Something I became very interested in during my time at university was something that at that time was known as the “History Wars” in Australia. This is a name given to something really going on all over the West and a major battlefront in what is similarly known as the “Culture Wars”. I have written a post somewhat related to this before. But the short of it is that on one side, you have people that want to uproot Western culture and traditions in order to replace them with something they prefer and on the other you have people who want to preserve our culture and traditions as they have been. This is not strictly a left/right political fight but still fits generally within this framework.
I was first introduced to this personally when I did a course on Australian history that was bent decidedly on the radical, revisionist, anti-Western side. Without having the knowledge to respond to this perspective, I at first merely reacted negatively towards it but I soon began to see what was being done and why. The historians focusing on this weren’t completely wrong, they were (and still are), just selective and dishonest with the history they write. The British did indeed occupy and annex Australia and such an action can reasonably be seen as invasion by the disparate peoples occupying the land at the time. There is indeed documented evidence of the colonists behaving beastly to the aboriginals. There were massacres, there was displacement and the aboriginals did lose their land and their culture to the people that came.
The problem isn’t so much that people want to make this known in our history but that they want to use this as a wedge to de-legitimise what is, in order to replace it with something they prefer. As mentioned the focus is also highly selective of what it shows and what it does not show. For example, the nuances that existed in all of this such as the true nature of aboriginal culture, the frequency of violence and even the very notion of ownership of the land. On top of this, there are also plenty of examples of historian being dishonest whether by invention, omission or both. And even if not, most don’t even deny they have an ideological axe to grind.
Now with all this, I used to try to be reasonable, assuming that the other side meant well and that rational discourse would ultimately bring the truth to light.
I was naive.
What I have learned, especially with better knowledge of people now known as SJWs (social justice warriors), is that this isn’t the case at all.
And here is a direct example:
We are taught that in the past everybody was racist, that they held prejudice against other races and cultures. The white race and/or European cultures are usually the focus of this teaching. In a way, this isn’t really wrong and is true to this day. It is only banished from European (particularly northern European) society through cultural pressure and to varying degrees, through the legal systems.
In saying that this is true, I am not endorsing the narrative of the cartoon like racists portrayed in the media. I don’t accept that the prejudice that existed was bigotry but rather a natural caution towards outsiders that sometimes manifested as bigotry. Reading non-fiction and fiction from the time, there is certainly a whole lot of politically incorrect language that would make the modern art major faint, but little that one would describe as genuinely bigoted.
Thoughts on Donald Trump and the Wall
This is my latest at Heroes of Play. Sonic the Hedgehog was the game series (and character) I was most fond of during primary school. I don’t know if it is a good or bad thing that I’m still into the series today.
Either way, the review is re-posted at the jump and can be seen here.
This post is mostly directed towards those on the alternative right, whether or not you want to call it that. I am still happy to stick by it and that is what I’ll be using here regardless of some of the less savoury people who are considered part of it.
I am sure I am far from the only one that is almost impatient for something to happen; for there to be an event or opportunity that gives a chance at change. Whether it was the election of Donal Trump (which happened), or economic collapse and/or open civil war. The slowly boiling frog metaphor is overused (and I’ve heard wrong), but it is useful to explain the feeling of those who can feel what is happening and want to jump now and well before it is too late. Thinking about this can lead to despair, frustration and anger, none of which is useful.
What I going to try and do here, is give some ideas for what can be done instead of spending time thinking or worrying about what is going wrong in the West. I will try to cover what is useful and what is useless. These aren’t all my own thoughts but a collection of what I’ve come to see as the best advice going forward.
A few months ago I finished up reading Napoleon: A Life by Andrew Roberts. After finishing War and Peace earlier, I wanted to read a more sypathetic take on Napoleon and I honestly didn’t know a lot about the man’s life outside the basics I learned in high school and university.
As the title to this post suggests, this isn’t a review of the book but something that jumped out at me in the course of reading it. I wil say though that I very much recommend the book for those that are interested in learning more about Napoleon. It is a sympathetic look at his life but not one that glosses over his many blemishes.
It is often observed that life can hardly be considered a gift or a blessing for the poor and those who suffer through disease, deformity or just terrible luck. That only one who has a generally comfortable existence relative to their situation could think so. The thing I notice about to the contrary with even the most downtrodden, is a determined desire to live; to maintain their existence however pitiful. The threshold of comfort below which life ceases to be worth living seems to be incredibly low.
This is so even for people that drop from a very high standard of living to low one. The people that I most often hear about ending their life tend to be people living historically wealthy and successful lives. The factors for giving up their life tend to vary, from mental illness such as depression, to public disgrace or out of desperation to end the suffering of a particularly vicious illness. I cannot think of a time when I’ve heard of someone ending their life simply for having a low standard of living.
None of the previous paragraph is the least bit academic and I could be entirely wrong about it but my instincts and experience suggest otherwise. My purpose for opening this way is just a vehicle for some thoughts on living and suffering in life.