View 429 August 28 - September 3, 2006 (original) (raw)
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Things improve, slowly. Keep doing the stretches, take the pain killers to get a good night sleep, get up and stretch every hour or so.
The column is up at www.chaosmanorreviews.com and I will have next Monday's up on time. And it's time to work on Inferno.
Subscriptions are coming in, not quite as fast as I would like, but they are coming in, so this experiment will continue. I will start the daily observations and essays again shortly. Thanks to all of you for patience. I do have things to say other than observations about my problems.
The California State Legislature has lost its mind. Bills to finish off what businesses remain in the state seem to flow out like effluvia from an abscess.
The Partition of Mankind
Apparently the IDF military commanders wanted to finish the job in Lebanon, and did not want the cease fire. Good on them. Unfortunately, their political masters were not up to it. The IDF won all its tactical battles, but Israel lost the war. If that sounds familiar, recall Viet Nam. Hizbollah is already flowing back into the areas from which they were driven, the missiles are flowing back in, and Hizbollah now has seasoned combat veterans to become NCO's in their new expanded army. The cost to Israel for not finishing the job will be a lot higher than anyone (except the IDF officer corps) understands. As Joel Rosenberg says, quite often it sucks to be right. I wish I weren't right about this.
And all this is small potatoes in the global war, which is a three-way war for humanity: Islam, Christianity, and Atheist Humanism. One, and only one, of those will prevail. Of the three, Christianity seems to have the most tolerance for those not of its faith. It is only tolerance: the command is to preach the Word to all peoples. But Islam is commanded to convert all those not put under tribute; while Atheist Humanism appears to be the most intolerant of the lot, insisting that in areas where it is in control there shall not even be tolerance of unbelievers.
Liberalism is not really a contender here. The John Stuart Mill variety of Liberalism is pretty close to what we today call Libertarianism, and its triumph would be no bad thing at all; but it appears to be unstable. Modern Liberalism is closer to Atheist Humanism and seems increasingly less tolerant of deviation from its tenets. There will always be advocates of "liberal democracy" (the political faith that Frances Fukuyama thought already triumphant so that we could see the end of history) but liberal democracy doesn't have passionate defenders. Few will give their lives for it; and as it becomes increasingly intolerant (take that Cross off that hillside! Its existence offends us!) it alienates those with real passions.
Yes. I know. There are intolerant Christians. Many of those, though, are actually seeking to be left alone, and while they would welcome converts, they mostly want to be able to raise their children without interference from outsiders who seek to impose Atheist Humanism or one of its namby pamby Liberal variants. As for the others, Niven's Law prevails: no cause is so just that it will not attract fuggheads, and the fuggheads generally get all the publicity and seem to be the spokespeople for the cause.
The US was founded on the notion of consent of the governed as the only real legitimacy of government. That requires Federalism, and requires that we respect each others' rights to be different. Really different. My example is the Blue Belly Baptists who feel that you must paint your belly button blue on Wednesday afternoons and seek laws requiring that those who appear in public on Wednesday afternoons have a blue belly button. So long as they have a restricted jurisdiction (and I don't think their doctrine will appeal to many townships) I see no reason why they should not have their silly laws. I won't live in their town, or if I do remain there, I will get some Woad for Wednesdays. I may or may not mix in aconite. Alas, the modern tendency will be to send in the National Guard to protect someone's right to live in Blue Belly Village with an unadorned belly button.
In a contest for existence, those without passion usually lose to those with passionate fervor for their cause. The Muslims are able to generate such passions. Christians have been able to do so. One wonders what passions the Atheist Humanists will be able to generate, and if those will be enough to defend what used to be called Western Civilization.
==
Subject: Your partition of humanity
Jerry,
"And all this is small potatoes in the global war, which is a three-way war for humanity: Islam, Christianity, and Atheist Humanism. One, and only one, of those will prevail."
Where do China and India fall in this division? I don't believe that either Christianity or Islam have much of a hold in those countries. Their religious traditions are Hinduism and Buddhism, neither of which seem to be as aggressive as Christianity or Islam when it comes to converting the nonbeliever. Perhaps you consider China and India to be mostly under the sway of Atheist Humanism? Any possibility that Athiest Humanism with Eastern religious underpinnings is significantly different (and more effective) than Atheist Humanism with Judeo-Christian underpinnings?
CP, Connecticut
And your point is well made. I do appear to be overly Western-centric. And yet.
It may be that Buddhism will prevail. We know that the Muslims had great success in India, but something did stop the spread of Islam to all of India. China is, officially, Atheist Humanist (Marxist) but that doesn't entirely prevail throughout the country. I am not sufficiently acquainted with the situation there to have an opinion. I do note that the government seems afraid of missionaries.
Sikhs have an aggressive and passionate attachment to their religious views, and have even won some converts in the west, but not very many. How long the Sikh regions could hold out against a world aflame with chiliastic zeal I don't know.
But I think the main theater of events will be in the West. If Islam takes Europe, which no longer seems impossible, and remains immune to the Western weapons of cultural mass destruction, who will prevail against them? Hindu adherents are ardent, and we know they can fight: the Gurkha regiments are Hindu in religion; but it does seem to me that Atheist Humanism is making great strides among the educated and powerful in India. Perhaps someone with more knowledge than I have will comment.
But I do believe the main theater of events is in the West, and in the West we have Christian, Muslim, and Atheist Humanist as the real protagonists; and the Atheist Humanists do not seem willing to die for their faith although they will kill to impose it if the costs are not too high.