Thursday, September 22, 2011
Friday, September 16, 2011
Sunday, August 21, 2011
It is an interesting approach to the Superhero Genre.
Sorry I have no essay to give right now. I have also been debating some of the posters on Bottom Line Discipline. Probably a waste of my time, but isn't wasting time what X11 was made for?
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
My first objection to Lawler comes from the very foundation of his blog. He embraces what he calls a "Postmodern Conservatism" which he attempts to distinguish from academic post-modernism as it is usually known. He describes it as simply being a belief that the world has both declined and advanced over the course of the 20th century, and that a certain amount of liberalism is fundamental to the United States and must be tolerated by conservatives. My question is, how is this a Conservative position? In practice the United States Government has come to give financial support to abortion and sexual perversion. I think there is clear decline, and I believe that it is ultimately founded upon liberal conceptions of the human individual and postmodern ways of life. Much of traditional culture is founded upon material factors, and it cannot be preserved without dealing with present day material conditions.
Postmodernity is to blame for much of the social degeneracy in our culture, and cannot be counteracted by any merely cultural or spiritual attempts at preserving tradition. How ever much our society supports it's comforts, those comforts have directly correlated to great evils. It can be plainly seen that GDP increases correlate to reduced fertility in every ordinary country. The few exceptions are places like Israel or the Faroe Islands, or Saudi Arabia, where a variety of factors have prevented a postmodern society from developing fully, and Consumerism is limited or curtailed by geographic and economic factors. Nevertheless, Peter Lawler continues to argue for a Postmodern Conservatism, a conservatism that embraces the very things that undermined it and continue to do so. This is not a recipe for success. This is self orchestrated sabotage.
It is also notable that he opposes what he calls academic postmodernism, but in the end argues for the same things they do: consumerism as a part of American life. He dismisses agrarianism and suggests the decline of culture has nothing to do with postmodern consumer culture. He thinks it's problems can be tempered by embracing traditional culture, but the postmodern academics are a bit more clever: they understand that consumerism will help undermine tradition, and replace it with there degraded vision of self selecting identities. Freedom to choose an abortion today, or a divorce tomorrow, and maybe a little bit of cheap live action pornography on the side. This kind of academic postmodernism is far more common, and far more accepted, than the Marxist kind. It is certainly more well accepted amongst the general public than any traditional conservatism. Embracing chain stores and suburbs does nothing to help protect us against these things.
He defends the suburb. He defends consumerism. He defends Postmodernity. Lawler never sees the writing on the wall. Postmodernity is part of the problem, not the solution.
Friday, June 24, 2011
I admit I have not read the series, so their may be valid criticisms of it,but I find it noteworthy that people are disgusted with a fictional marriage without blood relations or an intrinsic expectation of sexual perversion. So many of them would comfortably accept a homosexual marriage, but not this apparently. And everyone very nearly treats this as equivalent to paedophilia despite the fact that it is between two adult individuals.
I think this demonstrates an urge to find perversion somewhere, to explain human uneasiness. If it cannot be found in the locations that previous generations would have known new places will be found.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
This post is a good follow up to the earlier post on this page.
Friday, June 10, 2011
It seems to come back once again to the soul. Socrates argued rather effectively that the soul in fact separate from the body, and that that is a fundamental matter of human perception. His argument would indicate that it is impossible for us to ever to correctly understand the soul to be something of purely physical origin, and would indicate the importance of religion and it's intrinsic reality.
Socrates argument is recorded in Plato's Dialogue "Phaedo", the conversation he had on the night of his execution. One of the arguments to oppose the belief that the soul was separate from the body argued that the soul was actually a harmony, what we might call an emergent property. It means to say that our thoughts and actions are a product of our body, just as the sounds of a guitar or a wind chime are a result of the strings and the wind. Socrates argued against this view, pointing out that our immediate perception was that we are conscious thinkers, and that we look upon our body, as if it is distinct from us. He argued out that this shows that our perception of our soul and body as distinct is a fundamental part of our understanding of reality.
I would argue that since we have demonstrated the separation between our soul and our physical body, that indicates the importance of other non physical non scientific knowledge to our selves. It is not a positive claim to belive in the spiritual, it is a fundamental matter of our reality, our reality as a being not merely physical, but spiritual as well.
We are spiritual beings. Religion is not merely an idea, but a reality, as real as wind wood and metal. We should understand that religion is not a claim that musty be supported by evidence, but a fundamental part of our perception, just like our eyesight and our hearing.
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
This really shows how much money was flying around back then. It is also interesting to note that this happened right before the fall of the Soviet Union.
I promise more posts later!! One of the topics will be common attitudes towards religion.
Monday, May 9, 2011
So you don't have to Google: Manabi Straight! , Blade Runner directed by Ridley Scott.
It's geeky but it's all I can think of typing at the moment.
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
Young men must be given the choice between good behavior or punishment, and the punishments should be denial of economic support, expulsion from the household, or even lawsuits and imprisonment if it is the law that is being violated. Young men who consent to corporal punishment at school should not have that relation interfered with, but attendance at school should not be the only choice given to young men. Those who become fathers out of wedlock should be encouraged to take care of their children, or pay some penalty for their misbehavior, even if that means they will be forced to feed themselves before they turn 15. We must remember that under common law, the capacity to get married is attained at 14 for men. Many 14 year olds work on farms and battlefields, and many studied at universities and colleges right up until the middle of the 19th century. The creation of the high school is recent, and the universalizing of high school an even more recent innovation. Men over the age of 14 can be expected or even required to work.
Parental authority can be strengthened when dealing with smaller children, or young women. Parents who wish to spank their children under the age of 14 should have free range to spank however much they see fit. Abuse should be restricted to only those situation where a parent was obviously acting with rage, and screaming at or cursing the child. Bruises should not be considered evidence of abuse. A boy of 12 can easily be a handful for a parent, and if he is bruised that is understandable. Many parents use paddles, belts or switches, as is their right, and they can sometimes leave a bruise. If a bruise is left after a normal run of the mill spanking, that should simply be considered evidence of parental love. A normal loving parent can still see it as their duty to spank their child, and many parents can not easily find different ways of punishing their child. If they are not actively yelling, screaming or cursing, it is debatable whether any abusive intent can be determined. Caring and loving parents should be allowed to punish their children without government interference.
For young women, the situation is a bit different from that of men. Although they are physically adults, they should still be required to respect parental authority, and receive more protection. They are physically weaker, and can not perpetrate physical crimes as easily as men can. They should have the same requirements imposed upon them as men if they are unwilling to follow the rules their parents set upon them, but I do not think it would do them any great injury if they are spanked or paddled by their parents. It should not be considered immoral to punish them with a paddling or whipping for misbehavior. Young women should be taught the importance of the domestic virtues, because the majority will need to become mothers some day. A good introduction should be from their own mother and father, helping them to understand what their work will be if they follow that path in life.
These guidelines can form a good first step on a road towards restoring a more functional society, one that rejects sexual perversion and embraces the values of motherhood, manliness, and responsibility.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
What possibility is there that states like Texas may drift to the left? Texas is a large Southern State, renowned for it’s conservative attitudes. Although Texas may seem conservative from the outside, it is from the perspective of immigration and the education system that cracks begin to appear. I have with my own eyes seen some a college instructor openly denigrate the Republican Party, and I had only one openly conservative liberal arts teacher at college, who was in the English department. It is in the English department that leftism is most obvious in the views of the department. We can also see potential problems regarding the issue of immigration. Although the mass immigration of Mexicans into the U.S. is not something accepted by most Texans, and we have had very few problems with immigration, it is still possible that things could change in the future, as more and more immigrants arrive from México, and it is possible that leftists and liberals could capitalize on this. Texas is not immune to the problems of California or Massachusetts. There are threats in both the English department and the immigration system, but there are solutions to be found in those areas as well.
There are many theories of literature that are dominant in the academy today. Formalism is the theory of literature that was dominant from the twenties until the sixties and is the most conservative in it’s political inclinations. Although is still at the head of the list and is considered the foundation of modern literary theory, there are other theories that are more popular and more dominant. They are often more likely to be founded on leftwing principles. There is Gender and Queer theory, where literature is analyzed through the lenses of gender and sexuality, with an emphasis on sexual minorities. There is also feminist theory, with it’s perspective, as well as several Marxist theories of literature. There are some others that are slightly more neutral, such as New Historicism, but even it is often considered to be morally relativist, and many consider it overly deterministic, since it treats the specific historical conditions of the author as dominant.
These problems in the English department may affect few Texans today, but more and more people are going to college, and almost everyone who obtains a teaching certificate will be taking English classes at a community college. If they absorb the opinions of the teaching departments and begin to repeat these beliefs in front of the children they teach, even those who do not attend college will receive the teachings of leftwing college professors. And there are many people who would argue that community college is the new high school, and may soon be common for all people to attend it. I have personally seen many students accept these teachings, and I am afraid that many will internalize these beliefs if teachers begin to teach them.
There are also possible hazards from the southern border. Our immigration so far has been reasonable, and has not tilted Texas significantly towards the left. However, that may change in the future. Our immigration difficulties are not as bad as the ones experienced by Arizona, but that doesn’t mean we are immune to having our state changed by immigration. California was certainly changed by it’s immigration. The influx of a disproportionately poor population moved it’s politics to the left and led to the success of progressive Democrats. In our state we are still electing conservative politicians, but immigration may change things. Our Republican governor currently has no plans to attempt to enforce federal immigration law in the same manner that governor Brewer of Arizona has. Many feel that attempting to make any hard-line moves against immigration would upset the status quo and alienate some Voters. Although this course of inaction may seem prudent today, if it causes a weakening of conservatism in Texas it could lead to Democrats winning victories at the polls in the future.
We must remember that California entered the sixties as a conservative state, but as politics changed so did demographics, and the politicians used that to cause even more political change. The new immigrants were poor people, and had very little inherent loyalty to the broader community in California. They instinctually voted only on the basis of there personal welfare and that of their neighborhood, with little regard to what happened outside it. It is possible that politicians here in Texas will try to capitalize on this very same alienation and use it to transform politics and move the State to the left. It would be wise for conservative politicians to take steps to prevent this.
Dealing with the universities and colleges is a delicate matter, especially because of the demand that many have for a cheap education. Simply defunding the Universities would most likely be politically impossible, and regulations could be seen as a means of infringing on academic freedom. Placing curriculum standards in place would be one method by which the legislature could encourage a more balanced viewpoint in the colleges and universities. It may also be time to consider alternatives to the current trend towards increasing college enrollment. If more students began working directly out of high school that would mean less exposure to the public education system. It might be advisable to explore means of encouraging such behavior. We should remember that the current system of education is very new. 100 years ago few children in our country or any other advanced past elementary school, yet countries like the United States and Great Britain were nevertheless the most powerful countries in the world. It is not necessary that the education system continue along it’s current path. We can find better alternatives.
One of the simplest ways of dealing with our immigration problems would be to follow the model of Arizona governor Jan brewer. We should limit foreign immigrants in Texas only to those who are willing to obey the laws of the United States and Texas. If Texas takes steps to discourage illegal immigration, that will help keep our immigration limited only to those who are willing to follow immigration procedures. Immigrants who believe in the culture and society of Texas have not harmed it, and should be welcomed, but those who come here only to earn income and do not believe in the traditions or laws of this country should be rejected.
Although some in Texas may feel we are clear from the social transformations that have rocked other parts of the country, we can see that is clearly not the case. If Texas is to remain a bastion of Conservatism actions must be taken to defend it’s society and beliefs.
Corporal punishment can take variety of forms, and I do not think there is necessarily anything wrong with it, even on adults. But it can take very strange forms, especially when applied to a young mans buttocks. The first acquaintance with this strangeness came from the correspondence of several parenting websites. A few commenters advised that spanking should be used throughout the teenage years. That may be defendable for young women in some contexts, and their even used to be some advertisements joking about husbands spanking their wives. However, this becomes slightly stranger when it is the spanking of young men that is being defended. This was taken to the next level when the issue of teenage boys and their erections came up. It is at that point when things become truly strange. There are disturbing signs of immorality to be found amongst many who spank young men.
Some of the following posts may be fantasy, but they are good examples of why I would feel discomfort with the use of spanking or paddling on a young man:
(WARNING: Not for Children or the Very Sensitive!)
Allowing the boy to extend
I would point out that Suzie Peters is still posting on other websites, although she now gives advice only on the parenting of girls, because the site she is posting on is devoted towards advice on raising girls. She seems to think that what she is doing can be defended in the context of Evangelical Christianity.
But even when a reference is not explicitly made to a physical reaction, one can still feel a certain oddity in the point of view, which can be seen in the following links from a different website:
(Perspective slightly different from ours because he resides in Japan now. That is obviously the only difference. Of course. Nothing to do with an empty and content free moral code.)
Their Second to last magazine Issue
(One wonders what in tarnation is coming next)
And it is interesting how it is presented as "Traditional Discipline" To what extent is this traditional? It seems incredibly fetishistic. But then again, what are the alternatives? Our whole society has been dedicated to making children out of the young men of the middle classes, and this is simply one more extension of that tendency. One example showing the specificity of this practice to the lower middle class can be found in George Orwell's Road to Wigan Pier:
"To the working class, the
notion of staying at school till you are nearly grown-up seems merely
contemptible and unmanly. The idea of a great big boy of eighteen, who
ought to be bringing a pound a week home to his parents, going to school in
a ridiculous uniform and even being caned for not doing his lessons! Just
fancy a working-class boy of eighteen allowing himself to be caned! He is a
man when the other is still a baby."
I will not criticize these people too much. A great many men here in the U.S. clearly agree with the views of Bottom Line magazine, and a great many of these are ordinary townspeople who attend church, believe in some concept of god, and have a reasonably large family. As the magazine points out, there are many high schools that use paddling in this country. Nevertheless, I find these things to be not something traditional, but a sign of moral and social degeneracy. The way in which these images depart from a coherent conception of our traditional culture is astounding. I believe they ultimately lead us down the road of moral degeneracy and liberalism, and a family bound only by a phony sentimentalism and legal limitations. But they are just one of the many perversions of "Tradition" that pervade our culture.
Note: My follow up is linked below: