Saturday, April 19, 2008
Praise the Lord and pass the ammo
Were I a Kerry voter, though, I’d feel deep anger, not only at them returning Bush to power, but for allowing the outside world to lump us all into the same category of moronic muppets. The self-righteous, gun-totin’, military-lovin’, sister-marryin’, abortion-hatin’, gay-loathin’, foreigner-despisin’, non-passport ownin’ red-necks, who believe God gave America the biggest d*** in the world so it could urinate on the rest of us and make their land “free and strong.” Seethe, Pepe, seethe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
20 comments:
Kerry voters ? You mean all five of them ?
It’s an attack on two of the critical advantages the U.S. holds over most of the rest of the western world
Yeah, I really wish France could have the blood bath and creationism taught in kindergarten. We're really missing out.
How’s that working out? Compared to America, France and Germany have been more or less economically stagnant for the last quarter-century, living permanently with unemployment rates significantly higher than the U.S.
Shit, if only we'd listened to Billy Graham, we'd be rolling in dough. Seriously, who's this clown?
"We're really missing out."
Nah, you've got all the Islamic Youth Lovin' and Geocentric Astronomy you can handle. Now go answer the call of the Muezzin, Jean-Clod
Shit, if only Eurosnobs had listened to Adam Smith rather than Karl Marx. Seriously, is there any Eurosnot who is not a clown?
Well Adam Smith is one thing but I am not seeing the connection between SBJ & the bottom line that Steyn takes for granted.
I take my Adam Smith before Evangelicalism (if I take it at all) any and every day of the week.
The Enlightenment Wealth of Nations in one hand, and my .40 semi-auto pistol in the other...
A connection between Adam Smith and Steyn's bottom line? Easy. Both are about self-reliance and distance from government intervention. You've heard of the Darwin guy, right?
SBJ and the bottom line, jj. adam smith is obvious.
Secular hedonists with no gumption or ability to defend the worldsytem which made secular hedonism even conceivable, never mind possible, have no iron or message that can withstand the Believers.
If a secular society wishes to continue to exist, in the face of Islam, it had better weave within its fabric a religious spirit which is able to both offer the grit to defend against the Believers and a natural tolerance, if not affinity, for the secular world.
You, Pepe, can thrive in a West filled with Christians [or an east asia with a more martial variety of neo-buddhism, e.g.Japan], and do so while living life as Pepe without pretense or obeisance to Christianity. The worst you suffer is a pained upper lip as the look of scorn is imprinted into your face through the force of sheer repetition.
You, Pepe, if you tried to live as Pepe, would be a hunted animal in the Ummah. You would be destroyed or you would hide your world as much as you could beneath a facade of Islam.
The bottom line is that SBJ helps you keep your butt. Momo would be out to hear you squeal like a pig.
That's the bottom line.
4/19/2008 8:57 PM
If a secular society wishes to continue to exist, in the face of Islam, it had better weave within its fabric a religious spirit which is able to both offer the grit to defend against the Believers and a natural tolerance, if not affinity, for the secular world.
This makes no sense:
Why is one religion necessary to defend against another?
It makes a lot of sense, if you but bothered to study the history of the endless warfare between Islam and the civilizations and nations it has burnt over the millenia. It is an empirical fact, noted over and over again. Noted, in fact, by those who first faced Islam on the battlefields of the
7th and 8th centuries [think of the huge transformations, in short time, the Frankish Kingdom and the remnants of the Eastern Roman Empire had to undergo in order to survive that first onslaught....[this is too big for here, better another time]
It is the profound mistake of the Left, today, arrogant in its disdain for the lessons of the past, to think that its socialist materialism has innate staying power against Islam. That the future Muslim Europe can be a secular socialist world. Nowhere in Islam, despite vast effort, has this succeeded. The salient hope for such, Turkey, is islamizing on all fronts, and the secular elite is now confined to the regions of Istanbul and a growing diaspora.
French Belgium, in 20 years, for example, won't be a socialist secular state with Muslim characteristics. It will be a Muslim state, with socialist characteristics.
If you mix Red and Green, what color do you get?
A connection between Adam Smith and Steyn's bottom line? Easy. Both are about self-reliance and distance from government intervention. You've heard of the Darwin guy, right?
Yes, I thought about raising that point but figured everyone is entitled to a break from mft ranting about Descent of Man.
If a secular society wishes to continue to exist, in the face of Islam, it had better weave within its fabric a religious spirit which is able to both offer the grit to defend against the Believers and a natural tolerance, if not affinity, for the secular world.
AA, check out Hermann Broch's "Geist and Zeitgeist: the Spirit in an Unspiritual Age." I'm hard on American religion, but if the Islamic shells start flying in what I know of as the geopolitical borders of America, I'll see you on the front lines, American secularists alongside Evangelicals, and whomever else wants to get into the grit. It's important to remind Americans that we argue with one-another in the tavern and public square, but that type of discourse stops and ranks form as soon its very existence is threatened. At least threatened by a theocracy, whether from Utah, Mormon pockets in JJ's backyard, northern Idaho White Supremacists, or the threat that Pepe seems to underestimate, that of Militant Islam.
