2010 July 19 Monday
Ground Zero Mosque Culture Clash With Our Rulers

While some people pose as wiser and morally superior to Sarah Palin because she opposes the Ground Zero mosque at the World Trade Center site OneSTDV points out that liberals favor cultural and social capitulation to a group that is hostile to what they stand for. Liberals are suicidal at a cultural level. What's with that? Libertarians are equally foolish of course.

So Palin criticizes the proposed Ground Zero mosque, perhaps the most unabashed insult one could lance at the American people. Per a response at HuffPo, opposing cultural and social capitulation to a pernicious group that openly champions the West's destruction represents bigotry and paranoia. Liberals would gladly welcome their own demise if done so under the guise of tolerance for non-Western cohorts. And while I surely support freedom of speech and religion, survival should always be the paramount value. This entails ardently opposing any overt aggression towards our country and our culture, even if it means subverting a cherished ideal. Though if we listen to some right-wing pundits, we can allay Islamic enmity by winning their "hearts, minds, and friendship". Fittingly, so as to not rouse their ire and pique their delicate sensibilities, perhaps we SHOULD let them build the mosque or even adopt their commendable moral standards. (\sarcasm)

Our ruling class will support a mosque at Ground Zero because our ruling class does not want to admit that America has cultural and ethical differences with some other parts of the world that are huge and that should be protected. What to make of this? Roissy points to an essay by Angelo M. Codevilla about how the ruling class and masses have drifted so far apart.

Never has there been so little diversity within America's upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America's upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter. The Boston Brahmins, the New York financiers, the land barons of California, Texas, and Florida, the industrialists of Pittsburgh, the Southern aristocracy, and the hardscrabble politicians who made it big in Chicago or Memphis had little contact with one another. Few had much contact with government, and "bureaucrat" was a dirty word for all. So was "social engineering." Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday's upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed.

Today's ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters -- speaking the "in" language -- serves as a badge of identity. Regardless of what business or profession they are in, their road up included government channels and government money because, as government has grown, its boundary with the rest of American life has become indistinct. Many began their careers in government and leveraged their way into the private sector. Some, e.g., Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, never held a non-government job. Hence whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America's ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.

The two classes have less in common culturally, dislike each other more, and embody ways of life more different from one another than did the 19th century's Northerners and Southerners -- nearly all of whom, as Lincoln reminded them, "prayed to the same God." By contrast, while most Americans pray to the God "who created and doth sustain us," our ruling class prays to itself as "saviors of the planet" and improvers of humanity. Our classes' clash is over "whose country" America is, over what way of life will prevail, over who is to defer to whom about what. The gravity of such divisions points us, as it did Lincoln, to Mark's Gospel: "if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand."

Our enemies rule us. That's a problem.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2010 July 19 11:49 PM  Elites As Enemies

OneSTDV said at July 20, 2010 6:51 AM:

Suicidal. Exactly the word to describe it.

Thanks for the link.

AnonyMouse said at July 20, 2010 9:42 AM:

If you look at the birth rates, liberals are also suicidal at an individual level.

Among the cows in Iowa said at July 20, 2010 10:57 AM:

You pasted the final paragraph twice.

no i don't said at July 20, 2010 6:41 PM:

"Our enemies rule us. That's a problem."

Yup. They are usual parasites of society: politicians, clergy / religious ministers and corporation$. And of course the usual cowardly citizens that permit such bold treason to the point of no return.

And it is only until now that many realize. But it is waaaaay too late already. Our enemies do more than rule us. They OWN us; they own your education, your likes and tastes, your nutrition, your desires, your loyalties, your thoughts.

That's what happens when people lease their heads in order to have a hat; when they trade principle for cash, dignity for comfort, water for soda and freedom for security.

Gosh the U.S. used to be such a great country.

"Our enemies rule us. That's a problem."

Yes. For any cowardly nation there will always be a dictator.

CMC said at July 21, 2010 10:32 AM:

Who sold it to these guys? Did the sellers know they were selling to muslims who intended to build a mosque?

In said at July 21, 2010 6:30 PM:

"Liberals are suicidal at a cultural level. What's with that?.....Our ruling class will support a mosque at Ground Zero because our ruling class does not want to admit that America has cultural and ethical differences with some other parts of the world that are huge and that should be protected. What to make of this?"

These are excellent questions. Think about how strange our elite's concerns are compared to previous times in history. Prima facia it appears our elites have degenerated, and I certainly think that they have in at least some ways. However allow me to present the explanation for this given by the integral folks (http://www.integralinstitute.org/) that suggests this strangeness is the result of something higher in development pathologically combined with something lower. They (or at least Ken Wilber) call it boomeritis. I'm not saying I buy it completely, but it is interesting.

The explanation rests on the idea that human consciousness develops in stages as modeled by spiral dynamics (sd). These stages are broadly categorized as preconventional, conventional, and postconventional or egocentric, ethnocentric, and world-centric. The idea is, is that many adults only develop to an egocentric level of awareness (narcissistic, self-seeking or the red meme in sd). Others reach a conventional level of awareness that is concerned also about the group as an extension of the self (blue meme in sd). The next highest levels (orange and green) are aware of global concerns as they pertain to the self and the group.

Orange is the rational level that much of modern progress depended on. Green is an extension of orange in that it (people at green) is sensitive to others in a way that orange is not. Hence all the appeals to tolerance, sensitivity, and other ideals that resemble the green party's platform (http://www.gp.org/platform/2000/index.html). The green meme is also home to pluralism, post-modernism, multiculturalism, etc.

The explanation rests on the idea that people at green are so concerned about marginalizing anyone's views that they have trouble making value distinctions and non-green people can take advantage of this. In general they view all hierarchies as oppression and hence our elites sensitivities: The lofty green meme ideals (which many people sincerely hold) are hijacked by people at an egocentric level of development (red). The sincere greens won't hold them accountable and hence all this damage is done for the sake of sensitivity.

I admit.... I'm sure I'm oversimplifying the integral view on this....and that I'm not 100% convinced myself....But it does explain this weirdness and I do think there is something to these developmental views.

Hornady said at July 21, 2010 9:26 PM:

no i don't said at July 20, 2010 6:41 PM:

Just you wait wen the SHTF. Better be ready...

Al said at August 5, 2010 8:21 PM:

Those guys who acted as " haters" before us were and are actually lovers.


Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright