Connect with us

Red Pill

News

Morality in a godless age

Published

on

14 Views

During the run-up to the Bolshevik Revolution, the standing narrative by the intellectual elite of that day was that the Church and religion in general was the “opiate of the masses.” It was seen as a way for people to be forced into submission to an imperial government in the Russian Empire, and the promising message was that if “man orbited himself” things would be better.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness… The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo…

…The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself. – Karl Marx, “Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right”

And this was somewhat amplified by the thought of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (a.k.a. Lenin):

Atheism is a natural and inseparable part of Marxism, of the theory and practice of scientific socialism. – c.f. Religion

The allure of these words – especially that of a man who is free of the “fetters” of religion (and imperialism) – was such that many of the Russian people really believed this was true. They took it to heart enough to overthrow the Empire, get rid of the Tsar and his family in the final way (they executed them in the basement of a house), and to destroy almost all the churches and monasteries in the Russian and Soviet lands in only a few years.

But it didn’t work.

The Communists missed a few things. First, they did not (or perhaps could not) change the Russian language sufficiently to remove all reference to the Divine from it. Second, they continued to uphold traditional family norms, though they were now made secondary to the needs of the State. The initial phase of Party loyalty sans marriage did not last very long or very purely. Thirdly, and probably most importantly, the Soviets were unable or unwilling to try to eliminate the conscience of the human person. Even in communist party propaganda films the high ideals of service, honor, being true to the Party and the State, are still things that call on good qualities, like loyalty, humility, faith, and the willingness to serve without reward. Those are qualities that even in non-religious people are still congruent with the Law of God, which theologians note is actually “built in” to every human being as intrinsic to our nature.

Eventually, we started seeing signs that the sense of right and wrong was still very much present, as in this scene from a movie filmed during the late Soviet era:

The writing in the stars is a message from the heavens to the protagonist, Vasya, to not cheat on his wife by sleeping with the woman at the resort. What we further see is a family conflict for the ages when Vasya does return home and his wife and family know what he has done. The scene is truly visceral, and if you want to see the movie, it’s title is “Любовь и голуби” (Love and Pigeons), released in 1985.

In other words, the spark of conscience  – that which tells us something is right and something else is not – was unable to be destroyed in Soviet Russia, and although certainly many people defied their conscience, even now, they still knew that there was a conscience to defy.

The attack of the secularist, cultural Marxist Left now is much more refined in the West than it was for the Russians. The present attack is honed in on Western Europe and the United States. Rather than make the mistake of persecuting Christianity so directly as happened under the Soviet times, the instigators now are keeping it much closer to what Lenin also said:

But under no circumstances ought we to fall into the error of posing the religious question in an abstract, idealistic fashion, as an “intellectual” question unconnected with the class struggle, as is not infrequently done by the radical-democrats from among the bourgeoisie. It would be stupid to think that, in a society based on the endless oppression and coarsening of the worker masses, religious prejudices could be dispelled by purely propaganda methods. It would be bourgeois narrow-mindedness to forget that the yoke of religion that weighs upon mankind is merely a product and reflection of the economic yoke within society. No number of pamphlets and no amount of preaching can enlighten the proletariat, if it is not enlightened by its own struggle against the dark forces of capitalism. Unity in this really revolutionary struggle of the oppressed class for the creation of a paradise on earth is more important to us than unity of proletarian opinion on paradise in heaven. – V.I. Lenin,“Socialism and Religion”

So, this time the attack is much more subtle, attacking religious points of view with the “enlightened” view that such beliefs are comforting and it is okay to hold them, but real life in our age is such that the values taught thousands of years ago are simply irrelevant. In this way the power of religious truth to change lives or to guide them is nullified. The trend actually has found great life within both the Roman Catholic adherents and many Protestants in the West, as well as many Eastern Orthodox Christians, that treat religion and ancient belief as something like a venerable anachronism, but not as something that is applicable or necessary in our day.

However, those pigeons are coming home to roost.

Now we have the dissolution of very basic issues of identity which has never happened before, where instead of two sexes, male and female, we are being taught in universities to have a whole range of new “gender pronouns” to refer properly to people who think they are something other than either male or female, and the number of these identities is growing. Facebook reportedly listed over 50 possible “genders.”

Of course, this is absolute and utter nonsense. But where we are going with all this is that now, we have the rise of the #MeToo “movement” concerning women (and some men) who have been sexually victimized in the Hollywood / Entertainment world. The Grammy Awards were overshadowed with it, and now we understand that the Oscars were overshadowed by this. Harvey Weinstein has been in and out of sex rehab and it seems that everywhere there is a cry for some sort of “morality” to be upheld.

However, this is not really a move back toward a sense of moral conscience. Not yet. It is not a move in anything that we might really call “repentance” – or a turning back to traditional values. Not yet. Rather, it is simply the continuation of a move towards societal implosion and self-destruction through ever more strongly enforced feminism (made much stronger by the #MeToo people and their narrative). Instead of humility and reconciliation, #MeToo, like most Western feminism manifestations, seeks to cow and humiliate men, to make them afraid of women, and the ultimate goal is some sort of “revenge” taken out by women upon any man, regardless of whether he did anything untoward or not.

One Orthodox Christian priest in America, Fr. Barnabas Powell, made this comment in a longer article linked here:

If we, as a society, find it so easy to dismiss timeless wisdom, we shouldn’t be surprised when lesser “controls” fail us and our society. To be so willing to throw away ancient mores for untried and novel notions of human relationships and behaviors is to court reckless consequences. To reduce human society to mere morality is to invite the chaos we see all around us today. To be sure, our history is awash in traditions and structures that were horrific and unacceptable. The remedy to these human failings isn’t the wholesale abandonment of everything we perceive as “old fashioned.”

This is quite true. If the matter was about following traditional values, then there would be no problem. But here, what has happened is that the people living wild lives want to have their cake and eat it too, so to speak – to live as they want without consequences. When we see Hollywood elites stop cheating on each other and stop making hotter and hotter sex scenes on camera, when we hear pop singers and rap artists clean up their lyrics and stop talking about drugs and sex in the most vile manner, maybe then we could believe that a real change is taking place. But for now the goal is only moved to how to do all the same things as before but in such a way that the woman always likes it.

Remember, this is not meant to be sexist, but most of the #MeToo people are women. The movement is distinctly feminist in nature and there is no way around that. We are Red Pill here.

The Russians were strengthened by their experience under Communism, and for many of them the history is still very fresh. Many of them have rushed into Christianity anew, and there are many men and women who have radically changed their lives because they realized at a personal level what it is like to live without God and the values inspired by Christianity, as such. Seen in this context the behavior of the West is seen as truly insane, and it is often viewed in Russia on the level of a spectacle, like “Look what those crazy Americans are up to now. What is wrong with them?”

This has permeated into all areas, of course, such as geopolitics and its corresponding journalism. President Putin was quite frustrated with it and got very direct at one point:

It seems this is a statement that could be rightly asked about many Western-promoted activities these days.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Pat Buchanan: “The Late Hit” On Judge Kavanaugh

Wha exactly is professor Ford’s case against Judge Kavanaugh?

Patrick J. Buchanan

Published

on

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org:


Upon the memory and truthfulness of Christine Blasey Ford hangs the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, his reputation and possibly his career on the nation’s second-highest court.

And much more. If Kavanaugh is voted down or forced to withdraw, the Republican Party and conservative movement could lose their last best hope for recapturing the high court for constitutionalism.

No new nominee could be vetted and approved in six weeks. And the November election could bring in a Democratic Senate, an insuperable obstacle to the elevation of a new strict constructionist like Kavanaugh.

The stakes are thus historic and huge.

And what is professor Ford’s case against Judge Kavanaugh?

