A number of years ago I read a book describing worldviews. A major tenet of the book is that “ideas have consequences.”
Your post here is very good and especially because you rightly state that ideas are important. It is not the level of zeal, per se, but what that zeal is willing to do or not do for the sake of its goal. What is the zeal directed toward?
Clearly Farmer Bill and his ilk are anti-human. They are not governed by any glimmer of Judeo-Christian worldview that values humans - every single one - as a sacred creation made in the image of an almighty God. Actually, they have set themselves in the position of god of the universe.
That is an idea and it has consequences.
They have their belief system and are living in righteous accordance with that system.
What we need is a fundamental upending of people’s worldviews. Far too many people who call themselves Christians went along with this anti-human crap {pardon my language, I don’t normally speak this way} of the last two years, because they somehow have been brought up to believe that safety and compliance are the noblest ideals, that harming kids for the sake of adult needs is okay (hello, abortion, and no, I am not starting a discussion about that, but abortion is always prematurely ending the life of a child for some purpose determined by the adult), and that we can somehow continue to function as a society while engaging in very anti-human behaviors such as obscuring our faces and isolating our non-sick selves and staying inside away from God’s good creation.
It’s not just Farmer Bill but so many seemingly (until now) ordinary, harmless-appearing neighbors and co-workers and friends.
Zealotry is not always bad. It matters what people are zealous about, and whether their tactics are free of deception or coercion. Zealotry about Liberty and Christianity is not bad. Barry Goldwater said (actually his speechwriter Karl Hess) "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." The Apostle Peter said that God was "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance", so many Christian missionaries have been zealous about making sure that the Gospel goes out to the whole world.
Right, I tried to open by rejecting the idea that "extremism" was a bad thing. It's not the extremity of the views one holds that makes them evil (which is what I think Vinay got wrong on his post). Obviously, I think it's good to be an EXTREME proponent of liberty. The distinction I'm making here is between someone who is merely criminal/corrupt versus one who is righteous in pursuing their evil vision, which I think results in far more human suffering.
Yes, you're right, you didn't say extremism per se was bad, so thanks for that correction. Yes, righteousness in pursuit of an evil vision is the most dangerous, I agree. I think the worst example of this are the occult writers who think we have to annihilate all those who hold to monotheism so that mankind can evolve into homo noeticus, or whatever they want to call the new human species in the Age of Aquarius. Anyone who believes that man is not god is holding up that evolution. Authors like Helena Blavatsky, Alice Bailey, and Barbara Marx Hubbard are in that camp, I believe, and influenced Nazi attitudes towards Jews. Another do-gooder theory right behind that (no offense to the naturalists out there) is Darwinian evolution, which influenced the Eugenics movement and promoted racism (Darwin thought blacks were closer to apes than to whites). So, we have to guide evolution by scientifically weeding out the defectives in the gene pool, and only white European intellectuals are fit to decide who needs to be weeded out. Another one (I'm on a roll, here) is Climate Change activism. For the sake of reducing CO2 to save the planet, we have to have a lot fewer people in the world (Steven Mosher of the Population Research Institute says their goal is one billion) with a much lower standard of living. I wonder how many people subconsciously think that the Covid deaths, vaccine deaths and lower fertility is not all bad, because they contribute to that population reduction goal.
It comes down to what are we zealous about, and what parameters contain or govern our zealotry? Does my belief system, my worldview, my set of ideas allow me to kill or abuse other humans in my zeal? Or does my worldview compel me to sacrificially serve others - even those who are not like myself or with whom I disagree - for the sake of reaching the ideal (Christian missionaries over the centuries being some good examples of this, as you mention).
Ultimately the crucial factor is the nature of my underlying ideas. What are the ideas about which I am zealous.
Dead kittens are dead kittens no matter what the motive was for killing them. I'm working on an article about the importance of Religion, capital R, because Religion is the only thing that allowed me to keep my job as a public school teacher and stay un-jabbed. Philosophical and scientific objections were worthless. There were only religious exemptions. THAT made me a "zealot' for Christ and His church. I feel sorry I wasn't one long before now.
