True
Diversity
+++++++
What Authentic
Diversity Means, and How a
False
‘Diversity’ Has Become One
of Many Idols Befogging
Our
Feeble Minds Today
+++
1. The Irrationality of Modern ‘Diversity’ & +++
‘Identity
Politics’, Along With a So-Called ‘Racism’, etc., or
the Tyranny
of Accusing Someone of ‘Microaggressions’
The early twenty-first century is a strange time to be alive.
Since the mid-twentieth century and the outbreak of what real
Catholics describe as the ‘Great Apostasy’, we have been taught that
‘discrimination’ is one of the worst sins that a person could commit, and that
a purported ‘diversity’ is one of the best things you could wish for. To think
otherwise automatically &
inarguably makes you into an ‘extremist’, ‘bigot’ or a ‘supremacist’
(usually with ‘white’ in front of this last accusatory label).
The hackles on
the back of your head already starting to rise, my
dearest reader?
Then, please, calm down, be an adult, and listen before flying off into
a rage.
Proof I am not an
‘extremist’, ‘bigot’, ‘supremacist’ or etc. is easy to see:
·
One, I was raised by a mother fervently devoted to the civil
rights movement and Dr. Martin Luther King in the
·
Two, the best boss I have ever worked for (and I’ve had a lot of jobs…) was black.
Or, if you will, African American. I had no problem following him and he
was the most patient, most fair & most considerate manager I have
ever had the privilege to serve under… especially in an oh-so-lovely
‘corporate’ setting.
·
Three, my father-in-law was Jewish. Yes, that’s correct, Jewish.
Guess I didn’t have a difficulty with
that, did I? And, though he and I were very different people, once he knew
that my wife & I were truly in love, he kindly & diligently treated
me like a son. I.e., our distinct ethnicities were not a problem for
either of us.
·
Four, one of my best friends in college was gay. And in
love with me. So… guess I could
handle that one, too, couldn’t I? He remained my friend, I still hugged
him, we politely disagreed about whether homosexuality was right or
wrong, and… we were still able to have a whole lot of fun times together
in peace.
·
Five, I almost certainly have Dutch Jewish blood in me, and
probably have at least a tiny bit of African American heritage through
my father’s family’s ever-so-long-ago roots in North Carolina. And, guess what? I’m perfectly fine
with that. Even a little thrilled about my own personal ethnic
‘diversity’!
We could go on, but this is plenty if you’ve an ounce of logic or
niceness.
Plainly, you’re not dealing with ‘bigotry’ or ‘racism’ in this
small article. Just a person --- a human being --- who is bothering to say,
“Hey, you know? I’ve lived all of my life with the idea of ‘equality’ at the
top of my list as an American citizen. So
how come it never seems like everybody gets treated like an
‘equal’, no matter what?
How come there’s always
something or someone oppressing
somebody else? Will we ever get it right? Furthermore,
could it possibly be that we’re barking up THE
WRONG TREE?”
That’s the crux right there, dear soul. We’ve meant well, but we’ve
gone astray.
The wrong tree means we’ve both twisted & misinterpreted
the word ‘racism’ into something it’s not
actually correct or wise to think; we’ve done the same thing to the word
‘diversity’; we use ‘identity politics’ to divide
rather than unite; and we lob
the accusation of ‘microaggressions’ (very
commonly heard at today’s universities in the United States) as a way to shut down civilized discourse
rather than to engage it.
In short, we’re NOT more free
or equal today. We’re more TYRANNIZED.
It’s one thing to disagree or debate. And it’s not polite or
civilized to unfairly hurt, slander, or otherwise mistreat one’s fellow human
being, especially your own fellow citizen or neighbor. Notwithstanding, it’s
also not polite or civilized to make it next to impossible for a fellow human
being, citizen or neighbor to disagree, or to have a debate, with you about
something that is very, very, very important to someone. To simplistically
& stupidly stigmatize, shout into silence, slur, or refuse to listen
respectfully to, a person who is earnest or intelligent, when grappling with a
subject that is divisive, is to be an immature jerk & childish dictator…
period. This is what today’s identity politics &
microaggressions, etc., have done to us. We’ve become little, selfish, stuck up
prigs.
