Day By Day by The Great Chris Muir

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Islamic Refugee Crisis: Good Samaritan or Maccabean Response? Or both

Islamic Refugee Crisis: Good Samaritan or Maccabean Response? Or both

What would Thomas Aquinas Say?

What would Saint Thomas Aquinas say about the Refugee Crisis?
We as Christians are debating among ourselves about whether or not we have a moral duty to receive refugees fleeing Muslim nations.

This article is politically incorrect and says things that might shock you. Please read the entire article until the very last two paragraphs before making a judgment or writing incendiary comments. This might be one of the clearest things you’ve read on the topic, because it draws on virtue ethics of Thomas Aquinas – something generally ignored in our day and age. – Godspeed, Taylor Marshall

Are We Good Samaritans?

As Christians we remember Our Lord’s parable about the Good Samaritan recounting how the outwardly religious clerics (the priest and the levite) passed the injured man in the road, but how the Samaritan proved to “be his neighbor” and care for him. Christ rebukes the outwardly religious hypocrites and commends the good Samaritan.
When it comes to the refugee crises, none of us wants to be the hypocrite who turns his steps to the opposite side of road to avoid caring for an injured victim.

Or Are We Good Maccabeans?

Meanwhile, if you are Catholic, you’ve been listening to the book of Maccabees this week in the daily Mass readings. These biblical lessons approvingly recount how Mattathias along with his Maccabean sons and companions rightfully used physical violence against their political oppressors the Seleucid Greeks who were actively using force to undermine the conscience and convictions of the People of God.
So which are we?
Are we the caring Samaritans or the crusading Maccabeans?

The Catholic political theology of Saint Thomas Aquinas can help us with this question:

Thomas Aquinas Black largeLet’s first suspend all emotional appeals, and set down a few logical and calm points of agreement to get us all on the same page:
  • In the Summa theologiae, Thomas Aquinas places politics under the civic virtue of patriotism which is itself a sub-virtue of justice. Our discussion is ultimately not about “politics” but the virtuous duties of justice toward God, our families, our nations, and all of humanity (in that order).
  • For Thomas Aquinas, all political human laws must be: 1) in accord with reason; 2) published or promulgated; 3) by rightful political authority; and for the common good (See STh q. 90, aa. 1-4). If a political law is lacking in any of these four attributes, it is for Thomas, not a law at all.
  • The duty of the political magistrates (the Republic or Kingdom) are by the virtue of justice different than the duty of the civilian person. Citizens are not de facto judges, soldiers, police officers, or legislators (STh q. 90, a. 3).
  • Muslims explicitly affirm that Muhammad is the Last Prophet of God.
  • Muslims explicitly affirm that Our Lord Jesus Christ is certainly not the Son of God.
  • These two Muslim affirmations place all Muslims in implicit or explicit theological contradiction with Christians who profess Jesus Christ as the Son of God and consequently conclude that Muhammad was a false prophet.
  • For Sunni Muslims (the majority of global Muslims), the mandate to erect Sharia law in every human government is a doctrine of faith. Muslims must in accord with their conscience pursue this theological belief that Sharia law must be promulgated in every human society (England, France, Poland, USA, Mexico, etc.)

So how does this apply to Refugees from Islamic nations?

When we move through the logical points above, we begin to discover a few logical conclusions:
  1. Muslims are bound by conscience to erect Sharia law in your nation. This is a bad thing for baptized Christians. At best it means being taxed at a higher rate (the Muslim jizya tax for Christians). At worse it means death.
  2. If you live in a democracy, a 51% political Islamic majority will allow “we the people” to promulgate Sharia law. They are following their conscience and religious beliefs in this matter. They will do this just as they have done in any other community where they captured the majority (Mecca, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, etc.)
  3. It is a duty of of justice for Christian people to strive to prevent the promulgation of false laws (i.e. those contrary to reason or the common good). Christians are called to be politically active and advocates for the common good and natural law.
  4. While we have the Christian duty to care for the refugee, the sick, the victim, and the injured, we have a greater common duty by justice to preserve the state of law and our religious liberty first and foremost.
We see this principle in our Scriptural readings. When it comes to the Samaritan, he rightfully cares for the victim. However, when it comes to the nation and the threat of terrorism (Seleucid Greeks), false laws, and the danger of our children, military, and civic peace, we (like the Maccabees) are politically obliged to resist, protect, and expel…for the common good.

The Analogy of the Familial Home

I am the head of a household. I earn an income to feed my wife and my children. With my surplus, I care for orphans, widows, the church, pro-life causes, single-mothers, and other apostolates that I feel God has called me to support.
Justice and charity demand that I care for the less fortunate and it is a Catholic belief that our salvation depends on how we treat the hungry, the naked, the homeless, and the sick.
I am not obliged to take the homeless into my house and have them sleep in my daughter’s bedroom at night. I am not obliged by justice or charity to give the homeless a vote over my financial decisions. He does not have the right to choose what’s for dinner. The homeless man does not (by my charity) receive a right to my continued support. The homeless man cannot share a bed with my wife when I am traveling. Nor may he presume a right over my children’s belongings.

Since we live in a democracy (“we the people”), political refugees de facto gain a measure of political authority over our laws, taxes, finances, military, religious holidays, and legislative bodies.
This principle applies to refugees universally. It applies even more so when the refugee in his conscience believes that he is morally obligated to introduce and vote for the enshrinement of Sharia law.
There is also the further problem that 5%-20% of global Muslims are considered to be “radicalized,” which means that they are consciously willing to use terrorist tactics to advance their Muslim worldview against the West. If you knew that 10% of your child’s Halloween candy was poisoned, would you allow your child to consume any of it?

So what would Thomas Aquinas say?

I’m afraid that Thomas would be much harsher than most of us would feel comfortable with.
Thomas prizes the “common good” so highly under the virtue of political justice that he openly promotes arms and capital punishment against those who are publicly “dangerous and infectious.”
The common good is the peace of society so that life and faith can thrive. Babies can be born and have a happy life. Grandparents can grow old together. Anyone who seeks to destroy the common good should be, according to Thomas, destroyed.
Thomas Aquinas also taught that anyone that fomented “danger to the community” or heretical movements is worthy of the death penalty:
“Therefore if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good.” STh II-II q. 64, a. 2.
It is permissible to kill a criminal if this is necessary for the welfare of the whole community. However, this right belongs only to the one entrusted with the care of the whole community — just as a doctor may cut off an infected limb, since he has been entrusted with the care of the health of the whole body. STh II-II q. 64, a. 3.
Have no doubt that Thomas Aquinas would have stated that Christian nations should receive Christian refugees but refuse Muslim refugees for the sake of national justice and the common good. The Muslim’s official declaration of faith denies natural law (eg, polygamy), religious liberty (eg, Sharia), and implicitly Muhammad’s doctrine and example of political violence.

What’s our Catholic Response? The Samaritan Uses the Hotel

We Christians should be generous with humanitarian aid toward Muslims and all people. We should send money and resources to those who have been dispossessed. We should be loving and generous with Muslims. Kindness brings about conversion and understanding. We should also try to topple the Islamic State and eradicate terrorism in our lands and in the Islamic lands.
Remember the Good Samaritan! He did not take the roadside victim home with him. Rather, the Good Samaritan put the victim up in a hotel and paid for him to get better. The Good Samaritan was good and commended by Christ. The Good Samaritan did the right thing: humanitarian aid.
We are not required by Christ to take victims that oppose our faith and our way of life and make them into our political heirs. We are not required to take them into our homes.
But we are obliged to help them. And if terrorists use our charity as a pretense to hurt us, then, as Thomas Aquinas says, they should be swiftly destroyed.
Saint Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.
Taylor Marshall

Not To Have Your Views And Motives Taken Seriously

Via The Dark Herald:

It must be incredibly frustrating as an Islamic terrorist not to have your views and motives taken seriously by the societies you terrorize, even after you have explicitly and repeatedly stated them. Even worse, those on the regressive left, in their endless capacity for masochism and self-loathing, have attempted to shift blame inwardly on themselves, denying the terrorists even the satisfaction of claiming responsibility.

It's like a bad Monty Python sketch:

"We did this because our holy texts exhort us to to do it."

"No you didn't."

"Wait, what? Yes we did..."

"No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons."

"WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers."

"No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so."

"Huh!? Who are you to tell us we're not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being."

"Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that's why you did this. We're sorry."

"What? Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians - disenfranchisement doesn't even enter into it!"

"Listen, it's our fault. We don't blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out."

"Seriously, stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off, and we're not going to let you take it away from us."

"No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame."

"OMG, how many people do we have to kill around here to finally get our message across

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Vox Day Book - Cuckservative

The third collaboration

Yesterday Mike Cernovich announced that he would be publishing his next book, Last Man Standing, with Castalia House. He also announced that he had accepted a position as Editor-at-Large with Castalia House. What he did not mention, at my request, is that he is also working with Castalia House on a third project. I asked him not to mention it because I wanted to tell you myself.

As dark lords go, I am, as most of you know, unusually civil. Having asked one of my GGinParis co-hosts to write a foreword for one of my books, I thought it would be a grievous breach of etiquette to fail to request the same of the other. So, I am pleased to announce that the aforementioned Editor-at-Large has already written the foreword for my next book, which I have written with a fellow American Indian (albeit one from a different tribe). It is expected to be released before the end of year. It is a hard-hitting book in the vein of SJWAL, but addresses an even more important and controversial subject: the politics of American immigration.

The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America contains an extremely important phrase that is almost always ignored by those who appeal to it, or to the men who wrote it, in defense of immigration. It states:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The key phrase is this: “to ourselves and our posterity.” The blessings of liberty are not to be secured to all the nations of the world, to the tired and huddled masses, or to the wretched refuse of the teeming shores of other lands. They are to be secured to our children, and their children, and their children's children.

To sacrifice their interests to the interests of children in other lands is to betray both past and future America. It is to permit an alien posterity, like the newly hatched cuckoo in another bird's nest, to eliminate our own, and in doing so, defeat the purpose of the Constitution. It is, like the cuckolded husband, to raise the children of another man instead of one's sons and daughters. It is, in a word, cuckservative.

Cuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America will be published in December by Castalia House.

Inconvenient Facts

HT: Brock Free NC


Thursday, November 12, 2015

With Open Gates

Time to reunite Poland and Lithuania and pull a Jan III Sobieski -Vienna in 1683:

Who Owns "The Red Pill?"

Here is a piece by Keoni, who, in my opinion, is being too humble.

But this will help document the truth in case of interlopers.

"I am Red Piller and so can you."


Who Owns The Red Pill

Rollo writes in his latest post entitled The Purple Pill:

"While I am humbled to be accounted as one of the Red Pill’s prominent writers I will never lay claim to having created it. The Red Pill in its truest sense belongs to the collective that has contributed to it as a whole. It belongs to the men who’ve fostered it, who’ve risked their livelihoods and families apart from it to make other men aware; it belongs to those who understand that its objectivity is what’s kept it open and honest, discussable and debatable...

...I believe that in the coming years there will be a concerted effort to claim authorship and definition rights to the “Red Pill”, and it’s important for anyone identifying as being Red Pill aware to acknowledge that what we’re a part of is a collective experience. We are, we become, the developments of a totality of men’s experiences across the world. Beware of any man or woman attempting to lay claims of ownership of the Red Pill. Beware of anyone defining this awareness, distorting these truths, to accommodate their narratives."

I agree with Rollo, but it's not something that's going to happen in the near future, it's already happened, and it will happen again as this allegory continues to spread and will eventually attain mainstream awareness. Soon we will be most likely seeing and hearing references to The Red PillTM on Late Night TV show monologues and referenced on celebutard tweets.

So for the record, here's my perspective on the history of this particular meme.

There are not many folks left that where there in the beginning stages of the MAndrosphere who are still going at it on a regular basis. And of those who are still going, most have moved on to capitalizing off of the success of their online blogging efforts and now have ulterior motives to continue their blogging.

Of course, I must disclaim here, that this is not a criticism of any of these folks who have done so, as we are all citizens of our Brave New World Order's Babylon System and we must all pay our tithes to Mammon to survive...but I still note that the moment any blogger crosses over into blogging for revenues, the motives and objectives for their participation in these fever swamps of the politically incorrect fringes of teh Interwebs become intrinsically altered.

But in the early days, for most of us that threw our hat into the ring and proffered our own views and perspectives for the emerging MAndrosphere (which Novaseeker accurately described as a clearing house of ideas), there was no other motive than to seek the truth and to wage a counter-revolutionary 4th generation war against the emerging recognition of the long march through our common culture. It was in this embryonic state of existence that the Red Pill meme arose.

In 2009, the early stages of the "manosphere" started in the "Roissysphere" which was primarily the comment sections of the now defunct Roissy in D.C. blog, Matt Forney's (writing as Ferdinand Bardamu) In Mala Fide and Bill Price's The Spearhead.

It was in these comment sections that I came across several commenters that drew analogies between the Matrix movie allegory and our current state of society. Intrigued by the idea, I consulted Googliath for articles on "the Matrix" and came across the following: The Media is the Matrix.

Up to that point, I was what I considered myself an MRA blogger, but I had begun reading "game" forums  and other PUA blogs that were at that time a completely separate blogosphere from the Men's Rights sphere. At that time, I considered the PUA blogosphere an interesting sidetrack on the main topic of our culture's gender dysfunction and the divorce industrial complex that was my primary blogging focus.

After reading up on the Matrix allegory, I wrote my own blogpost Game is the Red Pill and shortly there after, it went viral. Six years, hundreds of blog posts and millions of page views later, and that post is still my number one linked to and most read post here.

Go ahead and look, you will not find a manosphere-associated blog post using The Red PillTM metaphor dated anytime before I made that post. After that initial success of that post, I decided to run with the theme a bit more and did a series on my blog called Red Pill Realities Dispelling Blue Pill Delusions. Prior to my first few posts of that series, no one else was blogging about The Red PillTM at that time.

A short while later though, and the idea caught fire and a whole host of formerly non-monetary bloggers saw an opportunity to capitalize on an idea and turn their blogging hobby into a money-making venture. At one point there were a large number of blogs that had The Red PillTM imagery or incorporated the words into their blog titles, screen names and avatars. Many saw the rising tide and quickly maneuvered to take their place and surf the zeitgeist for maximum gain.

From 2010 to 2012, everyone in these fringes of teh Interwebz was hip to The Red PillTM. Then it seemed to hit a saturation point, and many of these same folks dropped the imagery and themes from their blogs, and a few sought to denounce and disassociate themselves from it (once they realized maximum gain from using it, of course). Yet the idea persevered and survived the initial gold-rush.We now have subreddits, twitter hashtags and even some feminist who is purportedly producing a movie about The Red PillTM and it;'s association with the men's rights "movement" on teh Interwebz.

I have only one reason for pointing this out...because if there was anyone who has an even partial claim to "owning" this meme that has now gone into common parlance out in these fringes of teh Interwebz, that would be me. But I won't, because that would be taking credit for ideas and insights I gained from reading many others and just doing my best to pay it forward using an allegory I found very useful in seeking to understand our modern dystopian existence.

I took an idea from a blog post from a lady who noticed how the emergence of mass media and the tell-a-vision allowed corporate entities to construct an artificial reality to take over our collective minds, and I synthesized it with my own understandings gleaned from reading a host of other free thinkers and truth seekers on the topics of game, feminism, pick up, etc., and put it together to come to a hypothesis that understanding the theories behind game served as a doorway to understanding just how much we have all been lied to by our controlled culture and society. I had no idea it would go viral like it did.

I certainly didn't plant the seed, but I helped to water it, and was amazed as anyone else when it sprouted and grew wild like it did.

No, the only thing I will claim is to being one of the original members of La Resistance who played his part in helping to wage the counter-revolution by helping the now ubiquitous meme go viral. I was only a contributor to the collective experience that Rollo rightly credits for the ascendancy of this allegory into popular, near-mainstream consciousness.

While Laurie Kramer, the original authoress of The Media is the Matrix post (who as far as I can tell,  has nothing to do with the MAndrosphere past or present), doled out her prescription at the end of her post on what we can do about the situation once we realize that we do in fact live in THE MATRIX. Her advice turns out to be remarkably prescient when you consider where we are today and how the The Red PillTM has become our present day, allegorical paradigm.

As she wrote in 2009: 

How can doing that make a difference? There is only one way to circumvent the media matrix. We have to start talking to EACH OTHER. Sure, we're not going to be able to reach thousands that way, but we will reach some. We need to check things out with each other to make sure we both have the same information, and that it is accurate. We have to not be afraid to voice our concerns and opinions to our friends and family. And yes, there will be those that won't listen. And yes, there will be those who will say you are nuts, or an idiot, and that you don't know what you are talking about. However, if you do your own research, you check out what you are being told, and from what source you are receiving the information, YOU will be empowered by those truths. Those that listen may then be empowered to get information that is crucial to handle what is happening around them. Or, they say you are nuts, or an idiot, and that you don't know what you are talking about. But YOU know different, and in the end, that's all that matters.

That is exactly what he have today....a large (and continually increasing), worldwide community of like-minded folks who started talking to each other over teh Interwebz. We who as Rollo states "...fostered it, who’ve risked their livelihoods and families apart from it to make other men aware," are all owners of this thing we call The Red PillTM.

Don't ever let anyone else try to $ell you otherwise.