When she was 15 in the summer of ’82, she went to a beer party with four boys in Montgomery County, Maryland, in a home where the parents were away.

She says she was dragged into a bedroom by Brett Kavanaugh, a 17-year-old at Georgetown Prep, who jumped her, groped her, tried to tear off her clothes and cupped her mouth with his hand to stop her screams.

Only when Kavanaugh’s friend Mark Judge, laughing “maniacally,” piled on and they all tumbled off the bed, did she escape and lock herself in a bathroom as the “stumbling drunks” went downstairs. She fled the house and told no one of the alleged rape attempt.

Not until 30 years later in 2012 did Ford, now a clinical psychologist in California, relate, in a couples therapy session with her husband, what happened. She says she named Kavanaugh as her assailant, but the therapist’s notes of the session make no mention of Kavanaugh.

During the assault, says Ford, she was traumatized. “I thought he might inadvertently kill me.”

Here the story grows vague. She does not remember who drove her to the party. She does not say how much she drank. She does not remember whose house it was. She does not recall who, if anyone, drove her home. She does not recall what day it was.

She did not tell her parents, Ford says, as she did not want them to know she had been drinking. She did not tell any friend or family member of this traumatic event that has so adversely affected her life.

Said Kavanaugh in response, “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Mark Judge says it never happened.

Given the seriousness of the charges, Ford must be heard out. But she also needs to be cross-examined and have her story and character probed as Kavanaugh’s has been by FBI investigators as an attorney for the Ken Starr impeachment investigation of Bill Clinton, a White House aide to George Bush, a U.S. appellate judge and a Supreme Court nominee.

During the many investigations of Kavanaugh’s background, nothing was unearthed to suggest something like this was in character.

Some 65 women who grew up in the Chevy Chase and Bethesda area and knew Kavanaugh in his high school days have come out and spoken highly of his treatment of girls and women.

Moreover, the way in which all of this arose, at five minutes to midnight in the long confirmation process, suggests that this is political hardball, if not dirt ball.

When Ford, a Democrat, sent a letter detailing her accusations against Kavanaugh to her California congresswoman, Anna Eshoo, Ford insisted that her name not be revealed as the accuser.

She seemingly sought to damage or destroy the judge’s career behind a cloak of anonymity. Eshoo sent the letter on to Sen. Diane Feinstein, who held it for two months.

Excising Ford’s name, Feinstein then sent it to the FBI, who sent it to the White House, who sent it on to the Senate to be included in the background material on the judge.

Thus, Ford’s explosive charge, along with her name, did not surface until this weekend.

What is being done here stinks. It is a transparently late hit, a kill shot to assassinate a nominee who, before the weekend, was all but certain to be confirmed and whose elevation to the Supreme Court is a result of victories in free elections by President Trump and the Republican Party.

Palpable here is the desperation of the left to derail Kavanaugh, lest his elevation to the high court imperil their agenda and the social revolution that the Warren Court and its progeny have been able to impose upon the nation.

If Kavanaugh is elevated, the judicial dictatorship of decades past, going back to the salad days of Earl Warren, William Brennan, Hugo Black and “Wild Bill” Douglas, will have reached its end. A new era will have begun.

That is what is at stake.

The Republican Senate should continue with its calendar to confirm Kavanaugh before Oct. 1, while giving Ford some way to be heard, and then Kavanaugh the right to refute. Then let the senators decide.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Arizona Senator Jeff Flake Opposes Vote on Kavanaugh Until Leftist Accuser Has Her Say

The end of the Republic inches closer as Identity Politics knows no bounds: Republicans join the fight to delay Brett Kavanaugh confirmation vote.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

Via The Gateway Pundit


FLAKE OUT — ARIZONA SENATOR OPPOSES VOTE ON KAVANAUGH

Anti-Trump Senator Jeff Flake, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in an interview Sunday evening that until he learns more about the sexual assault allegation regarding Brett Kavanaugh, he is “not comfortable voting yes” on Kavanaugh.

It’s Flakes last chance to poke President Trump and the country in the eye before he rides retires and likely finds a job in the liberal media.

Via Mike Cernovich:

Kavanaugh’s accuser is a far left anti-Trump activist.

Via Zerohedge


Over the past few days, what appeared at first to be a merely token resistance to the nomination of Trump SCOTUS pick Brett Kavanaugh has morphed into something entirely more menacing. And for the first time since Kavanaugh’s name was first floated in June, his nomination may be in jeopardy.

After allegations of decades-old sexual improprieties first surfaced last week, it looked as if Kavanaugh would easily surmount this obstacle. But we have to give the Democrats credit: They have lined up their dominoes perfectly. And on Sunday, they set their plan in motion when the Washington Post published an in-depth interview with Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. The story detailed a blow-by-blow accounting of Ford’s allegations, as well as her explanation for why she neglected to share her experience until decades later. Tellingly, the story also noted that Democrats have been sitting on the story since July, and that Ford only decided to out herself after some unscrupulous members of the Judiciary Committee shared her identity with the press – or at least that’s what California Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office alleges.

While the allegations are relatively tame by #MeToo era standards (the incident allegedly unfolded when Kavanaugh was 17), it has apparently been enough for Democrats and a handful of turncoat moderate Republicans to successfully shut down a planned Thursday vote of the Judiciary Committee. Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake effectively shut down the vote last night when he revealed that he wanted to hear more from Ford before voting. Without Flake, the Republicans’ 11-10 majority on the Judiciary Committee shifts to a 10-11 vote in favor of the Democrats. While Committee Chairman Charles Grassley has said he’d like the vote to proceed as scheduled, media reports say he is quietly working to organize a private call involving Ford and curious Senators in an effort to help mitigate their concerns.

But looking further ahead, Republican leaders might have more difficulty as Tennessee Republican Bob Corker – who is not a member of the Judiciary Committee but could still hold up the final confirmation vote – said Sunday that he’d also like to see Thursday’s committee vote delayed.

Here’s more from Bloomberg:

“I’ve made it clear that I’m not comfortable moving ahead with the vote on Thursday if we have not heard her side of the story or explored this further,” said Flake, who has the power to stall consideration if all Democrats on the panel join him since Republicans only hold an 11-10 majority on the committee. Flake’s office didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Corker of Tennessee, who isn’t a member of the panel but whose vote is critical to confirmation, also doesn’t want the committee to vote on Kavanaugh’s confirmation until Ford’s allegations can be heard, said his spokeswoman, Micah Johnson. The senator wants the allegations to be heard promptly, she said.

The backlash intensified late Sunday when Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski told CNN that Thursday’s hearing should be delayed.

“Well, I think that might be something they might have to consider, at least having that discussion,” Murkowski.

[…]

“This is not something that came up during the hearings. The hearings are now over. And if there is real substance to this it demands a response.”

However, at least one of the Senate’s reputed moderates has stood up to the Democrats in an interview with the New York Times, castigating them for withholding this information until so late in the process (remember: Feinstein justified this decision by saying she had referred Ford’s allegations to the FBI, who reportedly added them to his background check file).

“What is puzzling to me is the Democrats, by not bringing this out earlier, after having had this information for more than six weeks, have managed to cast a cloud of doubt on both the professor and the judge,” Collins told The New York Times.

Collins asked if Democrats believed Ford, “why didn’t they surface this information earlier,” and if they didn’t believe Ford, “why did they decide at the 11th hour to release it?”

“It is really not fair to either of them the way it is was handled,” Collins said.

Collins comments come after Ford spoke publicly about the alleged incident for the first time during an interview with The Washington Post that was published on Sunday.

On Monday, in the latest sign that Ford could appear at an embarrassing public hearing, Ford’s attorney, Debra Katz, told “Today” that her client would be willing to testify publicly before the Senate Judiciary Committee. “She’s a credible person. These are serious allegations. And they should be addressed.”

The White House, for its part, is standing by Kavanaugh, and allowing the Senate to sort things out. According to Bloomberg, Kellyanne Conway said Ford should not be “insulted and ignored” in what appears to be an attempt to beat the Democrats at their own virtue-signaling game.

Still, according to a White House spokesperson, Trump isn’t giving an inch. Washington Post reporter Seung Min Kim, citing WH spokesperson Kerri Kupec, reported that Judge Kavanaugh “categorically and unequivocally” denied this allegation: “This has not changed. Judge Kavanaugh and the White House both stand by that statement,”she said.

In fact, as Axios reports, Senate Republicans could “play hardball” by calling on Ford to testify before Thursday’s scheduled vote. Though Republicans wouldn’t surprised if Ford holds a press conference or gives a TV interview, which Axios says “would raise the stakes considerably.” Chuck Schumer, meanwhile, has repeatedly called for an FBI investigation and a postponement of the vote

To be sure, the Democrats’ goals here are obvious. After Sen. Corey Booker’s “selfless” decision to release unauthorized documents about Kavanaugh’s time in the Bush Administration failed to even delay the process, Democrats have now played their Trump card – no pun intended. Their goal: Delay Kavanaugh’s confirmation at least until the Oct. 1 mark – the beginning of SCOTUS’s next term – to put a halt to any controversial decisions that could reverse important precedents. Of course, their ultimate goal is to stonewall the White House until after Nov. 6, when a few victories in the midterms might allow them to sink Kavanaugh’s nomination once and for all.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

University announces “White Awake” safe space for white students

The University of Maryland at College Park has set up a new diversity support group to create a “safe space” for white students to discuss their feelings.

Campus Reform

Published

on

Via Campus Reform:


Update: After publication of this article, University of Maryland-College Park changed the name of the group to “Anti-Racism and Ally Building Group,” along with a shorter description, which reads,  “Do you want to improve your ability to relate to and connect with people different from yourself? Do you want to become a better ally? Members will support and share feedback with each other as they learn more about themselves and how they can fit into a diverse world.”

In a statement provided to Campus Reform on Friday, the university explained the name change: “Our Counseling Center acknowledges that we did not choose the right words in raising awareness about this research-based initiative, and how this group has been perceived is counter to the values of inclusiveness and diversity that we embody. Therefore, we are renaming the group to better reflect our intention and values.”


The University of Maryland at College Park announced Friday a new diversity support group to create a “safe space” for white students to discuss their feelings about “interactions with racial and ethnic minorities.”

The support group, called “White Awake,” will help white students who may “sometimes feel uncomfortable and confused before, during, or after interactions with racial and ethnic minorities.”

“This group offers a safe space for White students to explore their experiences, questions, reactions, and feelings,” the description explains. “Members will support and share feedback with each other as they learn more about themselves and how they can fit into a diverse world.” The description asks students if they want to “improve [their] ability to relate to and connect with people different from [themselves]” or if they want to become a better “ally.” The new group is now one of four in the university’s “Diversity Issues” program series.The group is being led by Noah Collins, who works for the UMD Counseling Center, and will be held once a week. Collins specializes in group therapy and is interested “especially in the areas of racial and cultural awareness,” according to his faculty bio.The safe space has been met with harsh criticism from students on social media.

“I am ashamed over the execution of white awake nor do I fully understand its clause. ‘How they can fit into a diverse world’? Why do they need to attend therapy sessions on how to be a decent human being in society?” a UMD student wrote on Twitter. “Why do they need to have these sessions to learn how to coexist?”

“Just like classes. You can’t take one class and feel like you have all understanding over a certain subject,” the student added. “It takes practice, it takes problems, it takes more than one course, so ‘White Awake’ has good intention but I am skeptical over the fairytale result.”

Campus Reform reached out to Collins and UMD for comment but did not receive a response by time of publication. If and when a comment is received, the article will be updated.


Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @Grace_Gotcha

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending