Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

The problem of virtue-signalling social permission to target and bully scapegoated groups

Categories
Academic Freedom
Agitprop
governance
Lessons of History
Politics
rhetoric
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

This is where we now are as a civilisation:

>>A Salvation Army bell ringer in California had been beaten in front of a Walmart because he wanted to spread joy this holiday season.

Rev. Jamie Wolfe Sr., the man ringing the bell, told CBS Sacramento that he says “Merry Christmas” to everyone who passes by his donation bucket, but one Grinch managed to knock the joy out of him.

“He haymakered me, hit me, got me down on the ground and we started wrestling, at that point I’m fighting for my life,” Wolfe Sr. said.

The suspect allegedly carried out the unprovoked attack not for the money, but for his cheer.

“Store says they love him and he’s been the best bell ringer they’ve ever had, so an attack that’s unprovoked is very surprising and very unfortunate. It’s not the call we’d expect to get at night,” or ever said Lt. Steve Pavlakis with the Salvation Army.

Pavlakis, who worked with the organization for 14 years, says he has not seen anything like this.

“It’s really saddening that one of our bell horingers would be out there working day after day for us that’s met with hate and punches to the face and kicks to the face,” Pavlakis said.>>

Why?

There is an answer, but it is one that is not going to be easy to swallow, especially for those who are invested in scapegoating and targetting the despised other. Nowadays, typically, Christians . . . as is seen.

Here is a first step to the answer:

FIRST, ROUGH DRAFT OF HISTORY ANSWER: We live in an age of ever increasing political correctness where the “permitted” answer to the question given to Orwell’s fictional Winston Smith — 2 + 2 = ___ ? — varies with the twists and turns of the power brokers in their ever advancing agenda. Such culturally dominant narrative and media manipulation games create targetted scapegoat groups and give implicit social permission and a licence to a chip- on- the- shoulder mentality that then can come out in this sort of “punch a scapegoat” way at one level. That is not to be overlooked, as the difference between such an assault and murder is a heart attack or the like, but it is not the most dangerous.  That is reserved for when the same punch- a- scapegoat mentality is embedded in agit-prop agendas and unjust decrees under false colour of law [often through lawfare] or when it becomes subtly entrenched in power circles, leading to exclusionary lock-out and marginalising, vindictive victimising behaviour. Beyond a certain level, the Gulag and the 4:00 am knock on the door by the latest Gestapo beckon.

Do we really want to go — yet again — down the road of a long train of abuses and usurpations predictably leading to the undermining of genuine liberty and community under just law? END

PS: SPLC Hate Tracker, screenshot Dec 25, 2355 hrs GMT — yes, this is real:

Let’s add no 8 on the list . . . Jesus:

PPS: The following clip from a Newsweek headline speaks saddening volumes:

Screenshot from Newsweek

. . . and, it is telling what Washington Post chose to push on Christmas Day:

Newsweek, we have some news: Christmas is not now and has never been an emblem of “White Nationalism.” Jesus the Messiah is central to the Christian faith, which happens to be at the heart of the history of a certain civilisation that as recently as the 1940’s, was described by Roosevelt and/or Churchill as Christian Civilisation, while defending it from Nazi assault. Even Santa Claus is a reference to a Christian Bishop in Asia Minor.

Washington Post, we also have a newsflash for you: the longstanding consensus of serious scholarship is that there was a Jesus who caused quite a stir in Palestine, c. the early part of the first century.  The “doesn’t add up” you used reflects ill-advised, dismissive selective hyperskepticism, not sound scholarship that could easily have been found if you cared about truth, responsibility and fairness.

