Handle on Cancel Culture

It’s often the case that you can learn more from random bloggers than prestigious “experts.” It’s also often the case that you can learn more from anonymous comments on blog posts than the blog posts themselves.

With that in mind, here‘s commenter Handle at Arnold Kling’s blog talking about cancel culture:

No one can say where the lines are or will be in ten minutes, they change and escalate all the time…. One can get by ok as a tamed heretic to a known thing, but not to an unknown thing. You can’t lead a blameless life if you don’t know from one day to the next what you’re going to be blamed for. … [T]he persecutions are *the point*, the thing that makes people feel the sadistic thrill of costless domination and punishment that means – in the way most fulfilling of core instincts – that one is higher status than one’s victims. … There has been a whole century of people trying to explain why untempered liberalism contained within it the seed of its own demise, and now we finally get to witness the path of progress leading to regress. … [T]he old progressive religion could advertise its positive vision through … the “The Smiling Multicultural Diversity Poster” manifested through various mediums. … Doesn’t it feel like that poster has been ripped down or papered over with new ones showing angry, brutal fists clenching rifles? … This is different. This is worse. *Much* worse.

And here:

Whatever the ideological “Cause” at a time or place happens to be, preaching it provides a useful way for outsider elites to undermine the legitimacy of the power held by insider elites. The trouble is, it never stops being useful. When it works, the former outsider elites become insider elites, but that only means there is a new set of outsider elites, and they are always going to try the same trick. … The Cause always provides a theory, explicit or tacit, of the legitimate uses and ends of power: that is, to further The Cause. … At some point things start spin really out of control and become chaotic and unstable and no one is safe in any position for a minute, because there is always something, some kind of heresy, infidelity, sin, or ideological kompromat someone can use to drag the new guy back down.[N]othing is ever enough. When The Cause is corrupted to give its troops and clients what they want, eventually it comes to the point where it can’t give them what they want…. And the intellectuals desperately revising and refining The Cause cannot catch up to such urges with anything approaching intellectual coherence.

Day Bidet #7

Seven days, seven links:

  1. “[T]he disciples in the early church were committed to sharing their material goods and possessions with each other as they had need so that no one went hungry or went without basic human needs.”
  2. “Masculinity and the Marvel Movies” (warning: some spoilers)
  3. “The account in the Bible of Hezekiah’s life … align[s] with what is known about him from the archaeological record.”
  4. Homeschool your kids. (Related. Related. Related.)
  5. “Philippians was written while Paul was imprisoned, but during which imprisonment and precisely where?”
  6. “Sunlight … reduces the risk of prostate, breast, colorectal, and pancreatic cancers. It improves circadian rhythms. It reduces inflammation and dampens autoimmune responses. It improves virtually every mental condition you can think of. And it’s free.”
  7. “The death of the Psalmist, of any of God’s faithful people, is not in fact desirable to God. It is painful. It is costly. It is expensive in his sight.”

More:

“China has already killed more Americans than World War 2.” (Related.)

“Like our leader, we’re a bit mad.”

Clown World. Clown World. Clown World. Clown World. Clown World. Clown World. Demon World. Demon World. Demon World.

“Paul uses shame as a pedagogical tool for Christic formation.”

“Once you reach a modest standard of living, additional income does not increase life satisfaction very much.”

“[T]he Fellowship [of the Ring] is an image of the church.”

The R-Word

The recently #cancelled classic Gone with the Wind

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There

There is racial and ethic hatred and bigotry of all kinds. But these days the word “racism” has little to do with actual hatred and bigotry. Increasingly, it is no more than a political weapon that has no definite meaning at all.

Merriam-Webster is redefining “racism” to reflect more recent developments in critical theory. But you don’t need a dictionary to notice the creativity with which accusations of “racism” are currently thrown around. Math is racist. “Guac” is racist. Coco Pops are racist. Seat belts are racist. Accurate crime alerts are racist. Colorblindness (remember “I Have a Dream”?) is racist. White flight is racist. The reversal of white flight is racist. Time is racist. Earth, wind, fire, and water are racist. Capitalism is racist. Socialism is racist. Lots of things are racisteverything is racist (except prejudice against white people).

Such flexible and ever-changing usage is not an accident. Politics is war, and in political war language may be the most important weapon. Language corrupts thought; thought shapes values; values shape what we buy, vote for, and retweet; money, votes, and retweets are important sources of power. The incentives aren’t complicated, and all political movements respond to them by weaponizing language somehow or other. (That said, since the Establishment is Blue, Blue’s weaponization is much more pervasive and effective. If you don’t believe me, just check out The New York Times Best Sellers List.)

With the word “racism” in particular, the weaponization strategy is simple: Pretty much everyone thinks “racism” is bad. So if (the activist wing of) the Establishment can control what people think is “racist,” it can control what they think is bad. It can control their outrage, their—our—mental, emotional, and even spiritual focus. It can blame anything on “racism,” whether or not any actual hatred or injustice was involved. And it can #cancel anyone who doesn’t fall into line and (literally) bend the knee.

Oh, and it can make money. Lots of money. There’s a whole “anti-racism” industry, which may or may not actually be helping black and other nonwhite Americans but is definitely helping professional activists and “anti-racists” (not to mention good ol’-fashioned scammers): “[A]bout one-quarter of Black Lives Matter expenditures in fiscal year 2019 went to salaries, benefits, and payroll taxes and 46% went to ‘consultant fees.'” (Don’t worry, the Minnesota Freedom Fund—which spent less than 1% of its donations on bailouts of arrested protesters—is “working on doing more.”)

This weaponization strategy isn’t new. Orwell noticed the same pattern with the word “fascism” back in 1944:

It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley’s broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.

Then: astrology, women, dogs. Now: math, “guac,” Coco Pops.

At least since the time of FDR, the Blue Establishment has used this weaponization strategy to take over pretty much the whole world. For decades, it’s been able to defeat almost all opposition by calling it “racist” (or “fascist”). Language control is thought control, and thought control is emotional control, and emotional control is power. By mastering such control, the Blue Establishment has become the most powerful establishment the world has ever seen. And here’s the proof: Even most of its opponents (on both the Right and far Left) willingly submit to its mental and emotional policing. If that ain’t power, then I don’t know what power is.

Why, however, should we put up with the Establishment’s thought policing? “Racism” is not a biblical concept, and at this point it’s not even a concept at all—it’s an anti-concept, a political weapon designed to mean whatever the activists want it to mean. It obscures rather than illuminates, referring to an omnipresent but nebulous malevolent force rather than to anything concrete—and giving the powers of this world (rather than God) ultimate control over our moral outlook and priorities.

“But doesn’t systemic racism obviously exist?” No, not really (at least not in the way you think): “[W]hile studies about anti-black bias that are well-designed generally find either no bias at all, small effects or ambiguous results, the existence of a huge pro-black bias in a variety of settings has been documented over and over.”

“But what’s the big deal? Isn’t this just semantics?” No. Besides what I’ve already said:

  • Oftentimes facts are wrongly discounted as “racist” (or “sexist,” or…) even though they are true. (Example: “African-American [college] applicants receive the largest race/ethnic preference (by a factor of 5.5 over whites).”) Consequently, the word “racist” (by design!) impedes our ability to see the world accurately.
  • As I’ve said, in the background of most “racism” talk is the presupposition that “racism” is an omnipresent malevolent force. Underlying this presupposition is an entire Narrative of historical, economic, and sociological assumptions. But this Narrative, which is perpetuated by words like “racist,” is mostly false.
  • Lots of Christians claim that “racism” is a sin. At first glance, this claim might seem obviously right. But if the word “racism” has no stable and definite meaning, then it’s not only wrong but dangerous, because it subjects the Church’s moral vision to the chaos and corruption of modern culture wars. When the Church uses the world’s language, it is robbed of its unique vocabulary and voice and ultimately reduced to cowardly pandering: “Please don’t hate us, we think racism is bad, too!”
  • To reiterate: Nowadays the word “racism” has precious little to do with hatred and other actual sins. For instance, this Racism Test asks lots of questions about the offensiveness of jokes but none about hatred of different ethnic groups. Accordingly, contemporary anti-“racism” is first and foremost about #cancelculture insanity, not the teachings of Jesus Christ (or the well-being of nonwhite Americans). The word “racist”—and the associated constellation of Woke neo-Marxist terminology (“marginalized,” “privileged,” “intersectional,” “problematic,” etc.)—sucks us into the vortex of modern activist thought instead of drawing us closer to Christ.
  • Actual people all over the world are deeply hurting in all kinds of ways. Focusing on Establishment myths like “systemic racism” distracts us from the issues which matter most to actual hurting people like extreme poverty abroad and the loneliness epidemic at home. (Moreover, it distracts us from solutions to social and political problems that actually work and genuinely help those in need.)

For all those reasons and more, I avoid using the r-word. Instead, I use good ol’-fashioned words like “hatred” and “bigotry.” They aren’t perfect, but they usually get the job done, and they haven’t been politicized to the same extent. At the end of the day, I don’t want the Establishment to control my thoughts; I want Reality to control my thoughts. What about you?

I oppose hatred and cruelty. I’m repelled by them whenever I encounter them, regardless of who their target is: blacks, whites, Mexicans, cops, Muslims, Christians, or any other group.

But I refuse to bend the mental knee to the powers of this world, which are much more interested in their own wealth and power than in the plight of black Americans. I refuse to play their language games. I refuse to give them my emotional and verbal allegiance.

Carlyle on the Cutting Asunder of Human Relations

Thomas Carlyle lm.jpg

Certainly the notion everywhere prevails among us … That the grand panacea for social woes is what we call ‘enfranchisement,’ ’emancipation;’ or, translated into practical language, the cutting asunder of human relations, wherever they are found grievous…. Let us all be ‘free’ of one another; we shall then be happy. Free, without bond or connection except that of cash-payment; fair day’s wages for the fair day’s work; bargained for by voluntary contract, and law of supply-and-demand: this is thought to be the true solution of all difficulties and injustices that have occurred between man and man.

To rectify the relation that exists between two men, is there no method, then, but that of ending it? The old relation has become unsuitable, obsolete, perhaps unjust; it imperatively requires to be amended; and the remedy is, Abolish it, let there henceforth be no relation at all. From the ‘Sacrament of Marriage’ downwards, human beings used to be manifoldly related, one to another, and each to all; and there was no relation among human beings, just or unjust, that had not its grievances and difficulties, its necessities on both sides to bear and forbear. But henceforth, be it known, we have changed all that, by favor of Heaven: ‘the voluntary principle’ has come up, which will itself do the business for us; and now let a new Sacrament, that of Divorce, which we call emancipation, and spout of on our platforms, be universally the order of the day!—Have men considered whither all this is tending, and what it certainly enough betokens? Cut every human relation which has anywhere grown uneasy sheer asunder; reduce whatsoever was compulsory to voluntary, whatsoever was permanent among us to the condition of nomadic:—in other words, loosen by assiduous wedges in every joint, the whole fabric of social existence, stone from stone: till at last, all now being loose enough, it can, as we already see in most countries, be overset by sudden outburst of revolutionary rage; and, lying as mere mountains of anarchic rubbish, solicit you to sing Fraternity, &c., over it, and to rejoice in the new remarkable era of human progress we have arrived at.

Thomas Carlyle, Latter-Day Pamphlets

The Spirit of the Lord Is a Warrior Spirit

And the Spirit of the Lord came upon [Othniel], and he judged Israel, and went out to war.

Judges 3.10a

And the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon [Samson], and he rent [the lion] as he would have rent a kid, and he had nothing in his hand.

Judges 14.6a

And the Spirit of the Lord came upon [Samson], and he went down to Ashkelon, and slew thirty men of them, and took their spoil.

Judges 14.19a

And when [Samson] came unto Lehi, the Philistines shouted against him: and the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon him, and the cords that were upon his arms became as flax that was burnt with fire, and his bands loosed from off his hands.

Judges 15.14

The Spirit comes upon other warriors as well: Gideon, Jephthah, Saul, and David. Those who are overcome with fear of war are described as spiritless (Joshua 5.1).

The Spirit of the Lord is a warrior spirit.

Day Bidet #6

Seven days, seven links:

  1. “The scandal of the cross”
  2. “[A]ll that is here are humans.”
  3. “By maintaining His claim of equality with the Father in John 10:38 Jesus would then be claiming to be a co-regent authority over the divine beings of Psalm 82.”
  4. “In 2018, the UK reported a 4,400 percent rise over the previous decade in teenage girls seeking gender treatments.”
  5. “[T]he nomadic Edomites could and did form a powerful political entity more than 3,000 years ago, as the Bible suggests.”
  6. “He said that it was hard to break the news to Whitaker’s son, who didn’t understand the implications of his mother’s death.” (Related. Related. Related. Related. Related. Related. Related. Related. Related. Related.)
  7. Despite superficial appearances to the contrary, all four Gospels agree on when the Last Supper took place.

More:

“Nation That Kills 3,000 Babies a Day Feels Morally Superior to Slaveowners from 200 Years Ago” (related; related)

“[John 21] is an allusion to Peter’s having boasted that even if all the other disciples abandoned Jesus, he would stand firm. … But … Peter’s boast, and his contrasting himself to the other disciples, appears nowhere in the Gospel of John! … It is in Matthew 26:33 and in Mark 14:29.”

Carnivore success story. (Related. Related. Related. Related.)

“[T]he conquest of Canaan meant defeating the Canaanite armies in battle and driving out of the land at least a significant portion of the Canaanite population” (rather than genocide).

Clown World. Clown World. Clown World. Clown World. Clown World.

“Male/Female Parallels in the Gospel of Luke”

And He Could No Longer Bear to See Israel Suffer

Edgar Degas, Study for “La fille de Jephté” (“The Daughter of Jephthah”)

So the Israelites cried to the Lord, saying, “We have sinned against you, because we have abandoned our God and have worshiped the Baals.” And the Lord said to the Israelites, “Did I not deliver you from the Egyptians and from the Amorites, from the Ammonites and from the Philistines? The Sidonians also, and the Amalekites, and the Maonites, oppressed you; and you cried to me, and I delivered you out of their hand. Yet you have abandoned me and worshiped other gods; therefore I will deliver you no more. Go and cry to the gods whom you have chosen; let them deliver you in the time of your distress.” And the Israelites said to the Lord, “We have sinned; do to us whatever seems good to you; but deliver us this day!” So they put away the foreign gods from among them and worshiped the Lord; and he could no longer bear to see Israel suffer.

Judges 10.10-16 (NRSV)

The Parable of the ______

Christ said ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor thyself,’ and when asked ‘who is my neighbor?’ went on to the parable of the Good Samaritan. If you wish to understand this parable as it was understood by his hearers, you should substitute ‘German’ or ‘Japanese’ for ‘Samaritan’, I fear many present day Christians would resent such a substitution, because it would compel them to realise how far they have departed from the teaching of the Founder of their religion.

Bertrand Russell

It’s a point I’ve touched on before, but whom should you (or I) substitute for the Good Samaritan? Some possibilities:

  • The Good Illegal Alien
  • The Good Privileged White Man
  • The Good Muslim
  • The Good Fundamentalist
  • The Good Democratic Socialist
  • The Good Trump Supporter
  • The Good Antifa
  • The Good White Nationalist

Am I saying all these groups are morally equivalent or above criticism? No. But it is a good and humbling exercise to remember that members of our ethnic, religious, and political outgroups can—and often do—outlove us.