Archive for the ‘Zeitgeist’ Category
From a book by the same title written in 1911 by Henry Osborn Taylor:
Nevertheless, the Latin Christianity of the Fathers and the antique fund of sentiment and knowledge, through their self-conserving strength, affected men in constant ways. Under their action the peoples of western Europe, from the eighth to the thirteenth century, passed through a homogeneous growth, and evolved a spirit different from that of any other period of history – a spirit which stood in awe before its monitors divine and human, and deemed that knowledge was to be drawn from the storehouse of the past; which seemed to rely on everything except its sin-crushed self, and trusted everything except its senses; which in the actual looked for the ideal, in the concrete saw the symbol, in the earthly Church beheld the heavenly, and in the fleshly joys discerned the devil’s lures; which lived in the unreconciled opposition between the lust and vain-glory of earth and the attainment of salvation; which felt life’s terror and its pitifulness, and its eternal hope; around which waved concrete infinitudes, and over which flamed the terror of darkness and the Judgment Day.
After the High Middle Ages, there is another flowering watered by the rediscovery of additional antiquities: that period we call the Renaissance. Whether as consequence of or as cooperator with the Renaissance, the Church fractures and a new age is born. As Latin Christianity loses its hold on the minds of the elites, a new spirit rises. The new spirit, the Modern Spirit, is in many ways the antithesis of the Mediaeval Mind: it no longer stands in awe of any external power, either divine or human, but deconstructs both; it sees no sin in itself; it revels in its senses, trusting feelings much more than logic despite adoption of appellations like Empiricism and Objectivism; it strips from the Church whatever is not earthly, worships the flesh and promotes lust and vain-glory and finally denies the reality of a Judgment Day.
Here in the first part of the 21st century, we see what a few hundred years without the Mediaeval mind can do. Civilizations die because of corruption. Loss of the knowledge from the storehouse of the past has led Western Civilization to the brink of death, as we no longer believe the Church is authoritative on Reality, nor do we believe we can learn from the Past. Like a drunken old man, we wheeze our way toward death mumbling incoherently the lies about our greatness only we believe.
There is no salvation outside the Church. Nobody dares say that these days, yet we see it is so not only for individuals seeking eternal bliss but also for civilizations seeking strength and renewal. If we love our country and we suppress the church, we prove ourselves to be either fools or liars.
Slightly restated, the Paul positions reflect the traditional small-government tenor of the GOP before it fell in love with big government.
- We cannot have liberty without respect for property rights, which depend on a steady measure of the value of property, which depends on sound money, which the Fed has destroyed over the past 90 years. Something significant must be done to recover our money and our liberty.
- We cannot have taxation (and the taking of private property on which taxation is based) without representation and call ourselves heirs to the Founding Fathers of this country. An administrative state in which unelected technocrats make rules with the force of laws and carry guns to enforce those rules is closer to Germany of the 1930s than anything consistent with the U.S. Constitution. Something significant must be done to recover our representative republic and our liberty.
- We cannot respect the lives of our military men and women if we are sending them into harm’s way without the deliberation prescribed by the Constitution. American blood is too precious to be wasted in non-critical conflagrations in remote parts of the world. The defense forces are primarily for defense, not a police force for the world, and something significant must be done to recover our Constitutional mandate for the military.
These are the views of Tea Party people. While it might be that his father Ron is no longer taken seriously, Senator Rand Paul seems to be able to articulate these themes with an even tone. Liberty rests on limited government, as our country’s founders knew. We need no more of good government types that know how to “do” things; it is time for future government leaders to listen to the Carrie Underwood song and “Undo It.”
As a libertarian evangelical Catholic grandson of a social gospel-ing Episcopalian priest candidate for NYC Assemblyman in the 1920s on the Socialst ticket, I have spent a great deal of time trying to understand how and why smart men like my grandfather could believe all they do believe.
In the case of the second generation, those that came to maturity around the Great War, it is somewhat explained in that the new ideas had hardly been tried. Bold and broad prescriptions for the ills of industrial society found an audience, much as Hope and Change appealed broadly in 2008 to U.S. voters. In the case of the current generation, it is clear that a century’s evidence indicates the prescriptions are not only insufficient to the problem but are in fact injurious to humanity.
Rather than scour the ruling classes of wickedness, leftist programs tried around the globe have institutionalized wicked ruling classes. Those societies most removed from active Christian practice revealed most clearly the depravity potential of a Progressive regime: the atheistic Communist governments of the USSR, China, the National Socialists, and the Khmer Rouge piled up bodies at a horrific rate. De-Christianized Europe and radicalized Muslim governments lagged well behind in total body counts, but in both cases the declaration of noble ends justified overt and subtle means of repression. The leftists of America announced a revolutionary program at the dawn of the 20th century, and it was implemented step by step over the course of 100 years, with only a five year hiatus during the Coolidge Administration. Even under Ronald Reagan the Leviathan grew. Now, already a decade into the 21st century, there is no cover left for the utter ineffectiveness of Progressivism to reach its stated goals of a Kallipolis.
The United States was founded by men who wittingly or not subscribed to the Thomistic/Aristotlean realism of man rather than the soaring Platonist idealism of their French contemporaries. Woodrow Wilson’s and Herbert Croly’s efforts to import a European solution failed because this country is not and never will be Europe. Rather than noble ideals, it is now apparent Progressivism trades in class envy and resentment. These sell in the short term but destroy in the long term. It is a sign of American health that Progressivism is losing its credibility, as Americans reclaim liberty as the founding principle of the country.
Walter Russell Mead’s blog has a post on this subject, from the perspective of the perplexed Progressive
I have spent some time trying to guess the genesis of American Leftism. I propose the German historical-critical Bible scholarship of the 19th Century. Devout Protestants — and America was a devout Protestant nation in the 19th century — had to deal with the fact that some of their long-held doctrines were clearly not true. (Moses did not write the five books of Moses in the Old Testament, for example. Mark was written before Matthew, and Q was written before either, for a New Testament example.)
This gave greater credibility to the intellectual children of the malicious Voltaire and the irreligious Jewish intellectuals mingling with goyim in a de-Ghettoed Europe. Sophmoric youth like Woodrow Wilson, and a few years behind him Norman Thomas, abandoned their allegiance to the tradition-bound Presbyterianism of their pastor fathers in favor of the ultimately empty promises of the Social Gospel. The teachings of the Popes of the time were on Socialism’s inconsistency with the inherent diginity of the human person, but the Catholics were persecuted in the United States through Blaine Amendments to such a degree that they set up their own Ghetto system complete with schools and hospitals. Catholic teaching was certainly not going to get widespread support among American intellectuals — Catholicism was thought to be the antithesis of intellectualism, mired as it was in rote ritual.
Fools like Wilson gave way to villains like Roosevelt, and the moral basis of limited government was replaced by a spirit of expediency and power. “Should it be done” was replaced by “could it be done.” And we see the final form in the current Alinsky Administration and the Brownshirt Congress of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
Nearly 120 years ago, Pope Leo XIII wrote a comprehensive letter to his people and the world on the lies of Socialism. He warned the proletarian and the worker “to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss.” [Rerum Novarum, paragraph 20]
That Mr. Obama has “evil principles” relies perhaps on inductive reasoning rather than deductive reasoning. We know Socialism’s evil rests on its false premises (e.g., class warfare) and its false promises (e.g., peace and prosperity through the abolition of private property) but we do not have a record of Mr. Obama openly advocating for Socialism. We look at his actions as President, from the takeover of General Motors by the government and the unions to the “pay czar” setting salaries in the banking sector, and we can see socialism — or certainly fascism — at work. We can draw the conclusion that Mr. Obama is a practicing socialist, but we cannot point to any declaration by him stating his allegiance to Socialism.
We can, on the other hand, point many times to Mr. Obama’s “artful promises of great results,” such as his promise to reduce unemployment from the 8% level at the time of his inauguration, or his promise that 95% of the country would not have a tax increase, or his promise that he would simultaneously overhaul our broken healthcare system while letting those who are happy with their healthcare plan (80% of poll respondents) keep the great system they have.
We can also point to Mr. Obama’s exciting “foolish hopes” for a peaceful Middle East, a post-racial United States, and a centrist government led by someone not named George Bush. We have ended in “useless regrets and grievous loss” with a 10.2% unemployment rate, a $1.4 trillion budget deficit that must be paid by higher taxes. We have less stability and more loss of life in Afghanistan, a “beer summit” after the President of the United States blamed the “stupid” police in “Gates-gate.” We have an extremist government that calls the American people “cowards” on racial issues, hires Green Jobs czars that believe the American government had foreknowledge of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and lets senior White House officials proclaim Mao Tse Tung as one of their favorite political philosophers.
The Pope was not all that keen on community organizers, either:
[N]either justice nor the common good allows any individual to seize upon that which belongs to another, or, under the futile and shallow pretext of equality, to lay violent hands on other people’s possessions. Most true it is that by far the larger part of the workers prefer to better themselves by honest labor rather than by doing any wrong to others. But there are not a few who are imbued with evil principles and eager for revolutionary change, whose main purpose is to stir up disorder and incite their fellows to acts of violence. The authority of the law should intervene to put restraint upon such firebrands, to save the working classes from being led astray by their maneuvers, and to protect lawful owners from spoliation. Rerum Novarum paragraph 38
No, Pope Leo was not some kind of Nostradamus. He knew that evil rarely shows itself fully until it has achieved power. He was describing a type. 120 years later, we see that type in our current President.
What should we call the adulatory Washington press corps that slavishly parrots the talking points put forward by Democratic Party operatives and studiously ignores talking points put forward by the opposition? The press corps that constantly claims objectivity despite a perfect record of advocacy?
I believe Rush Limbaugh’s appellation “butt boys” is too vulgar, beyond the Anderson Cooper “teabagger” in its obscenity.
I have heard Hallelujah Chorus, the Amen Corner, and I like both for their Messianic imagery that reminds us of the Blessed One’s unique role.
What about the Fugal Press Corps?
The Free Dictionary (www.thefreedictionary.com) defines it thusly: “An imitative polyphonic composition in which a theme or themes are stated successively in all of the voices of the contrapuntal structure.” (It defines contrapuntal as “having two or more independent but harmonically related melodic parts sounding together.”)
There I learn also how “fugue” is used as a term of psychiatry: “A pathological amnesiac condition during which one is apparently conscious of one’s actions but has no recollection of them returning to a normal state. This condition, usually resulting from severe mental stress, may persist for as long as several months.”
This is perfect!
On the one hand, the press corps produces an imitative multi-voice composition in which the voices are independent but related and each playing off the other in a harmonious melody.
On the other hand, it is a bunch of people operating under such stress that they have no memory of what they did after they have done it.
Some of us have wondered how they could sleep at night, given their performance on camera or on paper. Now we know.