Source; Sent from a friend on the internet...
There is no FBI report on the number of murders and other violent crimes committed by the illegal immigrants biden has invited across our southern border. Why is that? Maybe they're too busy spying on Catholics?
It is clear that the highest-profile anti-Semites in America are the left-wing democrat House Jew-hating Islamists, Reps. rashida tlaib and ilhan omar. They help to explain a surge in attacks against American Jews and the growing anti-Semitic sentiments on university campuses. Big Tech is giving those haters a pass, but prospective employers are not. Insurrection anyone?
According to a Harvard/Harris poll, only the police and military are more respected than Israel.
Then again, “palestinian authority” gets 17% support, and hamas has a 14% positive rating — which is to say, 14% of your neighbors have taken the side of a medieval religious cult that’s vicious enough to cut Jewish babies out of mothers before beheading them. If 14% of Americans supported ISIS or al Qaeda or the Nazi Party, would you be concerned?
The BObama types, who do the perfunctory throat-clearing about Israel’s right to exist before going into the usual reasons it should not. This faction is a growing concern in the left-wing/democratic Party.
According to the Harvard poll, 36% of “liberals” of all ages agreed that the hamas unprovoked brutal attack on civilians was justified. While antisemitism isn’t the exclusive domain of left, full-blown hamas apologists are now deeply embedded in left-wing institutions such as universities, major newspapers, cable news, progressive politics, think tanks, and the State Department. They have the kind of disproportionate reach and institutional respect that cosplaying Nazis standing in front of Disney playing with themselves can only dream about.
Of course, barbarians hate Israel! Surrounded by enemies, Jews transformed an unforgiving desert into a 1st-rate civilization. Did anyone imagine the Holocaust would temper the bitter jealousy? That’s like heterosexual white coeds claiming to be “binary” to earn woke street cred. You’re still pretty, and they still hate you.
The conflict is far larger than disaffected immigrants cheering mass murder by invading paragliders. This is an endemic problem. Israel can’t do much about the neighborhood, but why on Earth is the U.S. importing preposterous hate-driven foreigners from 3rd-rate cultures? The failure of their ancestors to create anything worthwhile, certainly compared to the stupendous accomplishments of the West, is too glaringly obvious. Inviting millions upon millions of them here, to gawk at, take advantage of and then denigrate our magnificent civilization, is a guarantee of perpetual strife and resentment. It could never work. It was always an insane idea.
Instead of trampling on the free speech rights of people who hate the West, how about avoiding the problem altogether by leaving them where they are? They’ll like it! Vastly fewer “white supremacists” to oppress them. And all the joys and benefits of what they have created--their homeland. They can hate us all they want. Just do it from their own countries
“Puerilism is the attitude of a community whose behavior is more immature that its intellectual and critical facilities would warrant.”---John Huizinga
Western societies have experienced a serious deterioration in their moral values. What they’ve experienced can be linked to what’s been defined as the deadening effect of the "mass man"; a loss of responsible freedom under the Leviathan state. This loss includes the collapse of recognizable standards of beauty in art; a weakening of educational standards; the marginalization of religion and the dominance of a materialistic culture based on jejune entertainment and instant gratification. What can explain this apparent breakdown in the values that had been central to Western civilization? What are the causes?
Perhaps this decline is the result of an absence of adequate metaphysical principles, objective values having an existence not dependent on one's feelings and subjective attitudes. Objective values that are propositions that embody universal truths. Propositions which are able to characterize a number of different particulars. In other words knowledge, which is a product of reason; and beliefs in universals and principles which are inseparable from the life of reason
Modern philosophy, summarized by the term neo-liberalism, has tended to reject the reality of universals and in their place instead assert that all abstract ideas are, in fact, ideas of particular things ultimately are derived from the senses. However, if all knowledge is reducible to personal experience or sensation, there can be no moral or aesthetic value other than what seems valuable to each person, based on what he feels at any given moment. In that self-centered and self-indulgent refusal to recognize the world as it really is the essential core of the notion of decadence. It is a barbarianism that rejects the cultivation of the intellect and seeks only power or physical comfort, du’ jour.
In a moral philosophy, termed here as classic-liberalism, the very notion of obligation, what "ought" to be done, implies the existence of objective moral values. In contrast, the relativism of neo-liberalism denies both the objectivity of moral law and the existence of objective limits on personal conduct. Neo-liberalism then, which holds that all knowledge results from sense experience and that there is no other order of reality, has a devastating practical effect, since the values inherent in the moral order provide people with principles to live by.
If, as neo-liberalism contends, a statement that X is good or bad is only a verbal ejaculation of emotion, morality is both irrational and wholly subjective. But that premise is erroneous. "This is good" is not the same as "I like this." "This is good" is both cognitive and normative; it gives us objective information about something other than ourselves. This is the critical point in moral discourse, where we are taken beyond sensory and subjective feeling into an objective realm of value. The universe contains an objective moral order, which subsists independently of our awareness of it.
The neo-liberal approach weakens us in many ways. Judgments of approval, in the absence of standards of value, become little more than reactions to present stimuli. There is no longer anything to bequeath to the future. The society becomes immersed in the present. Without historical memory, neither culture nor moral order is possible. The quest for immediacy puts society on the path in which we can no longer recognize evil and depravity. Standards of propriety are abandoned because they might inhibit self-expression. The most permanent feature then becomes a compound of humbug, pretense, and vulgarity, which we can identify as "Hollywood values", which means either we will value nothing at all, or we will value experience in itself. This is precisely the condition of decadence. It manifests itself in exclusive concentration on material things, insensitivity to beauty, ignorance of history, a utilitarian attitude to education and indifference to religion. All of these defects are present in modern Western civilization.
Classic-liberalism argues that no particular configuration of matter on any particular occasion can exhaust the universal values of order, coherence, resemblance, and regularity. These universal values, therefore, cannot be wholly supplied by ourselves-they are outside of us and transcendent. At the heart of all of these values is the virtue of self-discipline, which teaches us that we have certain responsibilities that have to be fulfilled, that good character comes through objective values. When the discipline of the permanent values is forgotten, citizens become spoiled, arrogant, and impious. This is the condition of decadence.
The prevailing neo-liberal values of today require neither discipline nor intellectual rigor. They rest upon sentiment and sensation, not reason. They reflect a society in which true excellence and distinction are regarded with suspicion. Where everyone seeks to shift blame to someone else, and government is expected to make people happy. That is the substance of spoiled children, who believe that luxury is an entitlement and seek scapegoats to conceal their own defects. These attitudes are symptomatic of a society in decline, and they are likely to lead sooner or later to a diminution of freedom.
Although Democracy may be a workable model for political relationships, it cannot be a principle of order in social and cultural life. However, the great danger in the disappearance of objective criteria is the impact it has on justice and civic virtue. It gives rise to resentment, repression and rebellion against every kind of distinction and authority. It feeds mass democracy's detrimental distrust of genuine ability and intellectual excellence.
Decadence is manifested politically in the love of power for its own sake-in particular, the aggrandizement and worship of the state. In contemporary political theory, planning, efficiency and an explosion of rights are seen as ends in themselves. There is a real danger that society will evolve toward Huxley's Brave New World, in which material comfort will be offered to everyone in exchange for the abolition of freedom and initiative. The more functions the State takes over from the individual, the fewer there are for the individual to be capable of exercising for himself. In a bureaucratic society fewer and fewer people listen. The result is the increasing institutionalization of ignorance. As Christopher Dawson observed: “The more ignorant men are, the more inevitable their fate.” Inevitable because such a system, as John Lukacs said: “… involves something that has nothing to do with an IQ or with functions of the brain: it involves not an inability to think about certain matters but an unwillingness to do so.”
Voters will therefore welcome increased dependence on government for health, education, welfare, and the other burdens of life, so long as they have access to the bread and circuses of everyday enjoyment. Increased dependence, in turn, leads to corruption. In periods of strain and crisis, this habitual neo-liberal way of life, lacking any foundation in principle, will crumble and collapse and ultimately to despotism. The Leviathan state then is part and parcel of the cultural decline. And the Leviathan state, in the form we find in Western civilizations today, requires supported, in its current stage, by Positivist legal reasoning.