Radical socialists cannot fathom that any person would seek a one on one understanding of a Source of higher purposefulness, even higher than here and now addiction to pleasure stimulants or to collective conspiracies to obtain such stimulants. They do not intuit any such Source, and it bugs them no end that anyone else might believe he does. They are unable to devote themselves to any purpose higher than social collectivization, except perhaps to crush all who do. (Their individual salvation depends on enforcing your collectivist, statist salvation.)
To entice and collectivize co-conspirators, secular hedonists promise all manner of cheap and addictive cures, diversions, and fixations. Indeed, they can never stop gathering firewood to fire up new fixations and fads, else the angst of the community would subside. It is easier to keep a crisis-fire burning than it is to start a new one. So no decently sustainable mores can be allowed to assimilate. That would risk letting the angst-fire flicker out.
Secular hedonists cannot allow any lines of decency to be long enforced. Concepts of God (higher than the State Liberation God), holy matrimony, and family values give secular addicts the cold willies. They must make God fearing people of purposefulness out to be the enemy of enlightenment. So we get statist rearing of children, gay and poly marriage, pedophilia, statist sexualizing of children, ridicule of cohering traditions, loss of firm values, effeminate fear of failing to tolerate everything, libertarian opening up of drug markets to everyone thought “mature” enough, etc.
As depredations accumulate and accelerate, we soon become numb. The absurd thing is, after all this, “enlightened” proponents assure us that, when it really becomes necessary, they will be able to draw and enforce actual lines … as in lines for defining and preserving nation and character. Ha! There’s reason why no society of radical hedonists has every flourished very long: they soon transmogrify into systems of radical social dehumanization.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Consider who most influences trade policies and regulations. Ask: Who, and what interests, are given most consideration and weight when it comes to trade policies? Do you think that has much to do with what is best for the American ideal, or for most Americans, or even for the American economy in general? Do you really think policy makers are concerned with looking out for ordinary Americans, so we can choose how to spend our money and buy the cheapest products? Apart from getting hoodwinked with talking points after the fact, do you think the real policy makers give a fig what ordinary Americans think? If they gave a fig, why would such a large percentage of the electorate believe it is simply not listened to after elections, apart from lip service? Do you really think the decline of American industry and labor is an unintentional byproduct of the trade policies of powers that be? What if the decline of America is the intention? If it is, how much longer should we recite the free trade slogan and continue with business as usual?
Post a Comment