Pepe doesn't see our discourse as being threatened, and how much he needs as proof that it is actually being threatened puzzles me. Last night a swooning Hippie at the bar told me she thought America was all wrong with its mass consumerism, and how We (yes, gentlemen, the royal We) need to stop looking at the world with our Western eyes. After returning from a 6-week stint in Sin City, I told her I understood and agreed that I thought there's a bit too much impulse-buying throughout America. And I also responded and told her that her comment about Western Eyes, though taken, was a fallacy from the beginning, and she ought to work on better historical interpretations. Her hatred for me was already established, though, as I told her politics is one of the lowest forms of discourse a human being can enter into (we should be reading fine literature of Western Civilization instead). Still, I continued (round of applause for mft here!).
First, its impossible for someone born and raised in what we define as the "West" to not look at the world with Western Eyes. We are inherently West, and thus any interpretation we offer is in fact "West." Second, I told her that to believe that it's somehow impossible for one human being to exchange ideas with another human being is slipping down that slope toward Racism. Certainly, there's a degree of misunderstanding and confusion and such when presented with a new concept, but to say this ethnic group or that human being is incapable of understanding another human being or ethnic group is foolery. She said she wanted to slap me at that point, but I told her she would only reinforce the points I already made. I continued (more applause for mft here!)
Instead of believing with what the, ahem, "Historians" say (Propagandists is a better term than Historians — I gotta defend my discipline, damnit), that America was a nation exclusively founded on Evangelicalism (which, interestingly, both Pepetians and Evangelicals agree on), she ought to investigate the archives and historiography and read the dynamic agreements and disagreements the founders had on matters of religion and deism and atheism and anti-theism and agnosticism and such. Yet when these founders were faced with an outside threat, and even after understanding their own contradictions, they were capable of uniting under the cause of self-preservation (both an 18th-century Enlightenment and 19th-century Darwinian concept). This is found in say, our sending a Naval fleet to bash in those barbary pirates. Or our alliance with France to 1.) ascertain their naval powers to blockade the Brits; or 2.) to spread the wave of Revolution and Enlightenment across the Atlantic (putting it mildly, though, the French got a little carried away with that guillotine). Jefferson got into arguments with Adams on this point, and they both worried about Hamilton's Federal Bank, something that could become a juggernaut toward individual and state's rights.
Yet again, all of this shows the contradictions, and while Pepe (perhaps) uses this to show how "wrong" America is, I use it to show the Left and Right how dynamic it is, and why it needs to continue. How America should be thought of: more as an extension of Western Civilization rather than an Evangelical, über-Walmart-Mormon society.
But whatever. I got other shit to do today, so I'll have to continue pissing off the swooning Hippies in addition to trying to convince you saucy bastards later.
6-week stint in Sin City
Which is sin city ?
if the Islamic shells start flying in what I know of as the geopolitical borders of America
jesus mft, what are you talking about? these are at worst largely baseless fantasies planted by the administration to keep us voting right, and at best hypotheticals for poli-sci classes.
Who in the islamic world has enough weapons and means to transport them long distance to constitute a serious threat to the US ? And who could afford to take the chance at facing escalating retaliation ?
This isn't the same situation as during the time of the USSR: who would risk total annihilation for the privilege of maybe taking out Topeka, KS?
I might also accuse you of being just as paranoid of "This Current Administration!" but I quickly grow bored of talking in circles with Hard Right and Left politicians. Ninety-five percent or more of graduate students I met during my historian/archaeological training were of the type that spout ideology before being informed on, well, really anything. You said you're more paranoid of Evangelicals in this country, and I told you I also keep an eye on them (noted in the post just above yours). And now this is the important component: you refuse to use the same methodology in scrutinizing Islam Militant.
Explain yourself and your alteration in methods regarding this last point, and do so without Black Whisper-Chopper lingo.
where is Sin City man?
mft, it's really very simple: I live in New Orleans. There are many dangers considerably more immediate than the hypothetical nuke of some undetermined wacko that doesn't have access to one or the capacity to send it my way if they do.
Now there are people getting shot 5 blocks from where I live, others 2 blocks from where I work. Someone got wounded last year by a guy with an AK at a stone's throw from my company.
There is the health insurance policy that protects me a little less each year while costing me quite a bit more, levees put up by engineers with little more than hair-cutting skills, dope in the 4th grade...
These issues are real, here, and now. the missiles overhead only exist in some people's imagination.
As with all predictions, what's imagined for tomorrow is only realized when it happens. A couple years ago Warren Buffet forecasted an Militant Islamic nuclear blast in one of the U.S. cities within the next 50 years. Statements like that tend to get my attention. And even George W. Bush said something to the effect of "Islam is a religion of peace." So he's on your side, Pepe. Meanwhile, I'm keeping an eye on all religions, both foreign and domestic.
If New Orleans politicians are half as good as those in the U.S. Virgin Island territories, I empathize with your plight. Corrupt politicians at the local level pass themselves off as legitimate at the Federal level, and they'll accept you in D.C. just on the grounds that you vamboozled your way to the top. It's only after $70,000 in cash is found in one of their freezers. But alas, the damage is already done: busted levees and cops steeling televisions shortly after. Lots of resentment in that city. Maybe the biggest problem with humanity is also when people act on their ideas of resentment (by that I mean the mass murder suicide jobs the world over). Fuck I get so fucking sick of it all. I digress.
"Sin City" is the nickname for Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada, arguably the impulse-buy consumer capital of the world.
In the glare of the desert sun (blasting into your eyes whenever outside), I pointed to a strip mall one day and said, "What's the name of that strip mall?"
The response, "Oh, that's UNLV! (University of Nevada Las Vegas)"
I said, "Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know."
They need to work on architecture in Clark County.
Post a Comment