Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ is Going to Go!
My husband, my youngest daughter, and I had lunch with an old friend yesterday. He and I were known to have heated arguments back when we were more politically in-sync, which, I daresay, we both enjoyed immensely. While he still adheres to atheistic liberalism, I’ve converted both religiously and politically. Paradoxically, our conversations seem to be more measured and substantive, although I still win 99 percent of the disputes – just ask me.
In the course of our conversation, he cracked a joke about selecting swimwear and potentially looking good in a burkini. This led to a discussion of France’s somewhat feeble attempts to push back against the assertion of Muslim culture by banning the veil and, now, the controversial initiative to ban the burkini. Our friend asserted there are only two realistic approaches to take on the cultural tensions extant when Muslims move into western societies: 1) Try to retain the western values of pluralism and religious tolerance in an open society while “leaving the door open for compromises,” or 2) Expel the alien ideological element and combat it wherever it is found. I demurred.
There is a third option, which is the course we’re currently pursuing: the West can simply lie down and die.
Something I said really touched a nerve, because our friend became very animated and heatedly asked me, “You really believe, in a hundred years, the West will be overrun?” He was absolutely confident that what we’re witnessing in the way of cultural jihad (from Islamic supremacists on one side and leftists on the other) is not a trend and I’m dead wrong to believe Western Civilization is vulnerable.
That was before I informed him about Sharia courts given the authority to settle civil disputes in Great Britain and many municipalities in Canada (because the Jews and the Catholics already had them, so Muslims must have them too!), and the abrogation of the Anglo common-law tradition. Neither was he aware of the video taken (by a very brave youngster, I assume) in the madrassa in Great Britain where high school students recite the punishments for homosexuality (throw them off a high place, and then stone them) and apostasy (kill them). H/t: @pseudodionysius
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzEm4xuBhqg
Still, he insisted, I’m wrong to think the West is dying. Unfortunately, our time together was short and I had to leave, but I parted with this thought: In order to sustain a culture, the people must understand and love their heritage (Westerners are either ignorant or ashamed), must live by its values (we’re increasingly secular and relativistic), and even be willing to die for its principles. Most westerners are too soft to assert the superiority of our culture, with the exception being Christians and conservatives. <mic drop>
Now, how is any of this relevant to the 2016 Election (because every worthwhile discussion must be related to Trump vs Clinton)? The real contest is between Christianity and its two mortal enemies: Islam and leftism. They know it and most Christians (who are not also leftists) know it. NeverTrumpers? Not so much.
Why do I assert this? After mentally replaying my conversation with our friend and trying to discover the pattern that would explain the NeverTrump position, I noticed that the NeverTrumpers align almost identically with secular “conservatives” who are soft on social/cultural issues like abortion and SSM. On these subjects, they largely agree with the anti-Christian Left.
I don’t mean to suggest NeverTrumpers are themselves anti-Christian, only that their unfamiliarity with the Christian religious tradition may amke them unaware of the danger of their alliance with the Left to Christianity and, therefore, Western Civilization.
Published in GeneralLet nothing disturb you,
Let nothing frighten you,
All things are passing away:
God never changes.
Patience obtains all things
Whoever has God lacks nothing;
God alone suffices.
— St. Teresa of Avila
The Chinese and other autocrats are sneering at Obama’s weakness to his face. Prager pointed out that our president had to exit the “ass” of Air Force One in an unprecedented show of disrespect at the G20 Summit.
Someone might point out to Obama that by destroying the moral standing of the US in the world, he hasn’t made any friends for us or himself. Surprise!
Hillary will be no better. In fact, she may already be bought and paid for by certain foreign contributors to the Clinton (Crime) Foundation.
I don’t think Donald Trump will destroy conservatism any more than Richard (Tricky Dick, wage and price controls, EPA, …) Nixon did. Conservatism did pretty well after that, considering the one-term Democrat president was followed by Ronald Reagan.
This is it in a nutshell.
Thank goodness this doesn’t mitigate WC’s point at all.
Why can’t the bottom line be what what we actually keep saying it is?
Striking.
There have been many times since I turned 18 that I have voted for the lesser of two evils – because one of the candidates was demonstrably better, even if I wasn’t enthusiastic. The only candidates I have actually been glad to vote for were Reagan and Bush43. However, I voted for Ford, Bush41, Dole, McCain, and Romney because they were better than the alternative.
I believe that Hillary and Trump are equally evil, just in different ways. If I believe that both would seriously harm the country, why should I give my support to either one?
Pro-Trump members in effect are saying that I should give my vote to Trump because they believe he is better than Hillary.
Sorry, but my vote is mine.
Because apparently the only arrow that Trump voters have in their quivers is the accusation that non-Trump voters like Hillary.
I didn’t see where WC used the word ‘like’, do you have an unabridged version of Ricochet?
Nope. Never said that. I said you’re more comfortable with a Clinton win than I am.
Like, support, help, more comfortable, etc., etc. — they are all the same argument from the Trump voters.
We are supposed to vote for Trump because they think he is better. And if we don’t want to vote for him, then we will be responsible for electing Hillary. We need to “own it.” This not-so-subtle intimidation is not worthy and not effective.
The people who will be responsible for electing Hillary are the plurality of primary voters who picked Trump. And they will need to own it.
I am equally uncomfortable with a Trump win or a Hillary win.
But the question is, why do you (and other Trump voters) feel it necessary to throw comments like that in?
Yeah, you know when you put something in writing that you know is going to give you grief…
I stated my conclusion poorly. I’ll work on it.
I find it useful to ask, “in comparison to what?” in these cases. It’s not that I find Trump particularly palatable. It’s that I find Hillary (and sexual predator Bill) Clinton unthinkable.
Also, I doubt very much you’d find people more versed in Western heritage and tradition than VDH and Larry Arnn.
Pain scientists once tried to put together this measurement called dols. It went up to 10 or 11 dols, the amount of pain you feel when your skin is being burned off – or during labor, apparently (they tested this by burning the skin of women while they were in labor and asking the women to compare the sensations).
If event X causes person A 3 dols and person B 8 dols, while event Y causes A 6 dols and B 9 dols, then, A is relatively more comfortable with X than Y by 3 dols while B is relatively more comfortable with X than Y by only 1 dol, and yet B is still in more absolute discomfort from both X and Y.
A is quite likely to say to B, “The fact that you see only one dol’s worth of difference must mean the one I found so much worse doesn’t particularly bother you,” but it doesn’t actually follow. All you have is the relative difference being smaller for B than for A.
Thanks.
You seem upset, EB, and that’s really not my intention. I do not mean to cast aspersions on your character or judgment. If I were equally uncomfortable with a Trump win, I would make the choice you have to vote for neither. I think I’m just stating a fact when I make the comparison.
Maybe another way to say it would be, “I’m more comfortable with a Trump win than you are.” Does that formulation help? Because I won’t deny it’s true from my end. I am more comfortable with a Trump win.
Yes, exactly. Different threat assessments involved here.
Well, it would be more accurate for you to put it that way, because you are voting for Trump
I’m not upset, just weary of the daily – “if you don’t vote for Trump you are voting for Hillary” posts and comments.
If someone thinks Trump is better, they should vote for him. While I have been very open about my opinion about Trump, I don’t think I have ever tried to convince someone not to vote for him.
I don’t have a quarrel with reluctant Trump supporters. I understand their reasoning. I’m just tired of Trump supporters having a quarrel with those of us who can’t vote for him.
When you’re not exhausted by this (should that occur before the election), I’d like to dig a little deeper into the “equally evil” argument. Let’s just take the obvious one first: Has Donald Trump gotten anyone killed that you know of? Because that would be an important piece of information I’d like to have before casting my vote.
@fredcole, the only question to which “Trump” is the answer is, “Who will keep unaccountable Hillary Clinton and her crime syndicate from rising to unimaginable power?” Don’t put words in my mouth and I won’t put them in yours.
Seconding, @eb, this is a significant improvement.
I view a Clinton presidency with something between dread and despair.
What separates us, I think, is not a significant difference in our evaluation of her, but a difference in our evaluation of him. The (real) chances that he is better are outweighed to my mind by the additional risks he brings by, e.g., creating a trade war, stumbling into a real one, and damaging conservative from within. I don’t deny for a moment the certain and potential dangers she poses; I think you’re underestimating his.
I respect that you and others do not share this assessment of Trump and are voting in accord with your best judgment and conscience. That’s all any of us can do. It stinks.
Every truly significant change to The West has stemmed from forces within it who wish to remake it. The outcomes are essentially Western outcomes – whether one likes them or not.
I don’t see that changing in the foreseeable future – threats from Islam/jihad/what have you are geographically contained, largely ineffectual and, most importantly, physical. In themselves they have zero chance of changing how the West thinks, what it values and what it (truly) believes.
What these threats do, and perhaps this is their greatest real impact, is bring disagreements within the West into focus. What is the role of the Church? Is Christianity special or just another religion? Are people free to wear what they want or not? These are all Western questions.
I think you may be underestimating the west’s capacity for surrender.
To whom? Itself? There’s nobody else there.
Tom M., you and EB must have missed my post. Even if you think they are personally equally evil, Trump will only be able to accomplish evil that is fourteen percent less evil than Hillary.
http://ricochet.com/hillary-14-more-evil-than-trump/
Just because we don’t know Odoacer’s name yet doesn’t mean he isn’t on his way.
You can’t beat something with nothing.
Fine, then make that point. But don’t mix your Trump advocacy with some grand defense of Christian values or Western civilization.
And the alternative is a man with an equal contempt for the law. Worse actually. At least Clinton has enough shame to try to hide her crime. Trump lacks any shame.
Yes, this is right. I wish I could reproduce my conversation with my friend in full, because at one point I touched on the difference between American “safe space” college kids and jihadist youth.
There are notable exceptions in the West. Having spent a weekend at Hillsdale a couple weeks ago, I can attest there are western youth who are deeply committed to their western heritage. But, these are the exceptions. The vast majority of our young people are either mis-educated by the Left into multicultural claptrap or are full-out “social justice” zombies who are ashamed of their cultural heritage.