Comments
JS, recall my previous comment?
Do you or do you not find yourself under a duty to truth, sound reason, fairness, justice? If no, then it’s over, your intelligence is just a nihilistic, amoral tool to con the sheeple. If so, you face grounding i/l/o the IS-OUGHT gap. If (as is most likely) you are indulging selective hyperskepticism, moral form, you are trying to bind others while reserving to yourself the out of ever escalating demands for moral warrant . . .
Your fatal term was the "all." Now, implicit in any contested argument is the premise that we have duties to truth, right and soundness in reasoning. On pain of twisting our intellectual powers into nihilistic weapons of cynical deception. In short X objects to Y, on the confident knowledge of in-common duties of intellectual, rational and epistemic virtue. The attempt to challenge ALL moral obligation would be self-referential and incoherent, undermining good faith reasoning itself. I would go so far as to say this duty of care to truth, right and sound reasoning is self-evident and is typically implicitly accepted. So, no, we cannot challenge ALL moral claims without undermining even the process of argument itself. No, we cannot dismiss general moral reasoning as suspect of being a blind appeal to authorities. No, mere consequences we happen to imagine (ever heard of the doctrine of unintended consequences?) or motives we think we read in the hearts of others (you are the same who seemingly views Christianity in general as though we are automatically suspect . . .)cannot ground such a broad-brush skepticism about moral reasoning. We are already at self-referential incoherence. Infinite regress comes out of the insisted on ALL and the inextricable entanglement of reasoning and moral duties as were outlined. Claim A is suspect so B must be advanced but implies another ought, so B requires C, and oops, we are on to infinity and absurdity. General hyperskepticism about the moral brings down the proud edifice of reason too by fatally undermining its own self. Selective hyperskepticism ends in inconsistency, exerting a double standard: stiff rules for thee, but not for me when such are not convenient to where I want to go. I fear, you have made a crooked yardstick into yopur standard of truth, responsibility, uprightness and accuracy in moral reasoning. What is genuinely straight, accurate and upright can never pass the rigged test of conformity to the crooked. And so those clinging to such an absurdity will be led to dismiss what is true and right BECAUSE it is true and right. As they won't fit in with crookedness. To break out of that Plato's Cave of shadow shows confused for reality, we need plumbline, naturally straight test cases. One of these, as I outlined, is the inextricable entanglement of reason and duty to truth, right and soundness of logic. In that light, we can then look at sound yardstick cases and clear the rubble of the modernist collapse of rationality and responsibility away. For example, it is self-evidently wrong, wicked, evil to kidnap, bind, torture, sexually violate and murder a young child for one's sick pleasure. (And, sadly, this is NOT a hypothetical case.) Probe this case and you will see that such a child hath neither strength nor eloquence to fight or plead for himself or herself. And yet, were we to chance on such a demonic act in progress we are duty bound to try to rescue or at least bawl for help. We are inescapably under moral government. Which implies that IS and OUGHT must be bridged in the root of reality, on pain of reducing moral government to grand delusion that takes down rationality itself in its collapse. And more, but there, we may start. In that context, there is absolutely no good reason to see that ethical theists and great teachers of the calibre of Jesus of Nazareth should be viewed with a jaundiced, cynically dismissive, hyperskeptical eye. Let me pause to highlight how Paul of Tarsus amplified Jesus' commentary on the neighbour-love principle:
Rom 2:14 When Gentiles, who do not have the Law [since it was given only to Jews], do [c]instinctively the things the Law requires [guided only by their conscience], they are a law to themselves, though they do not have the Law. 15 They show that the [d]essential requirements of the Law are written in their hearts; and their conscience [their sense of right and wrong, their moral choices] bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or perhaps defending them 16 on that day when, [e]as my gospel proclaims, God will judge the secrets [all the hidden thoughts and concealed sins] of men through Christ Jesus [Cf Rom 1:1 - 5 as to how Jesus' resurrection with 500+ witnesses demonstrates his status as Lord and Judge] . 13:8 [b]Owe nothing to anyone except to [c]love and seek the best for one another; for he who [unselfishly] loves his neighbor has fulfilled the [essence of the] law [relating to one’s fellowman]. 9 The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not covet,” and any other commandment are summed up in this statement: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor [it never hurts anyone]. Therefore [unselfish] love is the fulfillment of the Law. [AMP]
Mirror, mirror on the wall . . . KFkairosfocus
December 25, 2017
December
12
Dec
25
25
2017
10:03 AM
10
10
03
AM
PDT
KF
Do you see the self-referentiality, incoherence and infinite regress (as well as assumption that one is overwhelmingly likely to be simply emptily drawing on authorities) implied in this?
I would if there was self-referentiality, incoherence and infinite regress implied in what I said. Unless you can support this assertion with something other than a bald statement, I’m afraid that I will have to stand by my comment.
as well as assumption that one is overwhelmingly likely to be simply emptily drawing on authorities
My point was that this is the danger if we don’t question actions proposed by authorities, regardless of who the authority is. We should not blindly accept any actions proposed by authorities without examining the motives behind, and possible consequences of, these actions. I don’t care if theses proposals come from government, peers, social groups, media, individuals or churches.JSmith
December 25, 2017
December
12
Dec
25
25
2017
08:20 AM
8
08
20
AM
PDT
JS, Try this:
All the more reason to critically examine and question all actions purported to be based on moral grounds, regardless of the source (government, media, religion or social group)
Do you see the self-referentiality, incoherence and infinite regress (as well as assumption that one is overwhelmingly likely to be simply emptily drawing on authorities) implied in this? KFkairosfocus
December 25, 2017
December
12
Dec
25
25
2017
06:34 AM
6
06
34
AM
PDT
KF
JS, lesse. Do you or do you not find yourself under a duty to truth, sound reason, fairness, justice? If no,...
