Be the Scapegoat

As rejecting the patrimonial cult, the tradent renders himself ritually unclean by its terms, and may therefore expect to be exploited sooner or later as a scapegoat. Modern society seethes with resentment, guilt and shame. To avert total meltdown, it needs regular expiatory ritual immolations of unclean scapegoats. When someone in the dysfunctional system must be designated the problem child, and all the blame for the dysfunction laid on his shoulders, and expelled from the community, that someone will probably be the tradent, who by his refusals to worship Moloch shall already have nominated himself for ostracism and banishment.

Be the scapegoat, then. Choose to be the scapegoat. Choose exit; choose escape for yourself and your own family from the system of the modern world, from its moral and aesthetic categories and imperatives. Plan it; put it into effect. If you choose exit from insane society, and put that exit into practical effect, implementing it all your quotidian acts, you can’t be too badly hurt when you are banished from it. Start on the project soon enough, and you’ll be so far gone that it won’t occur to them to ostracize you when they are next looking for a victim.

An effectual scapegoat must be selected from within the community. Let us be without it, then. The more of us who betake ourselves away from the precincts of the Revolutionaries, the sooner and more often they’ll start chopping each others’ heads off.

39 thoughts on “Be the Scapegoat

  1. Pingback: Be the Scapegoat | Neoreactive

  2. This is excellent advice, and very much sound in its reasoning. It certainly doesn’t help the left that their current base of degenerate classes raised to the top is a cauldron of contradictions. They embrace the embryonic stage of the Islamic uprising, but lavish praise on sodomites. They shelter the criminal rape culture of black men, but abhor anything that offends Feminist sensibilities. They tell the poor how oppressed they are by the excesses of Capitalism, yet take fat paychecks and lobbying proposals from the biggest banks in the country.

    If those of a Reactionary bent could find ‘exit’, the society’s ‘Two Minutes Hate’ would have to be directed inwards. And when the last Robespierre declares victory from his mound of corpses, he’ll be shocked to discover legions of the dispossessed at the gates of the fortress, emerged from the desert. Alas, he’ll have no fighters left. The only thing that will remain is his own scrawny neck.

    • Antony fled Alexandria to be absolutely alone, except for God, in the Thebaid. That it is to say, he preempted his own scapegoating by making himself an outcast without a referendum. Ironically, but not all that ironically, Antony became the founder of a new community. Josh, the answer to “exit where” is, anywhere or nowhere. It doesn’t matter because the real secession in inward.

      Remember, before Benedict there were no Benedictines.

      PS: One practical step that you can take is to stop participating in the scapegoating cult called democracy – and you can do that by ceasing to participate in democracy’s main scapegoating ritual, the election.

      • I don’t follow politics. Maybe the hermit monks were part of God’s plan, maybe they will be again, but communities of like-minded people helping each other, praying for each other, trying to be oriented toward the good is the ideal for a social animal.

        After Benedict there were A LOT of Benedictines (and even more Christians). NOVA?

      • “…by ceasing to participate in democracy’s main scapegoating ritual, the election.

        Hear, hear!

    • I was raised in Loudoun County, I live in the WV’s eastern panhandle now and work just south of Winchester. Where are you at Josh?

  3. Exactly – after Benedict there were lots of Benedictines. Like-mindedness requires a beginning. In a conformist society, the beginning of renewal can only be in non-conformity. There must be (pardoning the slight mutation of grammar) many first non-conformists who care not whether they attract followers, but who act in conscience, rejecting the pressure of the crowd. No one can be “like” anything until the “anything” acquires an identity. As Kristor says in other words, first non-conformists will look a good deal like scapegoats, but they cannot function as scapegoats because they will not have isolated themselves through a referendum; they will not have assembled a mob; and they can only be imitated, not expelled.
    The difference between a scapegoat expelled or immolated by a mob and a secessionist (like Antony) is that the mob cannot abide the scapegoat’s difference; the mob wants to be unanimous, so it expels or immolates the scandal. The secessionist preempts his expulsion by insisting on his difference and refusing to join in unanimity – to the extent of martyrdom. A martyr is not a scapegoat: He is an anti-scapegoat.
    I have no notion what NOVA is, only that it was a science-program on “Educational TV” in Los Angeles around 1968, but you can’t possibly mean that.

  4. Pingback: Be the Scapegoat | Reaction Times

  5. Simplicius, living under the tyranny of Justinian, gave sage advice on how to conduct oourselves in evil times like that in which we presently live:

    In worthless states, however, he will abstain from public affairs, because he doesn’t like badly-governed citizens, and isn’t liked by them either, and he can’t serve the rulers of such people while keeping ‘that trustworthy and respectful person around’. Hence, since he declines to give advice about matters that are beyond cure, he will emigrate to another, better state, if he can, as Epictetus himself did, moving from Rome to Nicopolis in condemnation of Domitian’s tyranny. If he can’t, he will crouch under a little wall, as it were, avoiding the cloud of dust, having concern for the well-being of himself and of as many others as he can, on the look-out at all times day and night for any good action happening at any time which needs his help, out of fellowship with his friends and all the citizens. Many actions will be found even in these states which need some advice and trustworthy help, or sympathy and encouragement, or even a companion in danger on occasions when the appropriate action dictates this as well. And should things go well for him as they flow by, he will give thanks to God for his calm amidst the storm; but if in the undeclared war of unnatural people against those in accordance with nature, or of the drunk against the sober, he encounters difficulties – well, those who are cowed and undo their ethical disposition show themselves worthy of a bad political system, and their disdain for it is proven vain; while those who use them as a training-ground and wrestle more eagerly with tougher opponents, so that they even given thanks to the training-master for these opportunities, such people will be crowned like Olympic victors, but with the fullness of the good life and truth rather than a wreath of olive.

    — Simplicius, Commentary on the Enchiridion of Epictetus

      • I think of Justinian as the first Caliph.
        Can you extrapolate on what you mean by that? I know some here see the caesaro-papist model as an ideal but I certainly do not.

  6. Incidentally, scapegoaters are people desperately in need of gods. They immolate their victims in the hope that their victims will become the gods who will save them. This is why a resolutely atheist society will be a relentlessly scapegoating society.

      • The story of Hypatia popularly told is almost entirely lies enlisted in the service of those who hate religion. Almost everything about it is wrong. Mike Flynn has a fascinating 8 part series of posts on what really happened, starting here. It is totally worth a read. Factoid city, if you know what I mean.

        Suffice to say that Hypatia does not quite fit the role of scapegoat. She was more like an innocent bystander, caught by chance in the crossfire between two feuding camps of Christians political factions. Neither of these factions were atheist.

      • See my Nineteenth Century Literature article, “Like Hypatia before the Mob” (1996, if I recall). Hypatia was a Christian in all but profession; the so-called Christian mob that murdered her was the same old lynch-mob, god-bereft, and desperately seeking a new god.

        I commend Joseph A. on not reduplicating the definite article when he refers to “the polloi.” Liberals invariably write, “the hoi polloi.” Ceux sont les barbares!

      • Dr. Bertonneau is absolutely right about Hypatia being caught between two religious/political factions, but I would say wrong about her being an anonymous Christian. She was a mathematician and Platonic philosopher, though not a participant in pagan cultic activities. I have faith that Damascius gives an honest account of the version of Hypatia’s death current in the Alexandria of his day, which also agrees in essence with the account given by Socrates Scholasticus in his Ecclesiastical History:

        There was a woman at Alexandria named Hypatia, daughter of the philosopher Theon, who made such attainments in literature and science, as to far surpass all the philosophers of her own time. Having succeeded to the school of Plato and Plotinus, she explained the principles of philosophy to her auditors, many of whom came from a distance to receive her instructions. On account of the self-possession and ease of manner, which she had acquired in consequence of the cultivation of her mind, she not unfrequently appeared in public in presence of the magistrates. Neither did she feel abashed in going to an assembly of men. For all men on account of her extraordinary dignity and virtue admired her the more. Yet even she fell victim to the political jealousy which at that time prevailed. For as she had frequent interviews with Orestes, it was calumniously reported among the Christian populace, that it was she who prevented Orestes from being reconciled to the bishop. Some of them, therefore, hurried away by a fierce and bigoted zeal, whose ringleader was a reader named Peter, waylaid her returning home, and dragging her from her carriage, they took her to the church called Caesareum, where they completely stripped her, and then murdered her with tiles.* After tearing her body in pieces, they took her mangled limbs to a place called Cinaron, and there burnt them. This affair brought not the least opprobrium, not only upon Cyril, but also upon the whole Alexandrian church. And surely nothing can be farther from the spirit of Christianity than the allowance of massacres, fights, and transactions of that sort. This happened in the month of March during Lent, in the fourth year of Cyril’s episcopate, under the tenth consulate of Honorius, and the sixth of Theodosius.

        I believe that many in Cyril’s party could be considered atheists, at least by the definition given by Plato in The Laws. An atheist is anyone who believes the gods do not exist, are not providential, or can be bought off and caused to change by means of prayer and sacrifice. Anyone who believes that God or the gods can be served by evil is therefore an atheist.

      • Kristor, thanks for the heads up on the Mike Flynn peice the first V parts have been page turners (down scrollers?) to say the least.

        Dr. Bertonneau,

        Have you read the piece to which Kristor alludes? I haven’t read your article yet.

  7. In America circa 2015, there is only one legitimate scapegoat and he is the genuine white Supremacist.

    BUT…

    Because there are virtually no self-identified genuine white Supremacists then, as was pointed out in the post, the scapegoat is really one of the anti-white Supremacists who broke from the massive weight of the deceptive liberal lies. Dylann Roof is a good example of a former anti-racist BLINDSIDED by racial truths that were entirely hidden from him until they weren’t. So the reality is that the mechanism by which radical liberationists “justifiably” annihilate each other is by simply “slandering” each other with the “white supremacist” label.

    Of course, to truly be a scapegoat in Murka and also escape with a preemptive separation, one must strive towards Supremacy. One must be a Supremacist… And only white Supremacists have any chance of perpetuating white Christianity or building a newly revived and healthy America.

