Why are’t things getting worse faster?

Things are getting worse very quickly. However, the process remains piecemeal, one cancelation, one smashed statue, one formerly apolitical organization putting out a pro-sodomy, anti-white manifesto at a time. When the reactionary sees how comprehensively superior is the enemy’s power, he expects something far more sweeping. To take one of the less important issues, why bother with separate protests, investigations, and vandalism before removing each statue of a white person? Why not just remove them all at once? The Left has the power. To take the most important issue, given the essentially unopposed power of the Left, why should they not propagandize children much more aggressively than they do and outlaw any counter-propaganda from parents or Churches? What’s holding them back?

There are three possibilities. JMSmith, in the comments to Alan Roebuck’s post on the legitimacy of political participation by Christians, suggests one.

As a young man you may still look forward to children and grandchildren, and you presumably wish to pass your faith down to them. This will be hard in the best scenario, and you should not snap your fingers at the idea that legislators can make it much harder. Atheist schoolteachers are presently under some restraint in deconversion, but this is only because the school boards that employ them have some fear of Christian voters. Remove that fear and you remove the restraint. What do you suppose would happen if churches were stripped of their tax exemption? What do you suppose would happen if the Bible was banned? There are plenty of people who would do all of these things and more if they were not opposed.

According to this hypothesis, the Left is restrained by the Right. Assuming the Left could move much more swiftly without Rightist obstruction, we must suppose that the Right’s power to obstruct nearly matches the Left’s power of aggression. If this is true, then it is important to maintain this obstructing power.

I wonder, though, if school boards or teachers really are particularly frightened of Christian voters or parents. Why should they be? The Left has the media, which is the only way the public knows about these disputes. If parents get unruly, the media can call them terrorists, and those parents will find themselves unemployed or in jail, either way without a soul to offer them sympathy. If an opponent of deconversion runs for the school board, the media can easily destroy that candidate’s reputation. It doesn’t matter how well you argue, how carefully you control your message, how irreproachable your personal life; all anyone will ever get is the Left’s side of things. Under these conditions, having some powerless opposition might be pleasant for school boards; they get to read in the papers about how brave they are. (That being said, as I discuss below, while the media is always a friend to the Left, it is not an ever-present one.)

A second possibility is that the Left is self-limited; it doesn’t move faster or more comprehensively because it doesn’t want to. Perhaps this is because Leftists have liberal commitments and insist on tolerating those who hold opposing beliefs. Perhaps it is because they refuse to admit to themselves the extent of their own power (and, hence, responsibility), and so they are hampered by the need to retain their pose as plucky outsiders by acting piecemeal and informally. Perhaps there simply is not that much further Leftward to go; we are already living in the Leftist utopia, so they have no great changes to make with their great power. There may be a bit of truth to each of these, although Leftists themselves would deny it. They would certainly not admit that we already live in a world largely to their liking, that they evade responsibility by obfuscating the extent of their power, or that they have a commitment to tolerating “racism” and “homophobia”. I’ve known plenty of Leftists, and individually they are not nearly as bad as their own side boasts. Still, this is an unlikely explanation. There are well-known Leftist policies that have not yet been implemented (e.g. reparations, removing tax exemption from Churches, seizing guns); the Left has wielded national power before without undue stress to its self-image; the claim that dissent is “violence” meets little argument and neutralizes any calls for tolerance or open-mindedness.

The third possibility I call “inertia”. Even without a countervailing political force, it takes time and effort to do things. Return to the example of indoctrination in schools. I can well believe that the ideologues who make up state and nation-level education and teacher associations would be willing even to sacrifice basic literacy for social justice. However, actual teachers have a lot of other things to worry about. Certainly, most will agree that social justice–breaking the spirits of white children and teaching them to hate themselves–is a good thing, perhaps (in theory) the most important thing. However, that’s not really what they went into teaching for, and they know very well that they will actually be judged on their students’ performance on state assessment tests in reading and math. The Left owns all the institutions, and the incentives at the top are to divert those organizations from their original and ostensible purposes to the service of Leftism, but at the bottom incentives usually work the other way. Even at Google, a lowly programmer will probably get in trouble more quickly for buggy code than for taking no interest in social justice. All but the zealots will adjust their time accordingly.

