To Zen Tiger, and On Engaging With Rabid Secular Progressives

Grateful for your brave and persistent attempts to get me to understand Zen. 🙂

I do understand actually, and I realise its a judgement call that we all have to make.

MY POV on such commenters is that they bring nothing to the debate. Nothing new. Nothing fresh. Nothing challenging. Nothing intelligent. They’re just ignorant thugs whose shared characteristic is a deep immersion in moral relativism and an extremely simplistic and facile understanding of the historical and cultural underpinnings of our society. They have no real in depth understanding of what makes western civilization better than most.

Or should I say what made it better than most, for under the influence of the Progressives, we’re fast losing that advantage. Savagery and barbarism are on the rise in the west everywhere you look.

As for engaging them in discussion, if they were making contributions that amounted to more than a pinch of goat excrement, I might see a reason to indulge them, but to me, they’re just immature children screaming in the supermarket and therefore one grits one teeth, rolls eyes and looks the other way. Just like the yelling kid wouldn’t understand any admonition, so they will never get what you are trying to say to them.

I appreciate the point about sharing argument with lurkers or other readers. Maybe that has some validity. However, I’d say many readers might just click to close the page in disgust once they observed the kind of infantile inanities you’re responding to. There might be some small profit from that angle, but is it worth the trial of dealing with such shallow and narrow ideological recalcitrance?

These are the people who have in their ignorance over the last few decades given the hard core of the socialist movement the beach head they needed to expand their death grip on our society. To white ant it and rot it and hollow it out from the inside. Too thick to ever understand concepts such as Cultural Marxism, (they’re deeply influenced by this themselves) and how the left have used that strategy so successfully, they’re beyond reason. They just have to be ignored and worked around and marginalized from the debate.

Giving them any kind of credence as serious commenters is just pandering to the narcissism that is frequently at the root of their problems.

They’re nothing. They have nothing to offer. They have betrayed us to the left. They are a negative we just have to exclude from our focus. Time wasters, and we have so very little time to waste. Far more productive to engage with those who have the intelligence to be persuaded.

16 thoughts on “To Zen Tiger, and On Engaging With Rabid Secular Progressives

  1. Beautifully put.
    “They’re nothing. They have nothing to offer. They have betrayed us to the left. They are a negative we just have to exclude from our focus. Time wasters, and we have so very little time to waste. Far more productive to engage with those who have the intelligence to be persuaded.”

    Yes indeed!


  2. Thank’s Gecko and KG. Appreciate your support.

    I understand Zen’s very civil attempts to explain why he feels he has to deal with these thugs, but for myself, I just do not have the patience for such infantile trash anymore.


  3. Were “Progressives” not such bigots towards conservative thought, were they to relinquish the words “progress” and “liberal” to their rightful owners, were they honest as to their objectives — to establish their authoritarian rule, were their media not deliberately comprised of the most dishonest bunch of smug morons this side of Hell, then maybe there might be something worthwhile to discuss with them. Let me thank you and KG for helping accept this reality. At some point patience runs out, so when Zen Tiger’s runs out, it is nice that you have tried to get him to understand that the problem isn’t with him.


  4. Don’t forget the so called “educators” Pascal, for it is they who are largely responsible for the moral relativism and the ignorance of history.


  5. When you boil it all down, it’s a little bit like a ‘meaningful’ discussion between Chamberlain and Hitler – one naively likes to think the best of everyone [the whole “we’re all basically good” pov], the other is an evil tyrant who, given the opportunity, would quite happily send the other to the gas chamber.

    The key is working out whether you’re dealing with a ‘Hitler’ or someone who ACTUALLY DOES want to have a meaningful discussion and exchange of ideas.

    The ONLY way you deal with a ‘Hitler’ is to set a ‘ Churchill’ on them!!!

    Life’s too short to deal with deliberately evil and condescending pondscum.