We pretend this is okay by saying we’re fighting for ‘rights’ or
uphold ‘diversity’. We insist we’re so very ‘woke’, and
‘virtue signal’ unabashedly, with no shame, voguing. Those boasting
of their ‘wokeness’ ruthlessly dogpile on those they despise, doing
everything they can to ‘cancel’ their victims, claiming the
‘culture’ they’re trying to cultivate is one of ‘love’,
‘inclusiveness’ and... ‘tolerance’.
When, in reality, it’s being bullies
and making other people into slavish toadies.
It is the bullied who need a ‘safe space’; the
bullies now hold much more power.
And the bullied are slowly waking up, realizing the ‘woke’
are mindless zombies, automatons of specious yet harmful hate, and the ones from
whom despotism flows.
And it all started with the fight against ‘racism’. This was a huge
issue that most Americans, eventually, could get behind and agree with one
another on. This is because, at heart, most Americans once believed that
everyone in our country should have a fair chance at life. It doesn’t matter
whether this belief was true or not. That we sincerely believed it to be true
is what is relevant. Because what we believe in is what shapes attitudes &
goals. Hence, however ‘imperfect’ the reality of life in the
That unity is now lost. For a pretty obvious
reason, too. By the 1960s, more and more people of a ‘liberal’ or
‘progressive’ political persuasion began to do more than merely ‘disagree’ with
their fellow Americans. They began to condemn and started to act ‘holier than
thou’ toward their peers. They refused to listen to, refused to care for, and
refused to treat with respect, their fellow citizens. They looked down upon and
disdained them. By the 1980s, more and more people of a ‘conservative’ or ‘reactionary’
political thinking returned the favor. They began to
condemn and started to act ‘holier than thou’ toward their peers as well. They
also refused to listen to, refused to care for, and refused to behave
courteously to, their fellow citizens. They hated and disdained them.
Oh, sure, you can say that I’m ‘oversimplifying’ things. I won’t
argue.
But, then, could you handle a really exhaustive analysis?
Probably not. That’s why I dare to simplify
things.
The point is, it’s the 21st century now, and all this
bad behavior has borne bad fruit. The wrong tree? To
judge by the fruit, I’d say so. It looked good at the time to get solemnly
pompous about civil rights in the 1940s, ’50s, ’60s & ’70s. Most Americans
agreed, eventually, that we should treat our fellow Americans, of a darker hue
of skin, with greater justice & kindness. This ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’ we
have tried to extend to ethnicities of every kind in the ‘melting pot’ of
Don’t get me wrong. I still think we should treat fellow citizens
fairly.
I just think we should have gone about it in a very different way.
A far wiser, much more prudent & ultimately
better way.
Because when is brutish
tyranny ever a good thing?
We’re fighting another civil war now, although so far without rivers
of blood.
Well, not so much blood. Not as much blood --- yet --- as in the
1860s. Must we be militant & violent again? Must we kill each other and
hate mindlessly? Wouldn’t it be smarter to learn to be less ‘sensitive’ and
more patient with one another? Wouldn’t it make sense to grow up, be an adult,
and learn to listen and speak respectfully? Is it possible --- do you think?
--- to hear an opinion that opposes yours, and,
without throwing a tizzy fit, try to understand your opponent? Moreover, that, if we can’t persuade the other side to agree with us, figure
out, instead, where we can be in agreement? And, where implacably opposed to
each other, we try to figure out, nonetheless, how to give a maximum amount of liberty
to the opposing side?
This would be true tolerance and true
liberty in a truly free country.
Shocked & appalled? Outraged? Hating me with a passion?
Hmmm… that sounds kind of intolerant
to me.
Yet perchance you accuse me of being ‘microaggressive’. After all,
to speak about ‘identity politics’ like I have is really just ‘code talk’ for
being an ‘extremist’, ‘bigot’ & ‘supremacist’. Ah, well, then. You’ve just
made my point for me, poor soul. Because I have said nothing nasty or impolite toward
others. I’ve actually spoken nicely
about a variety of people, having lived, worked, befriended & interacted with
these people at great length.