Against this tendency to lethargy is the media, which can put an organization’s feet to the fire if it’s not canceling and struggle session-ing hard enough. However, the media’s eye is not be everywhere at once, a fact captured by Steve Sailer’s expression “the Eye of Soros”. The reason it cannot do this is not a lack of resources. It’s that the whole enforcement mechanism of Leftism is based on socially isolating the target, and everyone else’s fear of being thus isolated. It works really well. No one wants to be singled out as “the racist” and made a penniless social pariah, and no one wants to risk being associated with “the racist” and thus run the risk of being next. Conservatives have grim fantasies that someday soon they’ll just declare all of us racists and send us to the gulag or something. This is actually wishful thinking; the Left will do no such thing. Their method wouldn’t work if a large connected group were singled out for censure. They’re coming for all of us, but it has to be one by one. That takes a while.

Doing it slowly is also part of the punishment. Separately defaming, protesting, and defacing each statue of a white man educates the public in the evil of Western civilization and makes sure each target’s reputation is completely destroyed. As I mentioned before, that Congresslady who wants to get rid of the Father Damien statue just because he’s white is actually being charitable. She’s willing to forgo the usual step of defaming Father Damien first. “You may be an okay guy, but you’ve got the wrong skin color” is a lot nicer than “You’re a monster, and your moral infamy makes your likeness painful to Persons of Color”. That’s one reason there will be no blanket order to remove all statues of white men everywhere in the country; some of those men would then keep their reputations intact. The other reason is the “Eye of Soros” thing: who’s going to bother going to all that trouble of moving big rocks in parks unless the media whips up pressure? But the media can only whip up pressure by isolating a single person, organization, or town and shrieking “There is the racist!” If they point everywhere at once and do that, it won’t work. They’re coming for the statues, but one by one.

This can also explain why there are subjects of Leftist concern where little progress seems to be made. Social status manipulation is powerless, for example, to fight global warming, because that’s an actual physical problem. Their modus operandi works great for deplatforming global warming skeptics, terrorizing children, and enforcing purely symbolic acts, but none of that actually effects humanity’s carbon dioxide emissions.

If any of these other possibilities are the main reason things aren’t getting worse faster, Christian political participation probably is not having much effect.

13 thoughts on “Why are’t things getting worse faster?

  1. Because when these things are too noticed more people on the left switch to the right. The delusion of moderation is necessary to keep from turning a humongous amount of leftists into rightists all at once.

    Just look at comics, turning Superman’s son and Robin gay. Why not just declare literally every character gay all at once? Because they must appear to be moderate or there would be an avalanche of ex-leftists finally realizing that LGBT is cancer.

  2. I’m not an accelerationist, but I think the fact that things aren’t getting worse faster is because of how stable our liberal tyranny is rather than due to any principled thwarting. The purpose of the Right – just read a few recent posts here – seems to be to make more livable, longer the liberal Thunderdome. Thus, that things are not getting worse faster signifies that very very worse things lie ahead.

  3. It is a good question, and one I have asked-myself.

    But I think you are looking for the wrong kind of answer – assuming you agree that this is a spiritual war, and that Leftism is essentially a (constantly mutating, always oppositional) socio-political aspect of the demonic strategy.

    In other words, the rate of things getting worse will be set by *spiritual* not political goals. In a nutshell; by what the demonic powers believe will be most effective at inducing the most people to choose their own damnation.

    So far, the rate of worsening seems to have been cunningly chosen; and the ‘health’ (plus environmentalist and antiracist etc) camouflage very effective.

    The very sudden and very complete devastation of Christianity and its churches in 2020 seemed like it might awaken Christians to the arrival of demonically-controlled global totalitarianism – what with so many coercive closures, and a months-long (not finished) top-down imposed suspension of all or many core church activities. Surely the largest and most extreme decline in the history of Christianity, surely the greatest abrogation of spiritual responsibility?

    Yet all of this destruction was vehemently and zealously supported by Church leadership!

    So it seems that amazingly few self-identified Christians recognize what happened, and is still happening – because they interpret the world through materialistic, political concepts.

    Abp Vigano’s analysis (https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/archbishop-vigano-vaccine-victims-sacrificed-altar-moloch-video/) ought-to-be regarded as blazingly-obvious among Christians; a basic baseline for discussion.

    Yet it is shocking (and shockingly rare) to hear any Christian leader speak clearly on what has happened spiritually, who recognizes what is still happening. Who recognizes that the motivational level at which it is happening is primarily spiritual not political (and certainly Not medical or scientific!).

    The pace of evil is constrained by the difficulties of corrupting the mass of human souls – which is difficult, as CS Lewis memorably describes it in The Screwtape Letters and Screwtape Proposes a Toast. Too rapid an imposition of evil, and it may evoke an awakening and a push-back – as, for example, happened with WWII – when churches (and Christianity) thrived.

    Overall, I think the demonic strategists have ‘done a great job’ since early 2020! They have gone very far and very fast; and yet it seems most Christians (including almost leaders and well known ‘Christian’ intellectuals) have not noticed what is going-on, indeed deny it strenuously.

  4. I am a former lefty still trapped in a job for a lefty nonprofit. I work for The Enemy. My actual concerns about the environment, civil liberties, war & peace have never been addressed by the left. It took me working on the inside to realize this. And I now firmly believe that the reason the left works on, just for example, gay marriage instead of climate change, is that gay marriage is so much easier. There’s no hard math or science involved, just chanting love is love repeatedly and hiring some good lawyers and raising the money to pay them. Likewise with the disasterous changes to our understandings of the Bill of Rights. Likewise with our infernal imperialism. They don’t do a flipping thing for actual poor and working class people, obviously, because to do so would benefit white people. If they had the smarts and the work ethic to do it, I think they would for poor & working class people of color, but agaIn, it would take brains and work.

    Anyway, they are very prideful, but a very big reason why they don’t do it all at once is that they’re not that smart. They hate hard work. They hate hard subjects.

  5. There is also a factor that the Right is a restraint on the Left, but only potentially, and this causes the Left to self-limit.

    Leftists say they are losing, and I think they believe it, although it is obviously not true. True hate comes from fear, else it is mere contempt. They hate Reaction, what they call fascism, because they fear it. They despise milquetoast conservatism because they do not fear it.

    The potential power of popular Reaction is not the everyday world of democratic politics, but in a seismic event of popular Restoration. The President is the closest thing the US has to a monarch.

    This explains the feelings of the Left to Trump and to the events of January 6. In reality, Trump is no Charles II and 1/6 was not an insurrection, let alone an attempted Restoration, but it felt like it to them.

    But, the Left also needs the fear. It is the axis upon which the wheel of progress turns. I think there are in fact some influential Leftists who know this and the reality that it is a Noble Myth, though perhaps it is just a mood.

    Americans have an unwritten constitution in their heart, the lines beyond which a regime strays is intolerable. The myth of the American founding, and to an extent the myth of the Christian West, still has power, I think, even though Leftists control media, education and government. Reparations, land seizure, gun seizure, taxing churches, gulags, dispensing with even the appearance of fair elections and banning the Bible, at this time, would serve only to (in Leftist’s minds) provoke a reaction.

    Their restraint is frog boiling, with some rare times of rapid heating and more rarely a small decrease in temperature, all according to the contemporary popular mind, the prevailing thought and feelings among those in power and the realities of the structures of power.

  6. Someone once said that terrorists do not want lots of bodies; they want lots of news coverage. If the left pulled a night of the long knives and had every dissident fired in one stroke, the event would soon be forgotten as old news. Periodic executions keep the intimidating image of unpersoning before the eyes of dissidents, and intimidating images encourage timidity. If they pull down one statue at a time, its a political “protest”; if they pull all the statues down at once, its overtime at the Department of Public Works.

    So I agree with you that the death by a thousand cuts is a calculated move that combines elimination of the enemy and public education. Killing two birds with one stone, so to speak.

    The Left cannot afford to spook the liberals. This is related to what I wrote about the Anti-Fascist People’s Front in my latest post. All liberals are more or less soft on the Left, but Liberals can still be outraged and disgusted.

    I think you are also right to say that many Leftists are not fanatics, and that they worry about their next performance review as much as they worry about the Woke millennium. Some are even humane, and actually like the right-wingers they know in day-to-day life.

    The question is whether this slow-burn Revolution is a paradigm or a prelude to something more in the way of a conflagration. As you know, revolutions tend to accelerate exponentially because unsettled times bring hotheads to the fore.

    In defense of my comment that you quote, I think elections still count for something and it still takes the propaganda a couple of years to install truly outlandish opinions. If you give the media time, they can obviously convince most people that we have a duty to murder our grandparents and sell our children into slavery, but the media cannot do this overnight.

    • JMSmith,

      Of the Reign of Terror, Robespierre wrote that its purpose was to ensure that the enemies of the Republic were not inspired by exceptions to justice.

      I see the preliminaries of it building. Some are becoming aware of the “Eye of Soros” and it is making them bolder. The logic of Revolution cannot allow that.

      Our people have been engaging in democratic posturing because they think we are winning. The Reaction can be birthed when they know we are losing. My wish is that they could learn this without the Terror, and I think it is possible, but I don’t know how.

  7. Two disclaimers; first i am not Christian but i consider myself irrevocably in the spiritual camp that values life, creativity, discovery and what have ye, even if i may have violated these values out of despair multiple times in the past. Yes that constitutes several sins but i have a (probably expected) flexible view on all that, in the sense that tragedy and hitting rock bottom is in some cases the only way to seeing clearly. Rebellion is more of an act of futility rather then a real sin and i see the word itself as a metaphor for that reason, since there is no cosmology where ‘Sorath wins’, its all ultimately a ‘localized’ battle.

    With that said, this is most definitely where the actual battle resides, The excellent post by WJT describes the two-pronged way by which the devil does his doing, but i would rather describe it as ‘the tempations into ungodly behavior’ which can function as a sliding scale into nihilism and total despiritualization.

    My father believes in radical freedom; anarchism with the potentiality for proper self-organization that almost never gets discussed in a serious manner. The core issue being that freedom gets conflated with chaos, and more importantly it gets conflated with a ‘laissez faire’ Thelemic kind of ideal, while it never implies that. Freedom without responsibility is by definition unfree because it will always lead to infringements upon others. If we managed to express Jesus’s values and lessons by nature, almost none of this government nonsense would be required to ‘make society function’ or whatever description you would like. Michael Huemer makes a case for ‘intuitive ethics’ a.k.a; most people have a very good sense of right and wrong without taking philosophical courses, this only gets distorted after prolonged meddling.

    Which brings me to the point that our current political systems are just one part of such prolonged meddling; when the choices presented are boxed in, pre-measured-censored- and weighted, arbitrariliy limited by other means, or downright fake, it means you are playing within their frames of reference, when we need to be creating our own.

    • lea @ “If we managed to express Jesus’s values and lessons by nature” there would have been no need for Jesus, or at least for the Jesus of orthodox Christianity. In orthodox Christianity moral evil does not result from ignorance of the good, and it cannot therefore be corrected by “lessons.” Orthodox Christianity teaches that moral evil results from a depraved (bent) will, and that a depraved will can be straightened only by supernatural assistance.

      Orthodox christianity agrees with Michael Huemer that men and women have an ‘intuitive ethics,’ but observes ethical precepts do, by themselves, restrain the will. An ethical intuition is just an ethical “hunch,” and my “hunch” that it is wrong to tell lies is no stronger than my “hunch” that there may be free doughnuts at the office this morning. You and I can easily ignore all “hunches” if we have what we think is a good reason to do so.

      The current political system is a distorted “frame of reference,” but I don’t think the answer is to “create” our own frame of reference. Anything we “create” would just be a new distortion that twisted things to our advantage. The answer is to “discover” the true frame of reference, admitting that this a not at all easy to do.

      • Just a quick P.S; i don’t think leaving ‘political’ systems is actually the call, rather to keep using them without expectations of tangible results within the system, but primarily keep doing it to remain visible and perhaps build a movement. A seated party in our parliament is operating by these exact ideas already.

        Transitioning fundamental systems is incredibly difficult, i have no sense of a guide for that despite thinking about it for several years. And yes that’s bypassing the spiritual aspect. I feel like we may have gotten too entangled in the web of the international systems tying into ‘jjust in time delivery’ for alot of stuff.

        I cant comment on the correct framework concerning Jesus because its just too far removed from my life thus far, and so be it. That being even in my personal ‘heretical’ interpretation.

        That said, the despiritualization is everywhere and its clearly steering almost everyone. We also seem past the point of rational argument, there is a psycho-emotional aspect that i’ve been trying to describe for over half a year now. How do you talk to the people that want to play it safe? How do you remove the Ahrimanic spells? Been looking into NLP, but my dad dislikes it because it infringes upon peoples freedom. Raises more questions, alas.

      • Before you worry about losing freedom, you should make an honest inventory of how much freedom you actually have. Our demand for freedom is often a demand to continue in the slavery to which we are accustomed.

  8. Thanks for holding up that mirror, will try to remember it as often as possible. Regarding the other topics, i have to believe that our better intentions are a part to posited question. Some of which i rambled about, some i have yet to feel and implore. If the dark forces are tend to copying surely creativity is at least part of the key.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.