Stalinists, goes about the business of tyranny using all these ugly tools.

With media co-conspirators, the biden-menstruation attempts to immunize itself by accusing others of doing precisely what they, themselves, are about the business of doing - right in our faces. Ever notice, for instance that its storm troops, antifa (or blm) is the most blatantly fascist group around? Their name, you see, gives them immunity from being identified as the obvious fascists that they are. Only mask-wearing, lack of color-coordinates and slovenliness distinguish them from Hitler Youth. These are not “a dangerous terrorist threat in the US”, despite hundreds of riots, billions in property damage, and scores of murders.

The only solace at all in all this horror of a terminally-sick quasi-nation is that it seems most likely that financial and societal collapse will precede the left’s rout of every last whiff of dissent. If I am mistaken in the order of things, the interval between the left’s victory and collapse will not be long. Those who are censored, terrorized, crushed and silenced tend to not be very productive (as they still manage to be at the moment) and neither the coming CBDC nor LLM’s/AI will produce sufficient bread and circuses or goods and services. The survivors may then set about to re-discover what was previously self-evident when it came to organizing a decent society way back in the late in the 18th century.


As always, CW, your essay is an intellectual juggernaut, so big and comprehensive it’s hard to pick just one aspect upon which to venture a comment. But, fools rush in, as the saying goes, so:

I read recently that Noam Chomsky said that what we’re seeing now: like reparations, trans ideology, the curtailment of what is considered “hate” speech—is, actually, the logical progression of Enlightenment ideas, embodied in our founding documents drafted in the late 18th century. “All men are created equal”—yes I know, that means equal before the law, but that isn’t what they wrote; they wrote equal from their very creation. “Liberty…for all”…ALL, you say? Then that means men can be women, why not, if that’s the “happiness” they have a Creator-given “right” to pursue…and freedom of speech? Y’hafta admit, IF you take that to its extreme, doesn’t it have to include the right to shout down speech you DONT wanna hear?
So (for the second time this morning!) I’m writing about an epiphany I had recently, pondering on how it sounds so good, so right, to be a “Progressive”, and so stodgy and just…reactionary, to be a “Conservative”. The Enlightenment ideas were great! They shaped the modern world . It’s not that they’re in danger of outliving their usefulness, it’s that they’re in danger of OUTRUNNING their usefulness. They had a glorious prime; we “conservatives” want to see them keep their balance at that summit, not tumble madly down the other side. We want to stay in the Golden Mean.

THATS what we wanna “conserve”, and I don’t care what anybody says: it IS a worthy goal. Hopeless as it may be. “Dawn goes down to day/Nothing gold can stay.”


Thanks. Bork made the same argument about the logical progression of Enlightenment ideas in “Slouching Towards Gomorrah”. Of course, I agree that preserving them is a worthy goal, though probably hopeless, as you say. As to shouting down speech one doesn’t like - that is step one in the progressive playbook - the abuse of power, coercion of any kind, force in any form, “by ANY means necessary” to have their way, further their power and permit no even a peep in response. Actually, as I suggested, we must affirmatively and publicly applaud their actions. God help us. Short of a miraculously-organized revolt (these words are in this instant being recorded and subjected to the most intense computerized analysis and flagging for further surveillance, probably far in advance of the public LLM’s). I might even get a friendly visit from the “priests” of the woke religion I spoke of. Or maybe, somehow, someone will offer to “help” me organize others in furtherance of my “subversive” ideas that we all really ought to be equal before the law, “live and let live”, and liberty and justice for all. Clearly racist, phobic and hateful speech. Isn’t everything said by my identity group?? I only wish I drank.


A couple of apposite quotes from Christopher Dawson’s “Dynamics of World History”, bemoaning the impacts of progressivism on a world which previously had been much more diverse:

But wherever modern mechanized mass culture obtains, even in countries of liberal tradition, we find the freedom of the personality threatened by the pressure of economic forces, and the higher cultural values sacrificed to the lower standards of mass civilization”.

The noble, the bourgeois and the peasant each had his own freedom and his own constraints. On the whole there was a lot of freedom and no equality, while today there is a lot of equality and hardly any freedom”.

An interesting point is Dawson wrote that in 1942. We have been riding down the road to Hell for a long time.


He was a most insightful fellow.


There needs to be a taxonomy of these “Enlightenment Ideas” because they are not all “equal under the law” of Nature and Nature’s God. The discovery of those laws is natural science. The usefulness of Enlightenment Ideas arise from the methods by which we obtain knowledge of those laws. Without such knowledge we are unable to subordinate ourselves to Nature and Nature’s God, no matter how much we might wish to. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions ignorant of the laws of Nature and Nature’s God.

In short, the proper taxonomy of Enlightenment Ideas must admit that there are “ideas” and there are “meta-ideas” and that the “ideas”, although politically expedient for the time, cannot be considered in the same category as the meta-ideas of the Enlightenment.

The ideas of the Enlightenment were, from the Enlightenment meta-idea perspective, merely scientific propositions subject to revision by social sciences.

Confusing these two categories is how Popper and Kuhn managed to destroy Western Civilization by eliding Algorithmic Information Theory at the dawn of Moore’s Law, as well as Popper compounding this attack on science by valorizing “Open Societies” over tolerance of control groups not consenting to what amount to sociological propositions set forth as axioms. This unleashed the ideas of the Enlightenment on us devoid of their subjugation to the laws of Nature and Nature’s God.

This essentially expands on what I said in my response to your prior post, “Hope Springs Eternal”.