    PS And in a biblical context – Christ had absolutely no time for the arrogant and evil Pharisees of His day. There’s a lesson there for those who claim to follow Christ.


  6. Thanks all for your insightful comments, except Kris, who is a bit like Hitler and is not interested in exchanging ideas, and life is too short to keep bringing up his rabid bias towards Catholics, ending his last comment with the passive-aggressive barb of “those who claim to follow Christ.”

    He’s not a nice person. Any chance you want to ban him Redbaiter? I really think it would lift your blog, and it would show every-one here I’m starting to listen to what you are all saying.


  7. For Zen:

    “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” – George Orwell
    [From Red’s sidebar]

    Gee, what a surprise – Zen finds my comments a bit too close to the bone so what does he suggest? Ban me.

    Lord save me from the all these ‘nice’ people.


  8. The book of Proverbs has a lot to say about fools. Don’t bother arguing with them. Most of them are snippy little maggots that somehow avoided being backhanded at school. Uncorrected, they’ve continued their obnoxious ways into an extended adolescent adulthood.

    The future is bleak for them, the world already has an oversupply of oafs and boors.


  9. That’s what I love about [some] Catholics, they’re such martyrs – except when they’re burning others at the stake of course …

    Attempts to have me banned, now labels me a troll – will I ever re-discover my self esteem … hic, hic.


  10. Once again, as is usual, I can only conclude that people like Zen [and generally papists in particular] really do regularly miss the point. No doubt he thought my reference to Hitler above was somehow referring to him [which it wasn’t] – I actually thought the whole contrast between Chamberlain and Hitler revealed both the naivety and evil respectively of these sort of people. And highlighted that we can’t actually [and shouldn’t waste our time] engage with evil in any meaningful sense in a debate type forum. To do so is indeed naive.

    Another example would be Israel attempting to ‘negotiate’ with the satanic death-cult of Islam in the hope of coming to some form of compromise – when all Islam wants [and requires] is Israel and ever last Jew be wiped from the face of the earth.

    My main point was, and is, that one just can’t negotiate with evil. And entertaining such commenters on one’s blog is actually counter-productive.

    That Zen will entertain these evil commenters, and won’t ban them, but will request I be banned from someone else’s blog is kind of ironic. And perhaps reveals that he views those who challenge [the cult of] Roman Catholicism as more ‘evil’ for pointing out the truth, than those who are genuinely evil and would quite likely march us all into the gas chambers given the opportunity.

    And lets not forget that, interestingly, many of the hierarchy in the Nazi war machine were or course of the Catholic faith …
    Food for thought – although the irony will no doubt be lost on people like Zen.


  11. The Pope, September 2011, in Germany:

    As the Bishop of Rome, it is deeply moving for me to be meeting you here in the ancient Augustinian convent in Erfurt. As we have just heard, this is where Luther studied theology. This is where he celebrated his first Mass. Against his father’s wishes, he did not continue the study of Law, but instead he studied theology and set off on the path towards priesthood in the Order of Saint Augustine. And on this path, he was not simply concerned with this or that. What constantly exercised him was the question of God, the deep passion and driving force of his whole life’s journey. “How do I receive the grace of God?”: this question struck him in the heart and lay at the foundation of all his theological searching and inner struggle. For Luther theology was no mere academic pursuit, but the struggle for oneself, which in turn was a struggle for and with God.

    “How do I receive the grace of God?” The fact that this question was the driving force of his whole life never ceases to make a deep impression on me. For who is actually concerned about this today – even among Christians? What does the question of God mean in our lives? In our preaching? Most people today, even Christians, set out from the presupposition that God is not fundamentally interested in our sins and virtues. He knows that we are all mere flesh. And insofar as people believe in an afterlife and a divine judgement at all, nearly everyone presumes for all practical purposes that God is bound to be magnanimous and that ultimately he mercifully overlooks our small failings. The question no longer troubles us. But are they really so small, our failings?



Comments are closed.