Wednesday, November 24, 2021

A Sad Day in the Politics of Fear

Welcome to, or back to, the stalwart yet pusillanimous Gauntlet of Balthazar, for some riffing on a theme that's been addressed here frequently as of late (or at least when I bother to get off my gauntlet-wearing ass and comment) - and that is the theme of fear  being used as a political weapon. Fear of disease, fear of race, fear of surveillance, fear of non-compliance, fear of interacting with society, and the fear of incorrectly defining sexual identity or partaking in sex, are all plied in the targeted quest for power that is highlighted by "cancellation" and the routine Orwellian re-working of our language and thereby our societal psyche.

One might think that some of the thoughts I'll be addressing in this post are unrelated, but what inspired me down this path was the removal of the iconic statue of the U.S.'s third President; Thomas Jefferson, from the vestibule of the New York City Hall Council Chambers just a few days ago after resting on its pedestal there for over 187 years. 

As you may know if you are an American, or even as a citizen of another nation, is that far leftist activists across the USA have pitched hard for the removal of a plethora of historical statues over the last few years. Of course, they first directed their ire toward those works of art that even many of those on the right had a hard time arguing represented paragons of past virtue. 

As a historian (yes, I have a degree), I object in premise to the removal of pretty much any monuments (yes, even a Stalin in post-Soviet period Russia), for in my opinion, and in most respects, I believe that doing so does not succeed in removing bad events from the past, but turns a blind eye to such mob-born initiatives and generally opens the door to societal anarchic chaos which can only lead to further acts of random destruction and civil unrest. So yeah, it's a slippery slope. As an old Punker / Post-Punker, on some level I appreciate the anarchic impulse as an unbridled form of liberty, but as Jefferson himself reminded, liberty must be coupled with civic responsibility in order to create a safe environment in which one can pursue happiness. The French didn't quite get this lesson right in their revolution and, voila, their zeal and intemperance led to guillotines, the reign of terror, book burning, etc., etc.

Case in point, I found it ridiculously idiotic, if not wholly tragic, when the Taliban...rather than accept cash for the transfer of a giant statue of the Buddha located in a public park to a museum in the west, felt that the object must be destroyed as an offense against Islam. I should remind you here that there had not been a single practicing Buddhist in Afghanistan for literally a thousand years, and that this statue reflected a period in the nation's history prior to the arrival of Islam. Anyway, they blew up the ancient statue leaving piles of rubble where it once stood. Why would they do this, you might ask? Well, the answer is simple - it's fear. Firstly, by leaving the statue it would have undermined the retroactive Muslim notion that Islam preexisted, well, everything, even though it occurs in history after Judaism and Islam. Secondly, by leaving the statue as is, it would have served as a de facto acknowledgement that there are competing belief systems out there in the wider world, and thus, both of these notions are based in the fear that Islam will not appear as all-encompassing and as normative as it "should", even when it is a numerical fact that many billions of other humans don't practice that faith. If the members of the Taliban were actually strong in their faith, they wouldn't be afraid of an old statue "luring" Muslims from their faith, nor would they be afraid of acknowledging the actual history of their nation, instead of a fantasy. But it is these sort of fantasies, subjective truths, utopian quests, and internal constructs, that we see riddling the west, and the east, and often stand-in for actual facts, science, logic, and well, reality.

But back to the U.S....

During the civil unrest that was spurred on by George Soros and DNC-backed operatives of Antifa and the deceptively named BLM, many a historic statues were dragged off their pedestals. At first the premise seemed to be that they wanted to remove Confederate War monuments as they virtue signaled their so-called "anti-racism", but I knew the minute it began that their scope would not remain limited to just that.

In fact, I would propose that the best thing you can do with a monument dedicated to even with a thoroughly despicable historical figure is to leave it standing, erect an explanatory plaque that explains the context of why, when, and the bad and good things about the figure, and have teachers use this as an educational tool for young school children. What's the worst thing that could happen? A kid learns about person and walks away saying: "What a douche that guy was!" To me that sounds like the reaction the statue-burners actually want, isn't it? If it's just deleted from sight there is no example to learn from, just ignorance.

Anyway, before long statues of Abraham Lincoln were under assault, and pardon me, but while Lincoln might have possessed a few flaws he is generally viewed as literally the best President in US history; ending slavery, preserving the Union, etc., etc. Obviously, if your premise is not just to destroy selected parts of history, but all of it, in a Pol Pot Year Zero Utopia thinking, then hell, damn the torpedoes and take it all down, man.

So, when they came for Jefferson a few days ago, it only made sense. Of course these modern day iconoclasts only know one thing about T.J., and that is that he owned slaves. Sure, that's not an ideal look, but if you study him in general, you find a man who was born into that institution from birth, and did most everything in his power to aid in the demise of slavery. Aside from penning the Declaration of Independence, upon being elected President Jefferson almost immediately banned the importation of slaves, effectively ending the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. We know he was in a long-term romantic relationship with one of his family's servants, Sally Hemmings; who was technically also his cousin. On other fronts he fought the Barbary pirates in order to stop the enslavement of Europeans and Americans, and was the ultimate champion of a multi-religion, multi-ethnic, civil state. Hell, he even designed the office chairs million of people sit on every day. Lastly, as the statue grabbers might not remember, he eventually freed all of his slaves. "Why didn't he do it earlier?" they would ask, and I'll tell you why. Picture that you are born into a family which held such human property at the time. Let me guess, you imagine that three-year-old you would have the power to do just what? Beat up papa and tell them to run off? Okay, let's say that was possible. What happens to the slaves you say you care so much about after they run off? Simple, they are grabbed by another planter a few miles up the road who treats them far worse than the gentle environment offered at your estate, which by the way, was loaded with slaves, many of whom were only 1/16th African after multiple generations of cross-breeding with the family. Regardless if these relationships were either on the up-and-up or had some nefarious origin, the fact remains that even back in the 1770's a person who is only 1/16th African visual appears in most cases as "not black". Indeed many writers in the period who visited Monticello specifically commented that the distinction between the Jefferson family and their servants was very hard to discern.

On a related note, when they come for statues of George Washington - who will be next, someone should probably point out that Washington held both black and white slaves (not related to him), and was know for having them killed (regardless of race) if they attempted to run away. So I guess the question is - is this about the time period, the institution, the character or acts of a specific person, or about race now? I mean, old George was a tough guy, big on military executions at Valley Forge too, but it is his refutation of a kingship and his status as a non-partisan leader was an essential factor in the creation of the republic.

As far as I understand it the next statue to be removed in NYC is that of Teddy Roosevelt's monument outside of the Museum of Natural History. As a turn of the 20th Century Progressive Republican he was a pivotal figure in the establishment of the Conservation movement (i.e. we call that "Green" now), he was a crusader for labor unions and racial equality, an advocate for children, busted on big banking, and established important Federal bureaus such as the FDA and the EPA in order to safeguard the public. It seems almost ridiculous, but the racist powers-that-wish-they-were are now attempting to depict T.R. as a racist, while only the contrary stands as evidence. Face it, they don't like this particular statue because he sits on his horse "above" a Native American and an African, and it is their own internal race narrative that works on the assumption that even this is "White Superiority". Hey, here's an idea - why not think of this image as T.R. being an advocate for these groups in a time when almost no one else was. In removing this tribute they should be ashamed of themselves. But this is the same destructive impulse that dis-empowers non-whites and encourages them to depict themselves as eternal victims in a sick, ongoing "story".

This is why "Schindler's List' is considered the most notable "Jewish Film" made by Hollywood. Nothing against Mr. Spielberg, and his many fine films, but that work upholds the Jewish victim narrative no less than how African-Americans have inculcated such initiatives as Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" program; which frankly dis-empowered their communities and destroyed urban areas for numerous generations. This was done by literally enfeebling traditional black family structure, creating dependence on the state, and enforcing the idea that only the state could help the community.

By utilizing fear as a tool to gain power, and redistributing economic dominance to specific entities, the globalist manipulators have forged a generation of young people who are afraid to stand up for themselves. They are afraid to pursue wealth, to have relationships, and to reproduce. Hence the up-swell in the number of young men who admit to "not having regular sex" and a great mass of youth suddenly describing themselves as being part of the "LGBT" spectrum, simply because they are so sexually under-powered that they believe that they are "Asexuals". This, friends, is not another "gender". Even if you accept the semantics of switching the perfectly fine "sexual identity" for an established biological term, Orwell. Ace (Asexual or Aromantic) people like to say that they are "not broken", but clearly, they have been "sexually retarded" by the powers-that-shouldn't-be. This massive flood of people identifying in this way should come as no shock, what with food additives and the like helping to cause widespread erectile dysfunction and "frigidity". This, plus the destruction of all gender norms through a wing of Marxist Class, Race, and Gender revisionism has contributed to the rise of disinterested men and unhappy, cat-ensconced women with jobs they are really invested in, but in eschewing all traditional norms are riddled with depression because they can't find a man to be in a relationship with, and probably don't even want to have kids 'cuz that would be hard work and interfere with their ability to watch Netflix undisturbed. Then again, these sort of folks truly believe that the sun monster (climate change) will end life on Earth in just a couple of years from now, when it certainly will not.

Well, news flash, if you are afraid to leave your house, if your gender is so confused that it can only be explained by an elaborate psychological construct, if you are afraid to take off your mask-muzzle regardless of "The" science, if you prefer to use the robot checkout machine in the supermarket instead of, gasp, having to interact and say hello to the cashier, and when you only date by swiping on an app and through text messaging with no intention of really forging a relationship with a future (i.e. kids), then you know what buttercup? You're not going to find it, and eventually, you'll end up wallowing in the failure of a selfish life, invested in what the social media platforms, the state, and the globalists at Davos want you to be instead of what you could be. For me, the idea of being dependent on the government, any government, is an utterly repugnant notion, and giving control of anything to such unimpressive people as politicians is quite terrifying. I mean these are ego-maniacal, power-drunk, world class idiots, and we all used to know it. What the hell happened? 

So, fake-immunized mutants, confused modern eunuchs, misguided iconoclasts, utopian zealots, and supporters of the nanny state, rise up and shake off your cloth muzzles (and cowardly balaclavas) and act like you're actually alive in the real world. This is not a video game, and life is actually quite dangerous. But if you look at it only like that, you should never drive a car for fear of an accident, you should never take a shower for fear of slipping, and most definitely, you should never, ever date. I mean you're risking both germs AND a broken heart, right?

Anyway, have a Happy Thanksgiving and Hanukah if you celebrate either, or both. Oh, and of course - Let's Go Brandon!, and as always, till next time.