*
People often advocate this or that socio-political change in opposition to the Leftist and secular domination of modern societies - but such plans and hopes get nowhere because there is (next to-) nothing to work with in the functional systems of modernity.
*
So, for example, there might be (there are) many sensible proposals for reforming and revitalizing the Church of England (as a whole) in a conservative direction - but the organization is so corrupted by Leftism that there is nothing to work with. As a whole, there is no motivation for change. Indeed, as a whole, the motivation is for more of the bad stuff!
*
(So where does one start? Only one possibility. Forget the whole. Start with those parts (no matter how small) where there is something to work with, some motivation. Build-on-them.)
*
Or, universities, or health service provision, or the law, or public administration or the media... Easy to see what's wrong, easy to make plans to put them right - but when it comes to action, there is nothing to work on, and no overall desire to do anything constructive - the process doesn't even get started.
*
Or a nation and nationalism - anyone can perceive the long-term impossibility of trying to run a country when there is n control of borders, no deportation, active subsidy of invaders and law-breakers, an active denigration and exploitation of natives at the expense of non-natives, of producers at the expense of consumers, of workers at the expense of the economically inactive and so on. This is a no-brainer.
But what when the natives/ producers/ workers are indifferent to patriotism, national interest, their own culture, the medium-term future as of course they are - or else the current situation would not have arisen and could not be hidden?
Then there is nothing to work with, and no motivation to work.
*
The underlying problem is demotivation - the constraint is that hardly anybody, any group, any institution, any nation or super-national body is motivated to do the right and necessary things.
(If they were, we could not be where we are.)
The modern world is suffering a generalized paralysis of the insane: we are not just demotivated (which is passive), but we have an insane positive motivation for that which is destroying us.
Therefore, there is no point at all in hatching general plans and schemes for change which depend on non-existent motivations.
*
Indeed, we should be doing exactly the opposite: start-from motivation, and start-with the motivated.
We should root our hopes and plans and dreams in those who want Good things; those who are thinking, talking, acting, and working courageously to attain Good things.
Then we would have something to work with and motivation to work.
*
But then, of course, this means that we don't get to daydream about bringing the rest of the world into line with a check-list of our own preferences; but instead have to accept some external and already existing source of motivation.
We must join, not lead.
*
I agree: join and follow, faithfully.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite example is Socrates. What did Socrates, who was clearly a genius, do when he stood in an Athenian phalanx? The same as every other hoplite in the phalanx, because there was nothing better to do.
We need to get over the idea that "I'm smart, therefore I should be doing something different from these other guys who aren't as smart. I should lead or go my own way, since I'm brilliant."
The intellectual leaders and media stars of the modern white world make a fetish of being different and first, not like the dull masses, and it works for them, if only because they have no loyalty to the masses of ordinary white and commonly Christian people the are alienating themselves from. That will not work for anti-PC people at all.
Don't be the guy in your small non-PC group who has to do everything his own way and is always ready to take his toys and go home if he doesn't get his on way.
@D - I should candidly admit that this post is a case of "Don't do as I do: do as I say" - because I am what we describe in England as "not a joiner"; however, in this respect I am wrong. I *should* join - but of course be properly discriminating about what I join. If, as it seems, I 'can't' join, then I must acknowledge my deficiency.
ReplyDeleteWhat should one attempt to join?
ReplyDeleteChurch was a real letdown for me, as its decidedly leftist.
Career? I've made so many attempts to do something meaningful but all white collar work is basically the same.
Exactly what are we supposed to join?
@asdf - How could I possibly know what *you* should join! But of course a Christian 'church' is the most likely answer - except that 'church' may in this instance refer to a single specific congregation, or a very small denomination, or a monastery, or even a 'home group' - or whatever it is that is alive and working and motivated and that you respect no matter how small (respect *overall*, I mean - it is certainly not, ever, necessary, or even desirable that anyone should subscribe to every detail about a church - although we should should be careful about publicly criticizing or subverting that with which we disagree, except under exceptional circumstances).
ReplyDelete"Church was a real letdown for me"
ReplyDeleteDifferent churches are different. Within the Catholic Church, for example, there is a huge amount of variety. Even within the same physical church, there is often significant variety (different Masses, different groups to join).
If a given church isn't speaking to you, perhaps try another one?
ajb,
ReplyDeleteI tried some different churches and Bible studies. They didn't seem that different (or more accurately they all had different but major flaws). I also try not to "church hop".