Mark Shea is a Progressive Scaremonger--But You Already Knew That

You know, Mark Shea really, really got it wrong in his response to being hoaxed:

But here’s the thing: That doesn’t really matter all that much, because the issue is not whether some local group of DE types goes in for silly rituals or uses goofy code words lifted from Tolkien or has a kinkyboots fascination with inspecting your phenotype. It’s not whether a couple of rich guys have decided to patronize this stuff as their latest boutique cause. It’s that, yes, this stuff really is about racialism and the inculcation of pride.

In other words, yes, I was fooled but I'm still right. This is exactly what the media has said whenever one of their manufactured controversies blows up in their faces. Who's the one with a pride problem?

I understand, really I do. I haven't been blogging long (and no one's reading anyway) so I'm still getting a little buzz every time I post--"What if I've missed something?"

It stings to be proven wrong but, if Shea wants to talk about pride, then the humble thing to do is stop talking and re-examine one's premises.

Shea's not willing to do that because he was too credulous.He was willing to believe that some DE types form Freemason-style sects, with secret rituals and special titles--not to mention the wealthy donors.

Being willing to believe something so outrageous really undermines his authority as a columnist. At the least, he's willing to assume that DE writers are mostly neckbearded youths who have attached themselves to The Matrix and LOTR one night over pizza and Mtn Dew decided to play-act. At the worst, he's willing to believe that there is a white supremacist occult forming in the US.

The former indicates a prima facie dismissal of DE ideas without consideration--thus his criticisms are of no interest. The latter indicates that he has an extremely skewed picture of reality--which makes him a fool with no understanding of the world or of how humans work.

The other day I classified DE criticisms into two tiers, middle-brow and unthinking progressive. Shea falls neatly into the latter. He'd like to smear all DE thought as "racist," and dust off his hands as if that's all the work needed to counter DE claims.

Really, I don't get how people like Shea get only a racialist vibe from DE. Maybe there are many more sites I'm not following that relate to HBD; I'm not interested in statistical analysis and scientific papers. If anything, the focus of DE writers is that we are living in a semantic world of lies, that we've built a society on a foundation of false premises. HBD is disproving just one of the lies.

It's been brought up before that the left is so "pragmatic" that acknowledging differences in the races must mean that the next step is to start eradicating "undesirables." I haven't seen anyone advocating anything of the kind, although the comboxes tend to be less than charitable sometimes. It's the left that believes that everyone not part of the solution is part of the problem--and thus undeserving of a livelihood to support themselves and their families--not anyone within the DE.

If anything, HBD advocates pointedly refrain from any prescriptions. The argument is scientific--racial differences are a fact. We are being told again and again that this isn't true and that to say differently is to be the worst kind of person.

I believe it was Vox Day who pointed out in the last year that we are all brothers in Christ, that we are equal before God. It's only in our devotion to Jesus that we'll be one people. Surely Shea, as a blogging Catholic, has to give this idea some thought. If we can be one people in anything else, then why do we need God?

In every human organization or "social construct," as progressives like to say, our differences matter. They may promote cross-fertilization of ideas or they may create insurmountable divisions. America, from 1850 to the end of WWII, benefited from having European ethnic groups come into the country. There are a lot of reasons for this (not least our former tendency to leave people, organizations and businesses alone) but important here is that, though Italian or German or Scandinavian, the over-arching culture was the same. They were mostly Christian and shared similar touchstones.

"Model minorities" like the Chinese and South Asian Indians do not often share Christianity with European Americans, but they share and come to assimilate American cultural behaviors. Culture is more important than race, I believe, but race forms the seams by which culture can be torn apart.

It's enlightening to read the aggrieved Tumblr "Persons of Color". Their greatest animosity is towards "allies," white leftists who think they are the proper spokespeople for the "oppressed" masses. This is because the PC left believes that, deep down, all races and cultures are really white leftists. It takes only a college education and the elimination of the right wing to create a world of Starbucks and IKEA furniture.

The PC progressive thinks of culture the way the American media portrays Italians making the sign of the cross--a cute bit of style. For all their multi-culti talk, they have trouble understanding that their SWPL values can be greatly different than other values. An Iowa Methodist has evil values, of course, but a Somali Muslim's are endearing. But Christians who have thought about the issue understand that culture only becomes flavoring--cute traits--when one's heart and mind is pointed towards Christ. Until then, we can't assume that we're all pointed in the same direction.

Returning to the racial issue, I hope Shea will take the time to consider his own struggles with being moral. We all have different obstacles. Put a case of beer and a pizza in front of me and I have to consciously control myself. But put me next to a roulette table and I'm left cold.

Every individual has particular vices that they struggle with--why is it so hard to believe that races have their own set of weaknesses they share? Why is it that Europeans systematized science and were driven to venture throughout the globe while the Chinese, with an older and more consistent civilization, didn't? Doesn't it seem that these groups have sets of strengths different from one another?

Shea would have us pretend that there are no predispositions from one race to another. The problem is, PC progressives can't see their own predispositions, so they assume that their traits are everyone else's, the "natural" state of humanity. No wonder those railing against "white privilege" are angry at their allies--the concept whitewashes them. "Oh, you're from Peru? I suppose you must love cayenne pepper sprinkled on your lattes."

The DE has generally stayed away from prescribing "solutions" for racial differences. No matter, people like Shea assume that acknowledging difference--the "diversity" they root for--is the first step in genocide. Shea would look a lot smarter if he would at least play the mental game of, "So, what if this is true? How should we approach our differences morally?"

Instead, he'd rather point and sputter, "Racialist!" In doing so, he can dismiss the Dark Enlightenment. He shouldn't, because I don't see either the Democrats or the Republicans showing any respect to his faith except as a bargaining tool. More than a few over here think it's the most important thing.