"Dead kittens are dead kittens no matter what the motive was for killing them." Agreed, and to extend the analogy, murderers are murderers--obviously it doesn't matter to the murdered person WHY they were killed.
But it matters a great deal whether you and I are living in a world in which we MIGHT be murdered for private reasons, say in a liquor store robbery gone wrong, versus: there is a small army of eager Gestapo outside our door on orders to execute us in the name of "public good" for our non-compliance with the New World Order.
The latter are more dangerous, is all I'm saying. (Whether you call them zealots, or righteously evil, or true believers, or ideologues, or whatever term you use... and also acknowledging language inadequacy and the plight of the poor writer 😆)
The "public good" or "greater good" is utilitarianism. That's why we Catholics prefer "common good." As to the term Zealot, I suppose I would rather use the word extremist, even though it is probably always good to be an extremist when it comes certain things, like the truth. The word zealot has a religious connotation and I cringe every time someone puts religion down. I heard a preacher say just last week, "It's not a religion, it's a relationship." Okay. Fine. It's a relationship. But it's a religion. I wasn't offered a "relationship exemption." I was offered a "religious exemption." Religion is the guarantor of our freedoms in the United States of America. And religion/religious people are not the problem. Socialism, communism, nazism, and fascism killed 150 million in the 20th century... https://rlmartinwrites.com/2020/08/24/why-conservatives-hate-this-bumper-sticker/
Anyway, thanks for answering my comment. I appreciate your writing.
"...that humanity will be better off by being chipped and tracked and medicated and controlled and AI-censored and penniless and property-less and thoughtless." 🎯
Excellent article, James, and a great companion piece to my “Anatomy of a Philanthropath” series (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams).
The only fault I can find is you missed a golden opportunity to use “philanthropath” :-)
Dang it. I did, didn't I? 🤦♂️
😆
“ ideas are important”
A number of years ago I read a book describing worldviews. A major tenet of the book is that “ideas have consequences.”
Your post here is very good and especially because you rightly state that ideas are important. It is not the level of zeal, per se, but what that zeal is willing to do or not do for the sake of its goal. What is the zeal directed toward?
Clearly Farmer Bill and his ilk are anti-human. They are not governed by any glimmer of Judeo-Christian worldview that values humans - every single one - as a sacred creation made in the image of an almighty God. Actually, they have set themselves in the position of god of the universe.
That is an idea and it has consequences.
They have their belief system and are living in righteous accordance with that system.
What we need is a fundamental upending of people’s worldviews. Far too many people who call themselves Christians went along with this anti-human crap {pardon my language, I don’t normally speak this way} of the last two years, because they somehow have been brought up to believe that safety and compliance are the noblest ideals, that harming kids for the sake of adult needs is okay (hello, abortion, and no, I am not starting a discussion about that, but abortion is always prematurely ending the life of a child for some purpose determined by the adult), and that we can somehow continue to function as a society while engaging in very anti-human behaviors such as obscuring our faces and isolating our non-sick selves and staying inside away from God’s good creation.
It’s not just Farmer Bill but so many seemingly (until now) ordinary, harmless-appearing neighbors and co-workers and friends.
Ideas matter. Ideas have consequences.
Amen! Good vs Evil. We cannot let them win.
I'm not sure that's the point. I think James is saying that any idea taken to the exclusion and active destruction of any other is a dangerous path.
Zealotry is not always bad. It matters what people are zealous about, and whether their tactics are free of deception or coercion. Zealotry about Liberty and Christianity is not bad. Barry Goldwater said (actually his speechwriter Karl Hess) "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." The Apostle Peter said that God was "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance", so many Christian missionaries have been zealous about making sure that the Gospel goes out to the whole world.
Right, I tried to open by rejecting the idea that "extremism" was a bad thing. It's not the extremity of the views one holds that makes them evil (which is what I think Vinay got wrong on his post). Obviously, I think it's good to be an EXTREME proponent of liberty. The distinction I'm making here is between someone who is merely criminal/corrupt versus one who is righteous in pursuing their evil vision, which I think results in far more human suffering.
Yes, you're right, you didn't say extremism per se was bad, so thanks for that correction. Yes, righteousness in pursuit of an evil vision is the most dangerous, I agree. I think the worst example of this are the occult writers who think we have to annihilate all those who hold to monotheism so that mankind can evolve into homo noeticus, or whatever they want to call the new human species in the Age of Aquarius. Anyone who believes that man is not god is holding up that evolution. Authors like Helena Blavatsky, Alice Bailey, and Barbara Marx Hubbard are in that camp, I believe, and influenced Nazi attitudes towards Jews. Another do-gooder theory right behind that (no offense to the naturalists out there) is Darwinian evolution, which influenced the Eugenics movement and promoted racism (Darwin thought blacks were closer to apes than to whites). So, we have to guide evolution by scientifically weeding out the defectives in the gene pool, and only white European intellectuals are fit to decide who needs to be weeded out. Another one (I'm on a roll, here) is Climate Change activism. For the sake of reducing CO2 to save the planet, we have to have a lot fewer people in the world (Steven Mosher of the Population Research Institute says their goal is one billion) with a much lower standard of living. I wonder how many people subconsciously think that the Covid deaths, vaccine deaths and lower fertility is not all bad, because they contribute to that population reduction goal.
Exactly 👍 and good examples!
Spring2020 I saw videos of gates talking about depopulation, and others with a needle wanting to vax...
I'm no Nobel laurete... But I stayed the hell away from deathvax
Yes, correct.
It comes down to what are we zealous about, and what parameters contain or govern our zealotry? Does my belief system, my worldview, my set of ideas allow me to kill or abuse other humans in my zeal? Or does my worldview compel me to sacrificially serve others - even those who are not like myself or with whom I disagree - for the sake of reaching the ideal (Christian missionaries over the centuries being some good examples of this, as you mention).
Ultimately the crucial factor is the nature of my underlying ideas. What are the ideas about which I am zealous.
Salman Rushdie stabbed. Timely post. Well written.
Dead kittens are dead kittens no matter what the motive was for killing them. I'm working on an article about the importance of Religion, capital R, because Religion is the only thing that allowed me to keep my job as a public school teacher and stay un-jabbed. Philosophical and scientific objections were worthless. There were only religious exemptions. THAT made me a "zealot' for Christ and His church. I feel sorry I wasn't one long before now.
"Dead kittens are dead kittens no matter what the motive was for killing them." Agreed, and to extend the analogy, murderers are murderers--obviously it doesn't matter to the murdered person WHY they were killed.
But it matters a great deal whether you and I are living in a world in which we MIGHT be murdered for private reasons, say in a liquor store robbery gone wrong, versus: there is a small army of eager Gestapo outside our door on orders to execute us in the name of "public good" for our non-compliance with the New World Order.
The latter are more dangerous, is all I'm saying. (Whether you call them zealots, or righteously evil, or true believers, or ideologues, or whatever term you use... and also acknowledging language inadequacy and the plight of the poor writer 😆)
The "public good" or "greater good" is utilitarianism. That's why we Catholics prefer "common good." As to the term Zealot, I suppose I would rather use the word extremist, even though it is probably always good to be an extremist when it comes certain things, like the truth. The word zealot has a religious connotation and I cringe every time someone puts religion down. I heard a preacher say just last week, "It's not a religion, it's a relationship." Okay. Fine. It's a relationship. But it's a religion. I wasn't offered a "relationship exemption." I was offered a "religious exemption." Religion is the guarantor of our freedoms in the United States of America. And religion/religious people are not the problem. Socialism, communism, nazism, and fascism killed 150 million in the 20th century... https://rlmartinwrites.com/2020/08/24/why-conservatives-hate-this-bumper-sticker/
Anyway, thanks for answering my comment. I appreciate your writing.
Great article. Thank you.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3vrkTl9Sv6Y
Another sicko
"...that humanity will be better off by being chipped and tracked and medicated and controlled and AI-censored and penniless and property-less and thoughtless." 🎯