Neoreactionary / alt-right

Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Freddy:
We are all racist
Speak for yourself. I do not believe skin color makes anyone inherently better or worse than another skin color.
It doesn’t. Understanding that doesn’t stop you from being racist. And I don’t mean an out-and-out torch bearing, placard waving, hood wearing white supremacist. It’s an inbuilt reaction to what we consider to be someone ouside our ‘group’.
 
Interesting story. Probably the most recent time I have been a victim of racism, that I can tell.

I was exiting the car and proceeding to the abortion mill to pray for an end to abortion. This is, of course, a busy urban area with many people coming through on public mass transit, many homeless around the streets, it’s a war zone, spiritually.

An African-American man approaches me and before I can avoid it, he’s giving me a pitch for some kind of charity that he wants to raise money for. I am listening impatiently and as soon as I can get a word in edgewise, I turn him down, politely.

And he says “why don’t you want to donate? you don’t have money, or is it that you just don’t like black people?”

I nearly laughed out loud in his stupid face. Yeah, buddy, great way to raise money for your fly-by-night charity. No, don’t show me any ID. Just accuse me of racism. Thanks for nothing.

By the way, the racism in this case is that I was profiled and targeted as a Rich White Christian. Hilarious.
 
Last edited:
Guess I am biased against strangers then because I help my family, friends and neighbors first.
 
Guess I am biased against strangers then because I help my family, friends and neighbors first.
Me too. That’s part of it. ‘Our’ group starts with immediate family and the circle gradually extends to include other family.members and then friends and then like minded people you feel associated with.

You’ll find that people who live a somewhat insular life are more wary of strangers. It’s a trope in a lot of Westerns for example. Stranger rides into town and all the locals are suspicious of him. Make the locals white and the stranger black or vica versa and the situation is exacerbated.
 
Nothing immoral about that.
No. I agree. It’s natural. But if we treated one stranger with suspicion and greeted another with open arms because the latter was part of our ‘group’, then that would be immoral.

A year or so ago my wife and I were in Paris. Just walking about, enjoying the day. And we found ourselves in an area where the people were predominantly black. Algerian maybe. And a correction - where all the people were black. And I felt uncomfortable. There was nothing to suggest the area was any worse than any other we’d passed through. It was low rent, no doubt about that. But no more than other area we’d passed through. But we were the odd ones out. It felt like we didn’t belong. And there was nothing I could say that made me feel unsafe apart from that.

We discussed it later and both of us were slightly embarressed about what we had felt. And I wondered what it might feel like for a black couple finding themselves suddenly in a low rent white area.

Hey, maybe it wasn’t a safe area in any case and some sixth sense was telling me that. Who knows. But part of it was definitely this automatic bias (or preference if you like) that we all have.
 
40.png
Freddy:
We discussed it later and both of us were slightly embarressed about what we had felt. And I wondered what it might feel like for a black couple finding themselves suddenly in a low rent white area.

Hey, maybe it wasn’t a safe area in any case and some sixth sense was telling me that. Who knows. But part of it was definitely this automatic bias (or preference if you like) that we all have.
Why be embarrassed about it? In-group preference is simply an evolutionary advantage that has shown over the millenia to be an innate facet of self-defense. Humans who didn’t feel this natural distrust were filtered out centuries ago, so I don’t see anything wrong with utilizing an advantage that was bred into me by my ancestors.
We’re on the same page. But we didn’t rationalise it and carry on our merry way. It affected our behaviour. We effectively gave in to our instincts and there was an unspoken agreement that we should head out of the area. We treated everyone in the area as being a threat in some way for no other reason than they were ‘different’.

Maybe that sixth sense of some danger was also present. Because we have been in very many situations where we’ve been the only white couple for miles and it hasn’t bothered us whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
Wiktionary
neoreactionary (adjective)
(politics, chiefly derogatory) Reacting against the (especially liberal) values of the modern world; now typically seen as characterised by opposition to egalitarianism, support for strong centralised government, and espousal of conservative economic policies.
egalitarianism ( countable and uncountable) , plural egalitarianisms )
The political doctrine that holds that all people in a society should have equal rights rights from birth.
 
There are people who have loved their neighbors and also killed others. Are they Christian?
It depends on the circumstances of the killing. The Just War Theory is still part of Catholic morality, as is the right to self defense.
 
Psychology means science of psyche, the soul. The soul does not evolve but is created.
Not exactly. Psychology is “the scientific study of the mind and its functions, especially those involving behaviour”. I agree with you that we each are given a soul. But evolutionary psychology makes sense given that our minds evolve individually and we learn, grow, experience life, experience trauma, etc.

Where is the distinction between soul/mind/spirit/heart/emotions? I’m not exactly sure.
ubermensch
I love you for using this word!!
 
Wiktionary
neoreactionary (adjective)
(politics, chiefly derogatory) Reacting against the (especially liberal) values of the modern world; now typically seen as characterised by opposition to egalitarianism, support for strong centralised government, and espousal of conservative economic policies.
If you’re going to put it that way, “support for a strong central government” is directly opposed to Catholic social teaching, namely subsidarity. One cannot hold the position that the Federal government can always overpower states, counties, and municipalities in every matter… well that’s a strawman, but subsidarity is de fide.
 

If you’re going to put it that way, “support for a strong central government” is directly opposed to Catholic social teaching, namely subsidarity. One cannot hold the position that the Federal government can always overpower states, counties, and municipalities in every matter… well that’s a strawman, but subsidarity is de fide.
This?

Catechism of the Catholic Church
1885 The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top