I had a sad argument with my nephew several months back.
He is a Christian with Libertarian bent.
I can't see how there is compatibility between the two.
My nephew blasted me for some of my stands with respect to who and how I was prevented from being the monster many believe I was put on this Earth to be. (And that there is less and less non-spiritual reason to believe they aren't right!!!)
If you want a real indication of that incompatibility (and do not wish to hear me ramble on that any personal agency on my part kills people and what now is necessary to prevent it), I submit to you this Karl Denninger Market Ticker screed from today and this one from eight days ago.
If you wish to proceed further, read both of them first and then proceed to my responses to at least portions of some of the comments supporting Denninger's post of today's.
I'll start with what I see as the take-home point:
Htp provides the money question after a discussion of today's post:
"So I am compelled to shoot the bastard or else risk eternal Hell? I am willing to do this but had always thought I risk Hell if I went too far too fast. In any event, I'm clearly not a theological scholar. It was a good story that made me think. Perhaps I just carry the nine and leave the camping toys at home."
The answer is an unmistakable yes, in Denninger's line of thinking.
And the backing point is what is making demographics like transgenders sick in this country: That Denninger's line of thinking is that the Gospel is a fraud, especially as it relates to allowing "other" (or the criminally violent) to exist.
The entire point of his "parable" is that you not only have a duty to kill in the search for righteousness and justice, but -- in the right situation -- a moral, ethical, and spiritual obligation to do so.
More and more, I do wonder if Karl Denninger is a government plant, because it is unmistakably clear what he calls for: A Libertarian (or, at minimum, personal accountability/agency) militia to take over the country by lethal force and run it.
The only thing he is right on is the concept that personal responsibility can only exist when there is no choice but to be personally responsible. That anyone sufficiently otherwise (such as what is believed of myself, and much of the crime in the cities besides) is killed/eliminated, and by the penalty in this parable for those who refuse to carry it out.
A number of the comments so far of the article lament the cowardice of even the American Right:
Invisible Sun: "I've long thought the modern interpretation of "Love your neighbor as yourself" was inadequate because too many people are self-loathing and treat themselves horribly. Why would I think someone who hates themself will care for my well-being or that of anyone else?"
Nadavegan: "Pacifism is a noble conviction, right up until it infringes on the safety and well-being of others, at which point is becomes dereliction."
Greenacr: "I wonder given the host's recent writings if this is his point. The difference being that you don't have to have necessarily be to "compelled to commit blood" to make changes in an oppressive government."
(Who is completely incorrect, both in the eyes of the Fathers (at least in the Conservative line of thinking -- which you can bat back with the concept they were wrong in the first place about all being created equal) and in what I believe Denninger is saying.)
Nelstomlinson demands a call to arms: "Christ is no pussy, and if you're going to follow Him, you better not be, either."
Crb2061, in his first post: "This parable seems to be making the man responsible and accountable for the actions of another man. This is a dangerous line of reasoning because where do you draw the line. If someone is on the verge of suicide or other reprehensible act, and you pass them by, not seeing their distress, not even acknowledging their presence, are you then responsible for their later suicide or other reprehensible act?"
(Suicide? May depend on the circumstances. Denninger, as stated before, is fully in support of those who believe they cannot make recompense but before God from eliminating themselves. But what he is also saying here is that, in fact, "other reprehensible acts" you DO become responsible for, because of your unrepentant allowance to let it happen by not killing him first, given the opportunity.)
(And, in fact, Denninger threatened to banhammer Crb2061, because Karl not only believes that, but, factually, does believe you are responsible for the conduct of every person you do not stop from committing that level of misconduct:
"But if someone is on the verge of rape, you detect that, and fail to prevent it when you have the capacity to do so are you responsible? YES.
The difference is profound and your attempted obfuscation intentional.
Do not do so again.")
The fact is that Karl Denninger wants a Conservative militia raised for righteousness, justice, and the elimination of the irresponsible, including the destruction and re-constitution of governments into ones of such righteousness and justice.
This is why many groups are demanding counter-justice to ensure this doesn't take hold. We are seeing a stark increase in "Whataboutism" with respect to "freedom": "What about MY 'freedom' NOT to have [X] exist?", whatever that X may be.
It's one of the reasons I consider the concept of freedom to be Satanic, as it has been perverted, twisted unto itself, and used against the people fighting for their human rights -- which would not be given if the Constitution didn't impose them against the majority, and had done so since 1868 and the spoils of the (First) Civil War.
-----------
So basically, by Denninger's line of thinking: Every online Deborah Gibson fan of the years at least 1992-1998 inclusive is going to Hell, as each and every one of them had the capacity (and, for more than a period of time, had my personal address to carry it out if they so desired (given for other purposes, but they had it!)) to prevent what was believed as, minimum, that requisite act he speaks of (and it was well-detected within the fandom, at least in their own opinion, 2+ years before my 1998 arrest...).
So, Karl, I will close this post with a mocking title of one of your previous, not that you will probably ever see this, because you have me blocked on all media: I demand that you shoot me, right now.
You're going to Hell otherwise. By your own words.
No comments:
Post a Comment