September 28, 2018
MY CORNER by Boyd
Cathey
The Kavanaugh
Hearings and the Real Issues at Stake
Friends,
The
Kavanaugh hearings have riveted America, and literally hundreds of observers
and commentators have weighed in. Watching some of the unleashed leftist
fanatics and feminist #MeToo-ers foaming at the mouth, ranting and raving on
CNN and MSNBC, and in the US Senate—with my fear of losing my lunch—I was
tempted to just tune out: the Far Left attempted coup d’etat against not just
President Trump but against the American citizenry and what is left of the
American constitutional system was in full display.
Let me
say that I have never been a zealous Kavanaugh supporter; he seems to be someone
I would term a “moderate conservative,” a solid and decent jurist, but not a
towering iconoclast who would take the Supreme Court and American jurisprudence
back towards our “stolen” Constitution. Yet, the very idea that such a “moderate
conservative” who might conceivably dare to vote against the ongoing slide of
our nation into something that the Framers never in their worst nightmares
envisaged—the idea that he might become a deciding vote, has so enraged the
demons of the Deep State, from its Congressional minions to its asexual women
in the streets who have rejected femininity outright, acted to pour gasoline on
a madness that was already near the boiling point.
Very
simply what millions of viewers, glued to their television sets, witnessed on September
27 in the all-day testimony of Dr. Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh before
the Senate Judiciary Committee was a very real, very palpable and very
frightening reality: that we are living in a geographical entity called the
United States with stark and unbridgeable differences that are as wide as those
that existed in 1861, in fact, far wider. For at least in 1861 most Americans
utilized a common and comprehensible language, a common means of expression;
today that linguistic template, that commonality, no longer exists. It’s like
perhaps 30% or 40% of our fellow citizens have arrived from Mars—or planet
Mongo (remember Flash Gordon?)—and somehow we are all supposed live together in
concord and harmony, and settle our spats using an inherited republican system
which they not only do not recognize, but earnestly seek to overthrow and
destroy.
I have never
expressed any support for South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham; I find his
globalism, his anti-Southern heritage views, and his support for immigration to
be disastrous and despicable, and I have said so in various installments of My
Corner. But I would be remiss if I did not admit that his vigorous comments
made in the Thursday hearings were effective and well-spoken.
Yet, I do
not believe Graham actually comprehends what is happening and has happened in
the country, for, in large part, he has been an enabler for much of the rot.
I don’t
much care for Abraham Lincoln, either; I consider him and his politics reasons
why we have as a country reached this point. But one thing he declared is
beyond dispute: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
My belief
is that we are at that tipping point, and the Kavanaugh hearings, far and beyond
the issue of whether the judge should sit on the Supreme Court, have opened a
vista, a terrifying panorama that reveals as never before the dark and inherent
evil, the outright malevolence of a large portion of our fellow citizens intent
on extinguishing our beliefs…and us.
Their
allegiance is, to continue the Flash Gordon analogy, to Ming the Merciless, ruler
of planet Mongo, and not to the Christian God, the God of Israel, the Creator
of heaven and earth, and that rocking Cradle in Bethlehem which 2,000 years ago
brought redemption and salvation to the human race.
There can
be no fiercer, no more severe a division than that. I may upset some readers by
what I now write, but what we actually need today is a new Crusade and the gumption
and boldness of the Cistercian Abbot Arnaud Amalric at the siege of Beziers
(1209), during the Albigensian crusade, who supposedly (but probably
apocryphally) said when asked about possible innocents who might lose their
lives in the siege:
“Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt
eius” - “Kill them [all]. For Our Lord knows who are His own.”
At the
very least those minions of Evil, whether accosting and screaming profanities at
Ted Cruz and his family in a restaurant in Washington, or standing up like that
vile chanteuse-cum-political whore
Madonna, or feverishly concocting the most vicious and filthy of attacks on
Brett Kavanaugh, need to be driven back to the lower reaches of hell…where they
belong.
No easy
task—but in the final analysis, is there any other way?
Over the
past few days several of my installments on the Kavanaugh process in the My
Corner series have been picked up by national publications and journals, and I’ll
be sending them out soon. Today I offer one that appeared yesterday (September 27) on the Web
site of Chronicles magazine. Chronicles is probably the most
respected and most recognized journal of the Old or traditional Right. It is an
edited version of My Corner from September 22:
What Has Happened to Masculinity in
the 21st Century?
By: Boyd D. Cathey | September 27, 2018
On Saturday morning, September 22, I switched
on Fox News and there witnessed a gaggle of five garrulous
women, all talking at the same time, all vacuous and empty headed, and all
saying basically nothing—a so-called “panel” discussing the nomination of Judge
Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court and the last-minute and largely-unfounded
accusations hurled against him by radical feminists.
There for anyone to see . . . and more
excruciatingly, to hear . . . were five salient illustrations why the 19th
Amendment, the women’s suffrage amendment, has not only been a disaster of
historic proportions for our culture, but needs to be repealed, and the sooner,
the better.
I finally had had enough. I quickly switched my
television dial to the Sirius XM Symphony Hall channel, there at least to find
some relief. Anyone for Telemann or Vivaldi or Schubert? Ah, but I forget: they
were white European Christian males (even if they and many others like them
helped create and added to the richness of our Western culture).
The feminist movement has been and is, in effect, a
rebellion against the laws of Nature and also against the very teachings and
beliefs of historic Christianity. Whether it be the so-called modest reforms
advocated in the 19th century—voting rights and property entailment and
inheritance reform, or the more progressivist demands of the late twentieth
century—military service equity, professional and job parity, unisex bathrooms,
or the most recent insistence on same sex marriage, transgenderism, and gender
fluidity, the movement is rubricked under the principle of “equality,” that is,
its proclaimed objective is the overturning of “restraints” on women and the
complete equality of the sexes.
Yet, in fact, equality as envisaged by the
feminists does not exist and has never existed in nature.
For feminism “equality” is a slogan, in reality an
exercise in subterfuge employed to shame weak-willed (and weak-brained) men and
to eventually dissolve the traditional social bonds and inherited natural (and
moral) laws that have governed our culture for two millennia.
Whether from the Prophets of the Old Testament, or
from the incredibly rich inheritance of ancient philosophy, or from St. Paul
and the consistent teachings of the Church, there has been an understanding
that there are discernible “laws” in nature, the orderly functioning of which
made society and social arrangements possible, even harmonious. What the
Christian church did, following on the acute observations of the Ancients, was to
confirm both spiritually and doctrinally the existence and appositeness of
those laws, for they were integral to creation, itself.
Thus, it is no exaggeration to state that feminism
is a rebellion against not just the Divine Positive Law—the laws and teachings
of God and His Church—but against Nature, that is, against the way things are
and function naturally in our world, those workings and that usual consistency
observed as normative for thousands of years.
The genie of feminism, however, of rampant egalitarianism,
is out of the magic lamp. And it is an egalitarianism and demand for
“liberation” from all restraint that will continue until it has completely
subjected men to its will and expelled anything redolent of masculinity from
our midst. For its actual objective is domination, and for the logical
feminists, that men must not only become unmanly and weaklings acceding to
every recent feminist demand, but in so many words, disappear, except as the
selective objects for breeding purposes, or for the occasional fling, always
understanding that it is the non-male who chooses the time, place, manner,
initiation, and who sets all the “rules of amour and engagement” (and to ignore
or violate them will bring down the wrath of feminist society and eventually the
legal opprobrium of our newly feminized legal framework).
The destruction of masculinity and emasculation of
men has been perhaps the most grievous and disastrous consequence of the
“women’s movement.” For centuries—indeed, not that long ago—an inherited code
of honor, deference and respect, how to treat women, prevailed in Western
society. While, it is true, certain functions and roles were generally not open
to women historically, that in no way dimmed or lessened their critical
importance and paramount position in society. Indeed, as child bearers and
mothers it was they most uniquely who governed the essential running of the
family and palpably were the primary and substantial foundation of society.
The Church understood that women were not the same
as men, that women were different and that they had unique God-given roles.
Like the Blessed Virgin in Bethlehem who cared for the Cradle in the Stable and
nourished the Son of God who would bring grace and salvation to the world, the
primary role of women was the nourishing of familial offspring and the
continuation of the human race. There could be no more important role than
this, and in that sense, women occupy in Christian teaching an exalted and
unequalled position.
What folly then, to even discuss “equality” in a
merely secular sense.
The potentially fatal demon, the monstrous and
infectious evil in our culture, is the Hydra-headed movement to extirpate
“racism” and end “sexism.” As increasingly independent from an historic
cultural Marxism formulated decades ago and insinuated into our educational
systems and entertainment industry, these demonic demiurges make the standards
and praxis of the old Soviet Communists appear conservative. Josef Stalin would
never have, and never did, put up with same sex marriage, transgenderism, or
the kind of feminist domination we see around us today. True, the Soviets
talked of equality and women occupied some professional positions, but for the
Reds a strong family and observance of supposedly “outdated” traditional morality
were still paramount. The Gulags contained dissenters.
Our present society is filled with malignant
Harpies—many political, many academic, many in entertainment, many in media.
They feast on the entrails of our once noble culture and scream bloodcurdling
screams against anyone who would dare oppose or restrain their demands for
liberation. In their unbridled frenzy loosed from any natural bounds and
standards of behavior, they turn liberty on its head, invert rationality and
enslave millions in unrequited passions and desire, unbound and unreasoned,
cocooned in a pseudo-reality. It is, to paraphrase the great English essayist
and poet G. K. Chesterton, the definition of real lunacy.
In his volume, The Poet and the
Lunatics (1929), Chesterton’s character Gale asks the
question: “What exactly is liberty?” He responds, in part:
“First and foremost, surely, it is the power of a
thing to be itself. In some ways the yellow bird was free in the cage . . . We
are limited by our brains and bodies; and if we break out, we cease to be
ourselves, and, perhaps, to be anything.
“The lunatic is he who loses his way and cannot
return. Now, almost before my eyes, this man had made a great stride from
liberty to lunacy. The man who opened the bird-cage loved freedom; possibly too
much . . . But the man who broke the bowl merely because he thought it a prison
for the fish, when it was their only possible house of life—that man was
already outside the world of reason, raging with a desire to be outside of
everything.”
Our modern feminist revolutionaries, whether out in
the streets demonstrating like wailing banshees, or broadcasting nightly
ideological pablum they call news, or parading before a Senate committee (or on
a committee), or indoctrinating gullible, nearly soul-less students in supposed
“centers of higher education,” are, to use Chesterton’s parable, certifiably
insane: women (and men) “already outside the world of reason,” whose
unrestrained rage to destroy is only matched by their profound inability to
create anything of real and lasting value.
The nightmare scenario painted by Chesterton in
society ninety years ago is with us today with a vengeance, it surrounds us, it
cajoles us, it demands total subservience . . . especially if you are a man
with the slightest inclination to think for yourself, to doubt the new dogmatic
and constantly advancing template of feminism. What was perhaps tolerable five
years ago is now met with demands for the application of a “social and
political death sentence,” and what may be tolerable today will soon be seen as
a sin against the triumphant and ever-evolving feminist mantra of truth.
That is, until men . . . and women, too . . . stand
and forcefully oppose this lunacy, completely, honestly, rationally, and
without hesitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment