Saturday, January 29, 2022

The rise and fall of Eric Clapton

Another liberal icon mauled by leftist tolerance
Old Slowhand.  Growing up in the 1970s and 1980s, there were many different cliques to belong to.  Many different music styles to enjoy.  Many different hobbies and interests to pursue.  But there was one thing that seemed to unite all who grew up in the shadow of the 1960s: Eric Clapton epitomized awesome coolness. 

It's true.  Over the years, his story would change.  He would have ups and downs and suffer tragic loss.  But he was always respected, always admired, and always liked.  In a world filled to the brim with personalities who weren't always the most likeable, Clapton was at least respected, and often spoken well of by his industry. 

But like all that the Left must poison and destroy, that was yesterday.  Today, Clapton hath blasphemed the Leftwing narrative of Vaccine god, and thus the propaganda organs pounce.  The leftist thralls and storm troopers pounce. 

Even Catholics set aside such notions as Christian charity or reaching out to those who are hurting in the world and pounce.

I especially like Mark's definition of rebel which fits like a glove on the modern Left.  After all, the entire rise of the 21st Century Left could be be summed up by saying 'You have heard postwar liberalism say, but the Left now says.'  Which is a roundabout way of saying those principles liberals advocated were a lie.  They only supported rebels against the civilization they sought to destroy.  Now that they have power there will be no more rebels, thank you.  

Or, perhaps another way of saying it: You heard liberals once say we only want a world where all animals are equal.  The Left now says, however, that we must get used to a world where some animals are more equal than others. 

Deacon Greydanus and Mr. Shea appear to be aligning with this global force, perhaps in the hope that it will be those other animals deemed less equal and therefore worthy of the glue factory. Those of us not prepared to throw future generations under the bus would do well to resist that particular temptation. 


  1. The vaccines are ineffective, rather like flu shots. No amount of snotty patter is going to make them work any better. The research grants need to move in the direction of treatments. That's been sorely lacking.

    One thing that used to disconcert me about the catalogues we received from Ignatius Press and the like is that they were promoting work that had been published decades earlier. I'm pleased to read old works, but it was rather troubling that there wasn't much recent material, as if the intellectual life of the Church in the English-speaking world expired with the council. In the intervening years, Ralph McInerney has died, Richard John Neuhaus has died and Fr. Paul Mankowski has died. Peter Kreeft I believe is nearly 90. Deal Hudson keeps his counsel for obvious reasons. Who is in the pipeline to replace them?

    1. That is a question I ask myself. I also wonder where the genuine leaders will be.

      But now the WHO/Fauci and co. are admitting it didn't work in so many words. By saying they're going with a different approach because the first outing didn't work against the variants is all but admitting the initial vaccines haven't worked without saying it. And the press isn't pressing the issue (focusing on the failure of the initial rollouts to perform as expected). As I said, insisting on Get the Shot stop the spread is like saying the moon is made of cheese.

  2. I always get a kick of the response to Mass Formation Psychosis/Hypnosis.

    The short of that idea is that in certain circumstances large masses of people will completely surrender over their thought processes to the edicts of leaders to the point that they will believe whatever the leaders say, no matter what other data comes their way or how many times the leaders contradict themselves. There's more to the theory, primarily in how this comes about (lots of talk about "free-floating anxiety" and the like), but that's the core idea.

    What is the response, each and every time? "There is no such thing as Mass-Formation Psychosis because the experts say there isn't." No attempt to explain why the theory can't work, just dictates from leaders saying that it's absurd that people believe things just because their leaders said so. (For added spiciness sometimes articles even use the controversy to argue against doing your own research into psychology.)

    1. I think Mark has gone bye-bye. I've seen a string of posts of his over the last couple weeks that strongly suggest a person unhinged from reality, driven by zealotry and barking mad hatred. At this point I fear things like facts, truth, reality and reality mean absolutely nothing to his mind.


Let me know your thoughts