Showing posts with label paganism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label paganism. Show all posts

Friday, 18 August 2017

Post 178--Five Facts About Alt-Right

Hello, I'm back from visiting kids and grand kids. The last visit was in Silicon Valley, where our oldest son and family live.  We were there for a good three weeks, sort of taking over the house, kitchen and all, at their request. Fun but busy, oh so busy, what with shopping, cooking and re-organizing their kitchen and warehouse.  I'll try my best to be more regular again, but when travel comes up, well, not much choice!
I pick up the  pieces with a blatantly American essay about the Alt-right. I do so, simply because Canadian media insist on its parallel(s) in Canada. In fact, tomorrow there will be some sort of demonstration or rally around Vancouver City Hall involving both them and their opponents. So, you're better off to understand the movement.  
This piece is written by Joe Carter of the conservative Acton Institute of Grand Rapids MI, a Catholic think tank with strong cooperative ties with Reformed groups in that city. Here goes Carter:
============
A rally held in Charlottesville, Virginia this weekend ended in violence and domestic terrorism, as white nationalist groups clashed with counter-protestors. The Unite the Right rally was intended, as co-promoter Matthew Heimbach explains, to unite the alt-right around the “14 words”: “We must secure the existence of our people and the future for white children’—as our primary motivating factor.”
The objectives of the alt-right movement are antithetical to the mission, values, and principles of the Acton Institute and other like-minded groups. Yet the movement is often associated with traditional forms of conservatism and libertarianism even though its supporters frequently rejects issues such as economic freedom and the dignity of all people that we consider foundational.* For this reason, you should know what the alt-right believes and the agenda they work to promote.
Here are five facts you should know about the alt-right:
1. The alt-right—short for “alternative right”—is an umbrella term for a host of disparate nationalist and populist groups associated with the white identity cause/movement. The term brings together white supremacists (e.g., neo-Nazis), religious racialists (e.g., Kinists), neo-pagans (e.g., Heathenry), internet trolls (e.g., 4chan’s /pol/), and others enamored with white identity and racialism. These groups seek to provide an “alternative” to mainstream American conservatism, which they believe is insufficiently concerned about the objectives of white identity, the defining concept that unites the alt-right. “Racial Identity,” said Arthur Kemp in March of the Titans: A History of the White Race, “can be defined as the conscious recognition that one belongs to a specific race, ethnicity, and culture and with that comes certain obligations toward their own welfare.” And the alt-right leader Jared Taylor of American Renaissance defines “white identity” as “a recognition by whites that they have interests in common that must be defended. All other racial groups take this for granted, that it’s necessary to band together along racial lines to work together for common interests.” In this video, Taylor answers the question, “What Is the Alt-Right?”
2. This association of the term alt-right with white identity politics first appeared in December 2008 when Paul Gottfried wrote an article for Taki’s Magazine titled, “The Decline and Rise of the Alternative Right.” (The article itself does not use the phrase “alternative right,” and the editor of the magazine at that time, Richard Spencer—the current leading figure in the alt-right—claims to have added the title.) At the time, the “alternative right” was loosely associated with “paleoconservatives” (another term created by Gottfried). Paleocons were self-identified conservatives who rejected the neo-conservatism of the George W. Bush-era. While the group tended to be anti-globalist and anti-war (especially opposed to the Iraq War) it was not necessarily associated with white identity politics. But in his article Gottfried identified “postpaleos” as a “growing communion “that now includes Takimag, VDARE.com, and other websites that are willing to engage sensitive, timely subjects.” The “sensitive, timely subjects” Gottfried refers to are topics that had previously been the main concern of white identity groups, issues such as non-white immigration (“being physically displaced by the entire Third World”) and “human cognitive capacities” (i.e., the belief that certain racial groups are, in general, intellectually inferior to others). In 2010, Richard Spencer launched a website, AlternativeRight.com, to promote these views. Since then, the term has been associated with the white identity movement.
3. The alt-right is a mostly secular movement that frequently embraces leftist political views (especially on economics) and rejects traditional conservatism. As George Hawley, a University of Alabama professor who has studied the movement, toldThe Washington Post, “the modal alt-right person is a male, white millennial; probably has a college degree or is in college; is secular and perhaps atheist and [is] not interested in the conservative movement at all.” What puts the movement on the “right” is that it shares, along with conservatism, skepticism of forced egalitarianism. But that’s generally all it shares with mainstream conservatism. In fact, many on the alt-right (such as Spencer) hold views associated with progressivism (e.g., support for abortion and opposition to free-market economics). The confusion about the movement’s politics lies in thinking that extremist groups are on each “end” of the left-right political spectrum. It is more accurate to consider them through the lens of the horseshoe theory, a concept in political science that claims the far left and the far right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear political continuum, closely resemble one another, much like the ends of a horseshoe.
4. While generally secular, the alt-right sometimes embraces “Christendom” (their version of a white European cultural Christianity) and some (such as Vox Day) claim that Christianity is a “foundational pillar” of the movement. But what they mean by Christianity is often a heretical form (Day rejects the Trinity and doesn’t believe the races are “spiritually” equal) a racialized version of the faith (e.g., the Kinist movement), or “religion as culture” (Spencer says he is both an atheist and a “culture Christian”). The movement is also frequently embraced by neo-pagans. As alt-right leader Stephen McNallen has said, “I am a pagan because it is the only way I can be true to who, and what, I am. I am a pagan because the best things in our civilization come from pre-Christian Europe.” McNallen says he opposes Christianity because it “lacks any roots in blood or soil” and consequently can “claim the allegiance of all the human race.” The true religion of the alt-right is white identitarianism.
5. The alt-right embraces white identity politics and almost all of them embrace white nationalism. But not everyone on the alt-right embraces white supremacy. White supremacy is the belief that lighter-skinned or “white” racial groups are superior to all other racial groups. Modern advocates of white supremacy (such as the KKK) almost always advocate for white identity, though the reverse is not always true. As alt right leader Vox Day says, “The Alt Right does not believe in the general supremacy of any race, nation, people, or sub-species. Every race, nation, people, and human sub-species has its own unique strengths and weaknesses, and possesses the sovereign right to dwell unmolested in the native culture it prefers.” White supremacy is also often conflated with white nationalism, the political view that merges nationalism with white identity. White nationalists are racial separatists who believe that to preserve the white race, other racial groups must be excluded or marginalized in “white states” (i.e., countries or regions that have historically had majority-white populations). White nationalists are frequently concerned about miscegenation and non-white immigration because it contributes to what they consider to be “white genocide,” i.e., the replacement of the “white race” by other racial groups.
*Many Christian conservatives and libertarians who do not agree with white identity politics have recently begun to refer to themselves as the “alt-right.” This is a disconcerting trend.
Some who do so simply do not understand the history of the term. They assume it means something akin to “paleoconservative” or is a synonym for “Trump supporter.” They aren’t aware it was chosen several years ago specifically to provide diverse groups who embrace the “14 Words” with a label to rally around. Others have adopted “alt-right” because the media has begun to use the term as a critique of all people on the political right, and so claim it as an act of defiance to the media. A smaller number of people understand what the term means but want to reclaim it for other uses.
But no one who is not a white nationalist, white supremacist, or white identitarian should ever use the label to describe their own views. Here are three reasons why.
First, it delegitimizes conservatives who do not embrace racialism. When decent people align themselves with a label like alt-right it gives the impression such views are considered acceptable within mainstream conservatism.
Second, it legitimizes racist elements within society. If you would not associate yourself with the KKK or neo-Nazis, you should not associate with the alt-right simply because they do not all wear hoods and chant “sieg heil.” (Though they sometimes do.) Conservatives and libertarians should be distancing themselves from fascist movements, not embracing them out of solidarity against the mainstream media.
Third, we can’t take back the term. Whatever legitimate uses the term “alternative right” may have had were destroyed long ago. Eight years ago Richard Spencer—the man who coined the term alt-right—started the website “Alternative Right.” Spencer used the site to flirt with Holocaust denial, promote racist and anti-Semitic views, and to champion the cause of white nationalism. He’s owned the term longer than anyone who now wants to adopt it. Attempting to reclaim the term is about as futile and unnecessary as attempting to reclaim the swastika.
Fourth, at the core of the alt-right movement is idolatry—the idol of “whiteness.” In building their identity on shared genetic traits the alt-right divides humanity and leads people away from the only source of true identity: Jesus Christ. The alt-right is anti-gospel because to embrace white identity requires rejecting the Christian identity. No Christian who loves Jesus should associate themselves with a label that is intended to promote racial separation and hate.
Not Tragically Colored


Saturday, 15 October 2016

Post 131—Prostitution: Further Ruminations


Rehabbing Prostitute Culture               
So the City Fathers of Vancouver decided the reputation of former West End (WE) prostitutes needed to be rehabbed. (See Post 130.) Did they consult with us WE residents at all? They may have, but I certainly never heard of such an event, while I usually try to keep on top of such happenings. Such consultations are usually well advertised far ahead of time. I must admit, of course, that I do travel a lot and thus might miss some of these occasions.
Lack of Citizen Involvement
But were there any cries from the current residents that a former injustice had to be undone?  Was the city under local pressure on this matter?  Even if I missed out on whatever public consultations might have taken place, I have noticed nothing of public pressure to restore the honour of prostitutes, let alone thank them for their historic contribution to advancing our “progressive” WE culture. I am sociable; I spend time on the street; I drink tea on the new plaza in front of our building. I heard no such discussion of any kind. It seems the City Fathers just quietly slipped this one over us, possibly alerting some citizen groups they would expect to support such a move, but almost definitely no general public consultation. Though St. Paul’s Anglican Church participated in and approved of the action, I doubt that other area churches such as my church, the large Baptist “cathedral” at Burrard and Nelson, was consulted, or the Guardian Angel Catholic Church on Broughton. Possibly St. Andrews United, for they could be expected to support the move and, perhaps, the Presbyterians.
Citizen Reactions
As could be expected, citizen reactions ran the full gamut from warm embrace to vigorous rejection. One Derek Frew wrote that he initially thought it a case of “blasphemy” that “involved…placing a monument to paganism in front of a Christian church.” But then he had second thoughts urged on him by words attributed to the famous writer G. K. Chesterton: “Every man who knocks on the door of a brothel is looking for God.” Frew concluded that “perhaps not a bad place for it after all” ! (Vancouver Sun, Sept 20, 2016, p. A11).  If nothing else, his has at least a humorous touch to it.
The Earlier Part of the Story
From the other side of the opinion track, we get Ray McNabb’s piece on the same VS page under the title “Memorial to sex workers a wrong-headed affront.”  He’s lived in the WE for 40 years and has always found it “a wonderful area to live in. However, I vividly recall a time when it wasn’t.” That time was the early 1970s when there was so much traffic that he could hardly get onto the street. There was a constant lot of “noise, car horns, car radios booming, shouting, swearing from the traffic. The cars were all headed for Davie Street, where the prostitutes all gathered. Bumper to bumper stuff. Some WE-enders organized a “Shame the Johns” movement. “We were upset and annoyed with the lack of action by the police and city hall….”  A pressure group of citizens, including some politicians, finally was heard and the “court ordered the…hookers out of the WE.”  Traffic was forced away from the regular tours by a mini-park on Jervis and a cul-de-sac at Bute & Burnaby, right in front of my building here. The neighbourhood slowly “returned to normal.”
Then and Now
So, that time there was public pressure on the authorities to stop the sex trade in the WE.  The residents did not want it. It ruined their lives and turned the area into a noisy and chaotic place. Davie village became so infamous that even in Africa, where I lived at the time, I heard about it, just like today the place is world famous for its gay-friendly culture so that gay people from all over the world gather in the WE to participate in the annual week-long activities that culminate in the huge local gay parade. But notice the difference:  infamous vs famous. At that time it was the laughing stock of the province, nation and even world! 
An Affront
And now, McNabb rightly complains that city Counselor Andrea Reimer, judging from the name, a descendant of that morally pristine Mennonite community, refers to the citizens’ action in the 70s as “a tragic injustice.”  Oh, yeah? How about opening up space for that crowd on her street and see if she would still feel that way! Her neighbours would likely drive her out with the rest of the crowd to follow!  If not worse!  “What an affront!” comments McNabb. “She lost my vote”—and mine as well. I am coming close to dubbing her an “idiot!”  Again, something like calling a spade a spade.
The Next Post

I hope to have the time to prepare for the next post to deal with the more overtly Christian perspective on the issue. You will learn that I do not see it all in black and white terms. My prostitute story in Post 130 is illustrative of the tragic circumstances that can drive a person into prostitution. I am far from judging an individual prostitute, but that is very different from elevating the culture of prostitution to the level of desirability to which more communities should aspire.