I'm not avoiding it just because of Mark's own approach, which typically involves name calling, insults, accusations and even calumny. But his comments section has become a tempest of insanity, hate, and all things left and anti-Western.
If you hate America, the Church, Jesus, Christians, Western Civilization; if you advocate for contraception, abortion, gay sex, Communism - it matters not. As long as your purpose is to stop by and trash Conservatives, Americans, Conservative American Christians, Republicans or - above all things - Donald Trump, you are given a dispensation.
At least you're not called on it. There was a time when someone posting a pro-abort or pro-gay sex or anti-American post would have been swooped down upon by Mark himself. Not to mention the majority of his readers.
Today? Almost never any push back, and that's when others don't line up and cheer and celebrate such posts. Why go to a "Catholic" blog for that? I can go to atheist, communist, pro-abortion and LGBT sites for that. And sometimes, even those type of blogs are at least fun and light hearted, if not wrapped in hatred and loathing for everything sane and right in the world.
Examples:
That was from the short lived 'John Kelly loves slavery' scandal that the press tried to float. Ever since his smack down of the Urban Cowgirl, the press has tried to do what the press will do to anyone who blasphemes the god of leftism: discredit him. So when he dared to say what historians universally said up until the dark times, that the Civil War might have been the result of many factors, even if slavery was the driving force, of course charges of Nazi and racist and irredeemable deplorable flew like crows. That is, until all but the most zealous and fanatical realized all he was saying was what historians have universally said up until these dark times. Then it went away. Except on places like Mark's blog.
Or we have this little gem:
In case you can't read it, here's what it says:
"I appreciate his willingness to speak up, but Will is being dishonest (probably with himself first) by pretending that Nazism does not have historical roots in the US. He also soft-pedals the alt-right's open advocacy of ethnic/social cleansing, describing it as mere "identity politics". Denial is dangerous here.
Manifest Destiny was the model for "Lebensraum". Under Jim Crow the US was nothing more or less than an apartheid ethnostate, The German Nazis were very explicit about using Jim Crow and the Native American genocides as their reference for for what they wanted to accomplish, and they used our laws as the model for theirs. Some particulars like the cult of "blood and soil" were German inn ovations, but at the heart of historical German Nazism was a kernel of America-worship.
Modern hardline white supremacists certainly acknowledge the kinship: it's been true for a long time that you could find Confederate and Nazi flags on display together if you moved in those circles. More common now in public too. The rot began here and it will have to end here, or (if the average Americans persist in denial) not at all."
Yep. In other words, the good commenter hates America and sees it, not Nazi Germany, which was merely inspired by it, as the core evil of the 20th century. And America must be the final end of these things. Exactly how, she doesn't say.
When I was in college in 1988, I took a course on the history of the 20th Century. The professor, during the section on the rise of Nazism, made a quip that 'America, in some ways, was worse than Nazi Germany, because the Nazis were at least true to themselves, not hypocrites.' Pretty shocking, though not as many students were as shocked as you'd think. By then, we were hearing it more and more.
I knew a couple professors by then who took that assessment of things like Christianity, the United States, and Western civilization. One, who was as white as Jim Carrey, dressed only in African garb, to distance herself from any connections to that white, European and American heritage she found so repugnant. There were students who thought that way, too. I knew one young lady who was raised in S. America (her parents were there for reasons I never knew), who shared the 'Hurrah for Che, down with America!' attitude. I knew another girl who had a picture of Lenin in her apartment and indulged in some serious Sovietphilia.
I operate under the notion that I'm not the only one to find the only professors who thought that way, or the only college students who thought that way (though I note it was female students I knew, almost to a person, who were more open to the Communist/death to America chant - I only knew one male student to proudly voice that viewpoint). Since I doubt they were the only ones at my Alma Mater, and that my Alma Mater was not the only university producing such thought, it's not hard to see that, a couple generations later, we've seen exponential growth in people who can't figure out what was so bad about the USSR or Nazi Germany, when obviously the nation that needs eradicated from history is the United States, and every wretched thing it brought with it.
That Mark's blog has become ground zero in the Catholic blogosphere for such thought, in addition to the casual allowance for anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, anti-family, pro-choice, pro-LGBT, pro-socialist voices in the comments, is enough for me. I have no desire to go and see people setting up the future for one of the most catastrophically disastrous displays of stupidity ever visited on the human race.
I am glad you finally reached that conclusion. When your dealing with something as vast as Catholic teaching, there is a real temptation where that some teaching intersects with some political movement or another, to start identifying with that movement. The two classic examples of this are the intersection the churches social justice teaching and the left and the pro-life movement and the right. While there isn't anything inherently wrong with political movements per se, people often forget that where those movements run counter to church teaching the politics needs to be rejected. Also people often forget that there may be more than one path toward any goal. So you can be a strong advocate for true social justice (as opposed to the fake sort being pedaled on college campuses ) without the Democratic party, or be pro life without voting straight line Republican. I often have noticed that when a person has started to identify their faith to much with one political position or another the last thing one should do is argue with them because they tend to just dig in. In reality there is no such thing as a Catholic party and if there was it would be at constant war with the world.
ReplyDeleteTrue that. I have no problem with politics. I'm fascinated by it. My problem with Mark is that he has now equated his political views with the Gospel. Basically, why is Paul Ryan so evil to Mark, when equally Catholic Colbert is a paragon of virtue? Because of their politics, and that is a dangerous mistake. But you're right, pointing it out only brings insults and accusations at this point, and it wasn't worth it. I'm saddened, because if you go back and look at his older writings (which I still do), there's a lot of richness there. But in recent years, it had been a complete meltdown. If he wanted to be political, that's fine. But you can't judge people preemptively based on their politics, and then dismiss their Christian walk because of it. And that's pretty much all he now does.
Delete