Your only real beef can be that I dare to question the logic, wisdom
& rightness of microaggressions & identity politics, and that I’ve dared
to suggest that we should have gone about acquiring civil rights for some of our
less fortunate citizens very differently. And I’ve said these things not to be ‘nasty’ (that’s your interpretation of my
words, what you so badly want to think you heard me say).
Contrarily, I’ve said these things to get everybody, here or anywhere, to be
nicer & fairer to everybody else.
Including you. That’s right. I want to be nice to you. Think you might reciprocate?
For, while ‘civil rights’ were achieved with a lot of ‘marches’, ‘freedom
rides’, ‘sit ins’ and huge public gatherings with very stirring speeches, etc.,
they were primarily gained, in hard reality at first, through two big things
--- the federal courts and federal legislation. This then continued with
another four big things --- federal executive orders & protocols, public
schools, the mainstream media and corporate policy (especially policies of most massive, wealthy & highly influential
corporations, which then filtered down to much smaller businesses as they
followed suit, either out of genuine agreement or else the gargantuan fear that
they’d go out of business or lose money if they didn’t comply).
After all, money talks. Loudly. Enough to make human beings go totally
deaf.
Almost the exact same thing has occurred, since the 1980s, with
‘identity politics’ & ‘microaggressions’. There have been ‘pride’ marches
and… well, not so much ‘freedom rides’ or ‘sit ins’, which seem kind of dated
nowadays… but still big public gatherings and stirring speeches (albeit, the speeches grew increasingly
strident, arrogant, rather insulting, and less and less elevated or noble…).
Then came the federal courts and legislation. Along
with executive orders & protocols, lots of indoctrination in our country’s
public schools, megatons of cheerleading from the mainstream media, and ---
like gigantic titans smashing skulls left and right, influencing or
intimidating everyone --- massively wealthy corporations crafting policies that
followed the overarching goal, we were told, of making us more ‘inclusive’ and
‘diverse’… or so it would seem to be.
Well, except for those who disagree, ever so politely, with their ultimate
goal.
They weren’t included. In fact, they are coldly and resolutely
excluded.
(Read: ostracized, reprimanded, threatened, suspended &
terminated.)
Which, you would think, then destroys a real
& genuine diversity. I mean, who’s courageous enough to
stand up against Goliath? Who’s willing to risk a career, be the outcast, or
find one’s self unable to support a family? Who’s brave enough to be tarred
& feathered in the mainstream media or social media as an ‘extremist’,
‘bigot, ‘supremacist’ or ‘unloving’? The latter is the allegation of microaggressions
turned into a big, huge macroaggression. In this case, ‘diversity’
doesn’t really mean diversity. It means uniformity of thought, dear
‘friend’ --- and you’d better get in line… or else!
Thus, is it any surprise where this culminated? The proponents of
identity politics achieved their greatest victory in 2015 with the decision of
the United States Supreme Court in Obergefell
v. Hodges. Many states in the
Has it suddenly disappeared? Of course not.
It applies to our situation.
That’s what I mean by saying we should have handled the problem of
‘racism’ differently. Partisans of identity politics have stolen the ‘civil
rights’ mantle and --- touting ‘love’, ‘diversity’ & ‘inclusiveness’ ---- have
draped it around their shoulders. The courts --- particularly federal courts
--- have generally bought into their claim. This is just another civil rights
battle, say they. Or, that is, the same battle still going on.
And yet it’s not.
No intelligent, learned, logical & honest person can agree.
It’s not about
‘love’, ‘diversity’, ‘rights’ or a purported ‘inclusiveness’.
Au contraire… it’s about hatred,
uniformity, slavery and exclusion.
In a word, TYRANNY. Good-bye,
Republic; hello, God-Caesar!
+++
2. Et Tu, Brute? +++
Maybe it seems odd for a real Catholic to say these things. Perhaps
both Catholics and non-Catholics wonder how a real Roman Catholic like me can
venture these suggestions. It’s simple --- we’re
not in a Roman Catholic country. Thus, until we’re Roman Catholic (as horrifying as that idea is to a
non-Catholic…), the best a Roman Catholic can hope & pray for is a
country where the leaders & people are truly tolerant of, and give real
liberty to, those who are real Catholics. It doesn’t mean a real Catholic
approves of everything his or her fellow citizens do or believe. It doesn’t
mean we give up or deny the True Faith. It just means we don’t fantasize we can
‘control’ or pretend to ‘rule’ others.
To wit, we face reality and ask only that we be left free to be Roman Catholics.
In return, we are not ‘combative’ unless it regards the most grievous
of sins.
And even then, if ‘outgunned’, we fight as MARTYRS… not as soldiers.
You savvy? This is first & foremost a spiritual war for all real Catholics.
We are not looking to ‘beat up’ people, murder anyone, or --- God
forbid --- start a torrent of bloodshed, waging guerilla warfare or outright
military battles on a colossal scale. It may come to that, regardless.
Something almost no one --- least of all
Catholics who are wise --- wants. But we are not salivating
for it or trying to make it happen. Today is an era of martyrdom for Roman Catholics. If not actual death at the
hands of cruel persecutors, then a ‘dry’ martyrdom as we suffer under
tyranny & wickedness.
Meanwhile, we grapple with the actual situation. The
actuality that we are tiny & few. The actuality that the world is
getting more and more wicked, with sin rampant, and that there is nothing we
can do to oppose it, apart from our prayers & sufferings. The actuality
that the one single thing we dare to hope for… and work for… is that here, in
the United States, we try to get our government to do what it’s supposed to
do --- what it claimed it would do --- which is to be
‘antimajoritarian’ (a multisyllabic word
that only a political scientist professor at a university would use) and
thus protect minorities from being tyrannized at the hands of a
majority that is prejudiced against us, persecutes us & condemns us with
blithe satisfaction & brutal glee. This
is what Catholics face.
Does anyone care? The
That’s part of what the guarantee of ‘religious liberty’ is for.
Yet it’s not just us. Real Roman Catholics aren’t the only ones who
suffer. As a matter of fact, because we’re so few and mostly out of sight, we
don’t suffer as much as others of some form of ‘traditional religion’.
Evangelic Protestants, for instance, are bearing the brunt of it. That is to say, Evangelic Protestants (EPs) who are of a more
conservative nature, and fervently so. They’re the ones being dragged
into court lately, slapped by lawsuits and punished with state fines of
thousands of dollars. They’re the ones right now… a few brave EPs, at least…
bearing the brunt of the initial assault. But it won’t finish there. Unless
enough Americans realize what’s going on, care about it, and push back,
politely insisting on their constitutionally guaranteed rights, then the
bullies will only become more emboldened, draping the mantle of ‘civil rights’,
‘tolerance’, ‘love’, ‘diversity’, ‘inclusion’ and fighting against ‘aggressions’
(whether of the ‘micro’ or ‘macro’ sort),
around their shoulders, pretending to ‘protect’ all of the ‘powerless’.
When, in reality, they smash, walk upon & tyrannize us…
who are the helpless.
In very ancient times, the Roman people started out as a
What to do? Why, when open conflict doesn’t work, turn to
skullduggery.
And so our intrepid Brutus (there
were actually two men with the name of ‘Brutus’ involved in this plot,
so it can be a little confusing…) arranged to meet with Julius at a public
theatre where, at the opportune moment, they could kill him in relative
privacy. A lot of myth & uncertainties surround Julius’ assassination. For
instance, while opposing accounts from ancient times claim different things
were said or different persons first struck, Shakespeare’s famous play about
the assassination of Julius Caesar --- itself
reflecting a popular saying amongst English speakers during the Elizabethan era
--- perpetuates the notion that Julius, as he lay dying, said, “Et tu, Brute?”
Which is just Latin for, “And you, Brutus?” That is to say, “You, too, my
friend, want me dead?” Really, we can be pretty sure the dying Julius Caesar
never said this. Ah… but Shakespeare! Who can resist his way with words? Hence its popularity.