  8. Should I?

    Today is the first day I have come inescapably face to face with the new definition of marriage. If I wish to continue my employment I must on this day deal with a lesbian as if she were married, including my regard for “their” children as members of their “family”. I may not say anything at all that would indicate my philosophical positions on such terms. I may not take another assignment or focus on something else or in any way dismiss this person. I must simply deal with this very senior person and use their terms, “marriage” “wife” and “our family” or be scapegoated, I presume. That’s it.

    Should I?

    • Friend, just remember that wives (in particular) do not like it when their husbands fall on their own sword on principle. If in becoming a scapegoat you lose your paycheck, nobody is going to be your friend–not even those closest to you. Perhaps you can go to truck driving school and become your own boss (sarc).

      So much for the cynical advice. Tell this lady what you really think and go down in a blaze of glory. Perhaps someday someone will write a song about you.

      Or you can take the evangelical Christian evasion, a la “Well, ‘gay marriage’ is now the law of the land, and the apostle Paul told us to submit to the governing authorities, and the Lord Jesus told us to love everyone, and to render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and so you now have an opportunity to show Christ’s love by accepting her as she is, and maybe, just maybe, you will be able to love her into the kingdom.”

      I am the most reactionary person I know, so the fact that I don’t even know what I would do in your situation is a reproach to me. For what it’s worth I feel your pain.

      • I know one thing. I will no longer call or introduce my dearly beloved as my “wife.” She is now “my woman.” Or maybe I should go full NT Greek and call her my gynē.

      • Sorry, to explain better: the NT does not have a word for wife, or husband. The word for wife and woman is just gynē, such as in 1cor7. I’ve heard the OT Hebrew is in the same predicament, but can’t look it up right now.

    • Earl, I would recommend that you lie low for the time being and start immediately looking for another job, or else begin opening your own business – not a bakery or photography business, presumably. In the meantime, there are ways to be politely noncommittal in conversation.

      In my post Back to Qumran of a couple years ago, I list some things to think about as you plan your exit. Main thing is to try to figure out how to land in a different life configuration that does not subject you to this same sort of thing all over again. Not an easy task. But still doable.

  9. Earl: The Modern English “man” and “wife” used to be werman and wyfman. A wer is a virile, male person, who undertakes masculine activities; wer is indeed related to the Latin vir and to the second syllable of the Greek aner. A wyf is a female person who weaves.

    The Greek gyne is cognate with the Norwegian kona (a mature woman) and the Swedish kvinna (also a mature woman), both being related in turn to the English “queen.” Both carry the connotation of a married woman. In the Scandinavian tongues, the wife is also the maka or “match” or “mate,” or the fru (German Frau). The husband is always the man – plain old “man.” In an old textbook of Swedish that I own, fru is translated into English as as “Lady Wife,” a phrase that I rather like.

    Incidentally, “husband” is a borrowing from Danish: It means a free-holding peasant-farmer (bond) in charge of his own house (hus).

  10. Kristor: Rene Girard is the theoretician par excellence of sacrifice. In Things Hidden (1977), he remarks on kingship that a king is a sacrificial victim who has manipulated the custom to his own benefit and thereby circumvented his immolation. The slippery would-be victim becomes the founder of a new society, but, of course, he has to deliver, or he might end up like Oedipus. (Or Montezuma.) Fascinatingly, Caesar thrice “put off the crown” and ended up a sacrificial victim in the cloakroom of the Senate, but his murder became the foundation of the Roman Empire. Augustus logically prevailed on the Senate to promote Caesar to godhood, but disdained a sycophantic offer to be treated likewise while living. Christ was the Creator and Ruler of the Universe who deigned to incarnate and submit to human judgment. Humanity sacrificed Him on the Cross. The crowd could not transform its victim into a god because He already was God, hence He stultified the usual process, but the ultimate effect of killing him was to transform the Roman Empire into Christendom.

    • So when we talk of anticipating our selection as scapegoats and effecting our own escape from the sick polis, we are effectually talking about setting ourselves up as kings of new communities – viz., Aeneas, St. Anthony, St. Francis, Abraham, Jacob, William Penn.

  11. Are “we” really seeking to escape the inevitable scapegoating? I “see” ample evidence that most “Christians” absolutely believe in a “self-annihilation for salvation” pact with their god. And of course, at the root of this disposition, is the egalitarian pathology. Christianity MUST BE MADE to be “equal” and so this necessitates the self-annihilation of its adherents. So “we” are now so deep into radical autonomy that faux-Christians will “martyr” themselves on the “altar” of Equality and the mass of sheeple will graciously applaud their act of self-immolation. But step back just a few feet and one will observe the bigger liberal annihilating lesser liberal and the least of liberals annihilating the mainstream liberals who in turn seek an exponential gluttony before their mass annihilation coming from both the bigger liberals and the lowliest of liberals. And this whole culling process operates with the understanding that the “white supremacist” really does call the shots in America and there is nothing any liberal can do to alter this reality.

  12. Pingback: Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Chaos Patch (#73)

  13. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/08/02) | The Reactivity Place

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s