If you’re kind to the cruel…
…you end up being cruel to the kind.
Richard Fernandez knows this:
The world has been a ruthless place for a long time. The politically correct narrative is for the benefit of the Leftist rubes ”” strictly from hunger. The terrorists just laugh at it. If the world is ever to find peace, it needs the Sword of Justice back ”” that or God.
But the west has forgotten it.
Read Fernandez’s entire article to understand what I’m referring to here. Note, also, that there’s a certain theme to all my posts so far today: the suicidal Western tendency to criticize itself and idealize and/or excuse other cultures.
[ADDENDUM: Michael Totten on ISIS and its campaign of genocide.]
For the life of me, I cannot understand how any thinking and rational person could support Hamas or have any sympathy whatsoever for the dead in Gaza.
They brought it all on themselves.
Western civilization is already comatose — we await only a sputtering death rattle.
The suicidal Western tendency is not purely that of self-criticism or exculpating cultures seething in destructive pathogens but in importing them into the West. Importing third world POCs (people of color) has to it what the LibProgLeft had already openly admitted to – British Labor (as LibProgLeft as you can get) — the wish to, “rub their face in it.”. By ‘their’ it was meant conservatives, i.e., traditionalist, Christians, nationalists, patriots, etc. — everything anathema to the Gnostic urge, for that’s precisely what it is — it had nothing to do with politics. No-one destroys that which they wish to be permanently governing.
Mr Fernandez is altogether too sanguine or too innocent or too wrapped in normal to see what goes on. There is more than an absence of the Sword of Justice at work in the Western world. There is an absence of the concept justice as well as many other heretofore accepted concepts. They have been overthrown by Marcusian neoMarxist concepts bearing no resemblance to what was and reality itself. This is madness. Not quite global madness — The East isn’t buying into it; Russia not so much; but the West is clinically insane. One would wish the mad meet their demise quickly and be put out of their, and our, misery. If only madness would see the sense in it. But if they saw that they would not be crazy/gnostic.
The book The Suicide of Reason is an excellent warning written by Lee Harris in 2008. Right now you can read a thorough and favorable NY Times review of it written by the courageous and brilliant Ayaan Hirsi Ali at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/books/review/Ali-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
But the west has forgotten it…
nope..
feminism and the state supressed it
the men had to decide
they decided they loved their mates
their mates decided they hated the men
so now, we have neither
we put up the sword of justice because she wanted us to and we could not have chidren without her
now… its up to her
and it looks like she will drive over the cliff with thelma and louise and be upset men did not come and rescue them…
no men
no justice
just boys running around killing each other
as women live in fear
this is matriarchy
enjoy
The inestimable economist John Lott has looked at the actual data. (And I’ll give you the citation! John R. Lott Jr., “Does a Helping Hand Put Others at Risk? Affirmative Action, Police Departments and Crime,” Economic Inquiry, April 1, 2000.)
It turns out that, far from “de-escalating force” through their superior listening skills, female law enforcement officers vastly are more likely to shoot civilians than their male counterparts.
Unable to use intermediate force, like a bop on the nose, female officers quickly go to fatal force. According to Lott’s analysis, each 1 percent increase in the number of white female officers in a police force increases the number of shootings of civilians by 2.7 percent.
Adding males to a police force decreases the number of civilians accidentally shot by police. Adding black males decreases civilian shootings by police even more. By contrast, adding white female officers increases accidental shootings
In addition to accidentally shooting people, female law enforcement officers are also more likely to be assaulted than male officers — as the whole country saw in Atlanta last week. Lott says: “Increasing the number of female officers by 1 percentage point appears to increase the number of assaults on police by 15 percent to 19 percent.”
In a study of public safety officers — not even the general population — female officers were found to have 32 percent to 56 percent less upper body strength and 18 percent to 45 percent less lower body strength than male officers Frank J. Landy, “Alternatives to Chronological Age in Determining Standards of Suitability for Public Safety Jobs,” Technical Report, Vol. 1, Jan. 31, 1992
Failure to realize that Western Civilization has been the pinnacle achievement of our species is to label yourself an ignorant fool (or worse).
Artfldgr @ 4:12,
That makes sense to me with one caveat. Very, very few people are ‘accidentally’ shot by police. Female law enforcement officers who shoot civilians, either do so because they are apprehending a criminal, or are being assaulted or out of fear of their vulnerability.
I suspect the latter is the primary reason for the disparity between male and female officers. Female law enforcement officers certainly realize that they have little ability to use intermediate force.
Regular police are typically not the most accurate marksmen. They qualify with their side arm once a year and the standards for qualifying are a low bar IMO. When they show up at the public county range for extra practice (using their own ammo… which is commendable) they usually fair poorly compared to shooting enthusiasts who know that good marksmanship is mainly a matter of regular training.
IMO cops should be supplied with enough ammo to fire a minimum of 200 rounds at a minimum of once per month at the police range, and their abilities assessed frequently. They should also be subjected to physical and emotional stress during their annual qualification test. Police have a license to use deadly force and that should require excellent skill with a firearm.
Heh, sword. http://sbg-sword-store.sword-buyers-guide.com/Tenchi.html
“IMO cops should be supplied with enough ammo to fire a minimum of 200 rounds at a minimum of once per month at the police range, and their abilities assessed frequently.”
The unions are using up the ammo money, for Democrat fundraisers. As usual.
Oh, I can’t take another heartache
Though you say you’re my friend, I’m at my wits end
You say your love is bona fide
But that don’t coincide with the things that you do
And when I ask you to be nice, you say
You gotta be
Cruel to be kind in the right measure
Cruel to be kind it’s a very good sign
Cruel to be kind means that I love you
Baby, you gotta be cruel to be kind
nick lowe
I took out an old college anthology text on the “styles” of history the other day. One that I had used in historiography studies back when, but had not fully read due to the use of other course materials.
The essays included a final one by C Vann Woodward in which he remarkably adverted to the danger to up and coming minority historians of feeding the appetite of masochistic white liberal males for flagellation, rather than serving truth to the best of one’s ability.
I wish I had read this many years ago. Because it demonstrated that what I thought I had stumbling discovered over the years concerning the psychology of the liberal male through my own observational and deductive powers, had been casually and explicitly laid out as a taken-for-granted socio-psychological predicate by one of America’s premier historians many, many, years before.
Some people are twisted enough to want to be punished. And many of these demented son-of-bitches have the legal status of political peers.
That we may not be able to do anything about for various reasons.
But if we grant them status as moral peers, and treat them to their face as if they are, it is our own damned fault.
Some people are twisted enough to want to be punished.
two great examples for you, one from literature, one from history. history first.
look up the source of flagellation
the best literature example to embody what you are referring to, i guess, would be from “confessions of a reluctant messiah”
And he said unto them, “If a man told God that he wanted most of all to help the suffering world, no matter the price to himself, and God answered and told him what he must do, should the man do as he is told?”
“Of course, Master!” cried the many. “It should be pleasure for him to suffer the tortures of hell itself, should God ask for it!”
“No matter what those tortures, nor how difficult the task?”
“Honor to be hanged, glory to be nailed to a tree and burned, if so be that God has asked,” said they.
“And what would you do,” the Master said unto the multitude, “if God spoke directly to your face and said,
‘I COMMAND THAT YOU BE HAPPY IN THE WORLD, AS LONG AS YOU LIVE.’ What would you do then?”
And the multitude was silent, not a voice, not a sound was heard upon the hillsides, across the valleys where they stood.
DNW:
Most liberals don’t actually want to be punished. They want to feel good about themselves, and speaking ill of their country and their race (terrible white men!) makes them feel as though they have the moral high ground. Actual punishment would be a problem for most people. That’s what NIMBY is all about.
ISIS is Obama’s Rwanda.
The actual text title was, “The Varieties of History”, Ed Fritz Stern.
The essay was Clio and Crisis, C. Vann Woodward.
“Style in History: Gibbon, Ranke, Macaulay, Burckhardt” was another text.
To quote Woodward:
Possibly. But we do know that masochists and nihilists exist. And it has become clear that there are a startling number of ways in which some human beings seek psychological relief and emotional gratification: and the price that they are willing to pay, or have you pay, for it.
Now, these self-destructive outliers are either disordered or not. If on their own say so we grant that they are not disordered but “merely” another mental kind, it does nothing to address the affiliation and affinity problems.
Grant for the sake of argument that it is improper to call them “sick”. Nonetheless, their manner of social being and their working out and expression of their idiosyncratic notions of “the good” and the satisfying, are still antithetical to and subversive of the lives of those who do not share their quirks.
Here’s the deal: You cannot trust that their idea of the good, is the same, or even socially compatible with yours.
It’s the moral reciprocity problem all over again.
But then for liberals, reciprocity is NOT taken as the foundation principle of affiliation.
DNW:
Of course there are some masochists among them. Robert Fisk sort of wrote the book on that. But, as I said, most don’t actually want to suffer. That means that some do.
neo-neocon Says:
August 7th, 2014 at 4:10 pm
DNW:
Of course there are some masochists among them. Robert Fisk sort of wrote the book on that. But, as I said, most don’t actually want to suffer. That means that some do.”
Acknowledged. Yeah; and Beat-me-baby-Fisk, is a good example.
Moralizing race/ racist flagellation provides a tremendous emotional balm by way of shedding personal responsibility — even some large portion of any perceived collective responsibilities.
Fisk is half way to self beatitude by way of over wrought pseudo-contrition.
(It’s is for his readership to be contrite — not him.)
At a certain level, even Fisk sees the absolute absurdity of where he’s taking his moralizing.
But all of this is but a part of the MSM replacing the clergy… every screed a new sermon.