Now, “Et tu, Brute?” can be applied allegorically here in two ways.
The side of identity politics & microaggressions looks
at the other side, which wants freedom to be traditionally religious without
persecution & ‘mind control’, and views them with great disgust. “Bigots!”
they scream. “Intolerant anti-gay pigs!” And, with
Donald Trump’s winning of the US Presidency in 2016, along with a Republican
sweep of both houses in Congress (not to
mention Trump’s appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court of the United
States, who is a ‘textualist’ or ‘originalist’ in dealing with federal laws or
the US Constitution, much to the chagrin of any zealous progressive, who loves
finding new ‘rights’ or new interpretations in the Constitution or federal laws
that were never explicitly written into them, or constitutional amendments, by leaders
who composed their texts in the past), they feel betrayed, angry &
frightened. “These evil extremists are going to ruin our country and threaten
our liberty to make everyone, everybody and everything better, fairer, more
equal and more modern!!!” they cry.
Et tu, Brute?
After all, we’re each of us Americans, citizens of the same
country, right? We’re compatriots, as the saying goes. Aren’t we supposed to be
on the same side? When in agreement or facing a crisis that threatens both,
yes. When disagreeing and seeing each other as the enemy, no. In any case,
people who believe in ‘identity politics’ or the idea of ‘microagressions’,
etc., etc., feel stabbed in the back. Notwithstanding, they’re not dead like
Julius Caesar. Wounded, indeed. But
very, very, very, very incensed.
Meanwhile, the side of traditional religion & conservatism
looks at the other side, that they see as wanting power to
tell everybody else what they’re expected to believe, think, say &
do since this is only proper and the way everyone should be, and views them
with equally great disgust. “Dictators!” they holler. “Hypocritical
anti-American & anti-liberty thugs!” And, with Ms. Hillary
Rodham-Clinton’s failure to win the US Electoral College in 2016, along with Democrats’
failure to get control of either house in Congress (not to mention Pr. Trump’s attempting to do away with many of Pr.
Obama’s accomplishments, laws, rules or legacy, much to the wrath & horror
of progressives, who view Obama as heroic, being our nation’s first black
president and gung-ho for the New World Order), they’re cautiously elated,
fiercely loyal to Trump’s ‘don’t worry about the facts, defy fake news, and tell
it like it is’ mouth that offends his opponents, and hope, maybe, that the
America they were raised to believe in continues to exist, with what they think
of as ‘liberty for all’. “Those evil extremists have been ruining the best country
in the world and threaten our liberty to believe, think, say & do as we see
fit, what we American people are all about, holding to our values, and staying
truly free!!!” they cry.
Et tu, Brute?
Probably neither side --- whether contemporary ‘progressive’ or the
new Trump ‘conservative’ --- will completely like my portrayal of them in the
paragraphs above. Although I’m guessing so-called ‘conservatives’ will like it
better than the self-styled ‘progressives’. No matter. I’m really not
interested in our country’s typical politics.
I don’t
consider myself a member of any political party in the
This is because no political party in the
I like to evaluate issues on their own merits as a real Roman
Catholic.
Mindlessly adhering to positions for this or that party is
illogical.
Ergo, I’m going to step on somebody’s toes sooner or later.
The point remains:
Aren’t we all Americans, living in the same country? Isn’t what
makes us citizens of
As a result, Americans who believe in ‘traditional religion’ or
‘conservatism’ also feel stabbed in the back. (By the way, Julius Caesar was stabbed repeatedly at the hands of many
men, 23 times altogether. But it was the stab in his aorta that did him in, per
the medical examination soon afterward.) And they’re not dead, either. Not
yet, at least. They’re very, very, very, very incensed as well… having the
upper hand, slightly.
For now, leastwise. Come the next election, or the one following that one?
Hmmm. Who knows? Nobody on
earth. Only the future will reveal it.
So… will our future be bloody, peaceful, or more of the same?
Will someone’s life-sustaining aorta be pierced --- fatally?
Will there arise a Brutus or two or three
or more?
Will ‘God-Caesar’ dominate, in spite of this?
And will all of us bow down to adore him?
+++
3. The Truth and the Choice +++
What I’m saying goes for everyone around the world, to some degree
or another.
If nothing else, the
Likewise other parts of the world.
The entire earth faces a similar problem.
‘Identity politics’ or ‘racism’ or ‘diversity’ are
all of the same beast. An Oceanic & Apocalyptic Beast.
You can read about this in great detail in the long book,
Helplessly Ignorant, particularly Parts 4, 5 & 6 as thus far
posted. In this relatively short article, I’ve got to be brief. This is the
Great Apostasy. If truly Catholic, you know what I mean.
For those who aren’t Catholic and don’t know what I mean, simply know that the goal
has never been ‘freedom’, ‘equality’, ‘tolerance’, ‘love’, ‘diversity’ or
what-have-you.
The true goal has been to overturn everything once taken for
granted. This means Catholicism is at the center of the turmoil --- and whether
you can believe that or not. It also means that anything ‘traditional’ is
either outlawed, shot down, ridiculed, ignored or barely tolerated. Hence why I include people of ‘traditional religion’ in my
observations, despite not being able to see eye to eye with them about everything.
I’m really Catholic, remember? Irregardless, people of ‘traditional religion’
have some important things in common with real Catholics. Therefore, we both
face a similar threat. And that is?
The loss of our freedom to be Catholic or traditionally
religious. Or, should we say, choosing to be Catholic or traditionally
religious now entails the possibility that you could be shamed, stigmatized,
punished, fired, sued, fined, imprisoned, slandered, or otherwise treated
cruelly & unjustly. And all because you remain loyal to what you believe is
true or right. That’s the beast we face. A snarling, savage,
nasty critter.
Take ‘diversity’, for example. No real Catholic, who is wise &
decent, thinks all ethnicities other than his or her own ethnicity are ‘lesser’
or to be treated ‘unfairly’ merely because of a person or people’s ‘ethnicity’.
We only believe that every human being is made in the Image of God --- thus infinitely priceless --- and that,
whether they are Catholic or not, they both can and may preserve their unique
ethnicity as it is. Which, when you think about it, is the
practice of TRUE DIVERSITY.
No real & wise Catholic thinks marriage between a man & woman of
different ethnicities is an ‘intrinsic sin’, as theologians would say. Yet
neither do we think that every ethnicity must permit an endless amount of
intermarriage that then DESTROYS THAT
UNIQUE & PRECIOUS ETHNICITY.
Get it? There’s a difference between phony
‘diversity’ and true diversity.
A phony ‘diversity’ promotes laws & policies that ultimately destroy
unique cultures, ethnicities & countries. This is GLOBAL MONOCULTURE… meaning, everybody winds up mixed together over
generations until nobody remains unique, having lost their independent culture, ethnicity, country, way of
life, and anything that matters to human beings in his or her part of the
world, having developed into what they are. Claim to cherish
‘diversity’? Then how can you believe in things that destroy our diversity?
This is precisely what modern totem words like ‘racism’,
‘tolerance’, ‘diversity’, ‘inclusion’, ‘love’, and so on and so forth are doing
to us. And if you can’t see that, then either you’re blind to what’s going on
or else you’re a part of it --- and don’t want it to stop. Whichever, more and
more people are starting to catch on. It’s slow. Most of humanity is still
fairly clueless and mixed up. Some fools get extreme and make everybody think,
“Oh, don’t want to be like them!” Yet the truth is the truth:
You don’t uphold a true ‘diversity’ by doing what destroys it.
Clearly!
If you believe human beings are valuable (whatever
their ethnicity!), and you want humanity to be varied in ethnicity or culture, then you neither ‘forbid’ all change and
intermixing nor ‘command’ all
change and intermixing. You strike a
balance. And that balance will NOT
be the same for everyone, everywhere, all the time. Nonetheless, balanced it
must be, or else we end up destroying
true diversity and usher in a monoculture,
with no individual & unique
ethnicities or cultures left.
Savvy? It doesn’t take a genius. Just a little
clear thinking.
So how should the US have handled civil rights for ‘minorities’ and
how is any of this relevant to contemporary ‘identity politics’, etc.? It would
have been more painful, slow & patience-testing, but we as Americans should
have waged the battle for treating black Americans more fairly by changing
hearts & minds --- and NOT by
judicial decree or a federal government passing legislation that penalized
certain people or states harshly. Such an approach only spawned resentment (like the period of ‘Reconstruction’ did amongst southerners in the
United States after the Civil War), and, as we have seen lately… and even
after having an African American president… so-called ‘racism’ continues
to afflict us and continues to divide us. Yes, lots of things are better
now, according to many Americans, not least of which are black Americans. But,
no, not everything is better, and, in many ways, things are worse.
And why? Why is this the
case? Because human hearts and human minds have
NOT been changed. Or, to put the matter a bit more
precisely, some hearts & minds were changed, while, along with these
changed persons, we’ve overlooked the hearts & minds that haven’t
changed (thinking, foolishly, that the
courts & legislation with heavy penalties have taken care of that…),
and, were that not enough, the aforesaid courts & legislation, along with stigmatizing,
have created a backlash that is growing and risks spreading more
violence & hatred. Then, to top it off, this civil rights process has
morphed into something completely different, while passing itself off as the
‘same’ thing (read: identity politics),
and, employing the same old tactics --- with even more ferocity --- then tries
to cow everybody in America into mindlessly or fearfully swallowing it whole. To wit, transgender politics, the redefinition of marriage, and
etc., etc., ad infinitum.
So, if we could go back in time, how could hearts & minds have
changed?
I don’t claim to have all the answers. And many heads are better
than one alone.
But I can propose a simple solution that strikes a balance. It
could have been put to the test back in the 1940s, ’50s, ’60s & ’70s, and
it could still be put to a test here & now as we grapple with ‘identity
politics’. It’s easy. You get tough, as a government, with every citizen --- of
whatever side of the fence --- who employs brutality & violence against any
fellow citizen. Meanwhile, you leave every citizen truly free to follow one’s conscience when it comes to
matters of morality & religion.
Yes, brutality & violence are often justified by individuals as a matter of
morality & religion. Howsoever, no,
this lame excuse does not pass
muster since brutality & violence against
lawful authority is the cause of greater
evil & senseless destruction than is the government resolutely
fighting such unsanctioned brutality & violence (as a Catholic, theology teaches that this kind of brutality &
violence is an unjust war, in
contrast to a just war). An
example of how this could play out in everyday life is allowing those who own
businesses to do as they must, following one’s
conscience. As long as it doesn’t involve brutality & violence toward other
citizens, then give them the real freedom to do so. Via posted signs or a
social media presence, every citizen could know what the owner of that business
upholds. Should an individual citizen disagree strongly with the business’
stance, he or she withholds support of, or transaction
with, that business politely & civilly. If such withholding of support or
transaction is not realistic at that point in time, one can, notwithstanding,
politely & civilly, voice one’s disagreement with their stance.
Comprehending? Sure, there’d be sticky points to figure out. Yet it
can work.
For instance, if a business refuses to serve African American
citizens, then, by law, require them to post a plain sign saying so in polite
terms. Social media nowadays can additionally and easily make such stances
known by anyone & everyone. But be civil! Stop the stupidity of ‘rage’
& ‘trolls’. Simply note the fact of the business’ stance. If one’s
conscience opposes this stance, then you may say so publicly… but politely,
courteously and with civility. Perchance many citizens will agree with you. If
we continue the example of a business refusing to serve black citizens, both
they & Americans who are white, etc., yet sympathize with them, could in
turn refuse to patronize this business. If difficult because this business is
crucial in some fashion, government could intervene with great restraint,
in order to prevent what amounts to brutality & violence toward an American
citizen --- but the smarter approach in
the long run is for these citizens, who disagree with the business’ stance, to
organize a separate solution completely, on their own. Recollect
American ingenuity & independence? A rugged ‘self-reliance’?
Um hmm. Sounds old-fashioned, I
know. But would it kill Americans to practice it in this case? I think not. You
just gotta have willpower. Determination. A willingness to stand upon your own two feet. I’m not fond
of ‘conservatism’ or any brand of American politics. Yet I can find things in
any independent party that I like. Moderation is key;
but self-reliance is good.
(By the way, I don’t
pretend that this is the only
solution or best solution. As
I said above, many heads are
better than one. Mayhap I or
someone else could come up with a better solution than this. Or several
solutions, including a variation on this one, that might be ideal. And
there would be sticky points, problems to solve and work out. All the
same, I’m confident we could solve
everything and make things work. We’re an intelligent people, right?
I’d like to think so --- even if a lot of our amusement or entertainment
increasingly ‘dumbs us down’. And recollect… just
because an idea seems to be ‘outlandish’ or ‘strange’ doesn’t mean that it
can’t succeed. Oftentimes people, encountering the new, require time to see
the need or what is truly possible.)
So how would this relate to proponents of ‘identity politics’ in
this case?
Again, easy. Require all businesses to post
their stance, via signs, social media or whatever. Make sure it’s polite &
civil. In response, American citizens can choose to patronize these businesses
or not, depending on their convictions regarding the stance. They could
patronize and politely & civilly voice their disagreement. Who knows? A
rash of sanity & logical discourse might even break out. Horrors! The very thought!
I jest, of course. This would be a far better way of changing human
hearts & minds, though. As our beloved William ‘Billy the Shakes’
Shakespeare had a very amusing character in one of his many theatrical plays
observe, “Murder cannot be hid long; a man’s son may; but at the length, truth will
out.” The point being that, if you care about the truth & right, then, “The
truth and right will come out into the open in the end, being unmistakably
clear for everybody to see.” I am that confident about the truth because I am
that confident in Our Creator. Even if you, personally, don’t want to believe
in a Creator… well, okay, but I’m still confident in Our Almighty Maker. So sue
me!
Any real & wise Roman Catholic is.
This is the Truth. The Choice is yours.
Which
Being Catholic, I want a Catholic America. Totally.
But, seeing as that’s not the case right now --- and barring a
sudden miracle --- then I’ll take a truly free
In return, I’ll be polite & civil to you, my fellow American,
despite you disagreeing with me about Roman Catholicism. I’ll gladly give you
the maximum freedom I can to act as you see fit, with the understanding that
you also give me the maximum liberty you can, permitting me to act as I see
fit, both for myself and for my family, or anyone in my personal care and under
my responsibility. See how it works? It’s not perfect. I.e., everybody wants more, we all want everyone else to agree wholeheartedly.
I get that. It’s only human. Ah, but we live in a very imperfect
world.
Don’t we? Indeed we do. Which is why we should strike
balances.
The Truth and the Choice is for All Humanity in Modern Times.
The Religion of Modernism has influenced every human being
everywhere, to some extent or another. For hardcore Modernists, I issue a cordial
warning. “Be careful, dear souls. You may want to think that your agenda is unstoppable,
that it justifies anything and everything you do, trying to get everybody to
talk & act just like you. I tell you, watch out. Kingdoms rise, and
kingdoms fall. Your kingdom has been ascending continually for many centuries
now. You’re pushing fast. Recoil may hurt.”
Badly. And that’s no threat. I’m a powerless
nobody. It’s just truth.
That doesn’t scare you, does it? Or maybe it does. Oh, well.
Truth wins in the end, despite being a powerless nobody.
Haven’t you figured that out? Shhhh.
Say it quietly:
“Truth triumphs. The meek
inherit the earth.”
Stay tuned. This one’s a cliffhanger.
Shhhh!
+
+ +
Pilate’s
query met:
Note:
if you’ve come
to this webpage directly from a search
engine or other
website, then, when done viewing this webpage
--- and assuming
you wish to view more of this website’s pages ---
please type the
website’s address (as given above right before this
note) into the
address bar at the top of your browser and hit the
‘enter’ button on the keyboard of your computer.
Please go here about use of the writings
on this website.
© 2018 by
Paul Doughton.
All rights
reserved.