How do you get from my comment at 10 to your admonition at 11? I am agreeing with you that virtue-signalling and polarization can lead to violence. I have just pointed out the fact that this virtue-signalling and polarizing can come from any source, even one we have always trusted. In many respects. It is the virtue-signalling and polarization that comes from our most trusted sources that can be the most insidious as we are more likely to believe them.JSmith
December 24, 2017
December
12
Dec
24
24
2017
11:27 AM
11
11
27
AM
PDT
JS, lesse. Do you or do you not find yourself under a duty to truth, sound reason, fairness, justice? If no, then it's over, your intelligence is just a nihilistic, amoral tool to con the sheeple. If so, you face grounding i/l/o the IS-OUGHT gap. If (as is most likely) you are indulging selective hyperskepticism, moral form, you are trying to bind others while reserving to yourself the out of ever escalating demands for moral warrant. But whichever way it goes on this trilemma, your case has collapsed in self-referential incoherence. KFkairosfocus
December 24, 2017
December
12
Dec
24
24
2017
10:32 AM
10
10
32
AM
PDT
KF
JS, when we get a virtue-signalling political correctness and polarisation spiral it lends social permission to the fringes — some utterly unhinged, others just immature and angry beyond self-control — to act out, often with physical violence.
I agree. History is replete with examples or virtue-signalling that has led to violence by fringe (and not so fringe) groups. The Westboro Babtist church actions against homosexuals, the KKK actions against African Americans, the crusades and the 9/11 attacks are prime examples. All the more reason to critically examine and question all actions purported to be based on moral grounds, regardless of the source (government, media, religion or social group). This isn’t to say that you don’t take the proposed action, just that you don’t blindly accept it simply because of the source.JSmith
December 24, 2017
December
12
Dec
24
24
2017
08:28 AM
8
08
28
AM
PDT
F/N: Food for thought -- if Christmas is in material part a celebration and loving cherishing of children as hopes for the future, is that not then a mark of a culture of progress? And, in that light, how will a culture that is suicidally depressed and so fears the future predictably react to a celebration that highlights hope and joy? Especially, if that culture is carrying in its conscience the blood guilt of half a generation of its posterity slaughtered in the womb? KFkairosfocus
December 24, 2017
December
12
Dec
24
24
2017
01:24 AM
1
01
24
AM
PDT
JM, too often you are close to right, but in fact there is a major family and faith centred tradition that does not get headlines, not only in the USA but across the world. To the point where a provincial youth arm of the Chinese Communist party is attacking Christmas there -- China is rated as having the second fastest growing church in the world. Likewise, observe how Christmas comes out in say the Harry Potter books, pointing to the issue that Christmas is also a time for kids to be celebrated and cherished. Makes a lot of sense as a child embodies a world of hope, echoing the hopes of Divine breakthrough and rescue centred on the Christ child that are to be found in the opening chapters of Matthew and Luke. We do need to dial back the excessive commercialisation though it is also fair to recognise that for many retailers 50% of annual sales and the main profits come from the Christmas season. KFkairosfocus
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
03:07 PM
3
03
07
PM
PDT
KF, Nobody knows all the facts... and probably never will... The issue is that society has been manipulated by big corporations to put emphasis on material things rather than Godly... The only time Christ is mentioned during these holidays is when someone opens a present and expresses disappointment... Tell me it isn't so...J-Mac
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
02:46 PM
2
02
46
PM
PDT
JM, the issue was, this is a clear example of anti-Christian hate crime (where an under-reported and often ignored fact is that globally Christians are among the most persecuted of all groups), though thankfully this man only suffered fairly minor injuries. KFkairosfocus
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
02:24 PM
2
02
24
PM
PDT
Christmas has its dark side; the pressure do give because all Christmas advertising (pushed by the big commerce) associates the happy holidays with generous giving and not with what it is supposed to be; families getting together for marry making... So, due to that undue pressure, some people crack...no excuse to beat up an innocent man though...J-Mac
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
12:38 PM
12
12
38
PM
PDT
JS, when we get a virtue-signalling political correctness and polarisation spiral it lends social permission to the fringes -- some utterly unhinged, others just immature and angry beyond self-control -- to act out, often with physical violence. That is one of the reasons why agit prop operators try to set such spirals off and get them spinning out of control. It is also one of the reasons why such spirals need to be exposed and stopped before it is too late. Punch a scapegoat is already verging on terrorism and rioting; it is in fact entry level 4th gen war. All of this is part of why some serious rethinking and dialling back are needed now. Before things flash over into horrific chaos. Where, in this case, the Salvation Army, for coming on towards 200 years now, has been one of the foremost social outreach and rescue ministries of the Christian church. I here recall things like General Booth in darkest London, and when the Army went up against the slave-prostitute district in Tokyo, armed with the law that ruled what was being done to enmesh the girls was illegal, in a literal march into the jaws of hell. And, there is much more. That is what was lashed out against when a bell ringer was assaulted for the thought crime of greeting passersby, Merry Christmas. KFkairosfocus
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
12:16 PM
12
12
16
PM
PDT
This is obviously a viscious assault, and I don’t want to detract from that or all the great work that the Salvation Army does. But is it not possible that the person doing the assaulting has a serious mental health issue, or a serious anger management issue, and that anything could have provoked him?JSmith
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
10:22 AM
10
10
22
AM
PDT
Unfortunately that's inevitable at this point. We are approaching the end of this age of grace. No one knows when the curtains will shut, though.Dionisio
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
08:33 AM
8
08
33
AM
PDT
Saying Merry Christmas as invitation to "punch a scapegoat."kairosfocus
December 23, 2017
December
12
Dec
23
23
2017
02:52 AM
2
02
52
AM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply