I stumbled on
another blog post by John C. Wright -- whom I quoted
here not long ago -- and was amazed at another of his keen insights regarding modern depravity. It appeared in a lengthy discussion on the deeper significance of The Lord Of The Rings, as follows:
Readers will forgive me if I provide no links and proffer no exhibits: the matter is too disgusting. There is a porn star who at the time of this writing is a Duke University freshman who appeared on a ‘rough sex’ website which portrayed her being choked, spat upon, and insulted during the sex act.
To justify herself in the face of criticism, she has publicly and defiantly stated that true feminism, true liberty and happiness, consists of her ‘ownership’ of her body, which ownership renders her immune from criticism, and hence allows her to do whatever degrading acts she wishes to herself for her own pleasure. She absurdly assumes a moralistic stance to blame the decent people who are disgusted by her acts. She is also a homosexual, and suffers from a crippling self-loathing. People who like themselves don’t act out fantasies of sexual degradation.
Reading the words of this poor, young morally crippled fool is a chore I will spare the reader. I am sure you can find her words through a thousand references on the Internet. I will provide no additional links or pingbacks or clicks-through to such sites. I will, nonetheless, mention the clear absurdity the words convey. She objects in the strongest and most morally elevated language, in fiery tones worthy of Tom Paine and Nathan Hale, that anyone should say demeaning things about her choice of playacting in scenes where she is demeaned. In other words, she enjoys being demeaned, but does not want anyone else to demean her. She is a masochist who does not want to be slapped.
This public spectacle should drive home the point, beyond any denial, that the modern philosophy which the poor brainwashed child innocently repeats is nothing but nihilism.
Nihilism is the philosophy saying that the external world is void of innate meaning or truth. Instead, the external world exists only to slake the appetites, which are themselves the sole and final judge of their own fitness. Since there is no truth, there is no standard by which appetites can be good or bad, wholesome or not, virtuous or vicious. Hence, appetites are absolutely sovereign and not open to question, judgment, prudence, or self restraint.
It must be noted that the nihilist worldview is fundamentally, nay, deliberately dishonest. The nihilists lie, and they know that they are lying, and they want to lie and to rejoice in lies. The only thing they do not want is to be criticized for lying.
In the nihilist world, there are allegedly no sins, and hence we are allegedly set free from all the suffocating oppression of moral codes. Despite this, the nihilist world view proposes that there is one sin, and that one is unforgivable: the sin of being ‘judgmental’, that is, the sin of believing sin exists.
How it is that sinning is forgivable, whereas naming the nature of the act and calling it sin is unforgivable remains a mystery of this particular religion as deep as the mystery of the Incarnation.
Because the one sin for Nihilists is the use of reason, and the faculty of judgment which calls some things good or noble and others base or bad, the eternal instinct of the nihilist is to elevate the base and bad and denigrate the good and noble.
No comments:
Post a Comment