From The Best Schools: Nonjudgmentalism is another name for desertion and cruelty

_{Denyse O'Leary

March 19, 2012

News, Off Topic}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

From Murray (Coming Apart) ,

Nonjudgmentalism is one of the more baffling features of the new-upper-class culture. The members of the new upper class are industrious to the point of obsession, but there are no derogatory labels for those who are not industrious. The young women of the new upper class hardly ever have babies out of wedlock, but it is impermissible to use a derogatory label for non-marital births. You will probably raise a few eyebrows even if you use a derogatory label for criminals. When you get down to it, it is not acceptable in the new upper class to use derogatory labels for anyone, with three exceptions: people with differing political views, fundamentalist Christians, and rural working-class whites. (p. 289-90)

So Belmonters do not wish to lead, even though the destructive effects of their failure to do so are all around them. Murray argues that the unwillingness of a privileged class to encourage constructive, productive lifestyles is a symptom of civilizational decline. He is probably right, and it might be instructive to look more closely at those three groups it is okay to attack and insult:

More.

Comments

Some quotes from that most perceptive of authors, G K Chesterton, which seem highly relevant to the issue of judgementalism and much else in our modern society, including Evolutionists: "Impartiality is a pompous name for indifference, which is an elegant name for ignorance." "The poor object to being governed badly, while the rich object to being governed at all." “It is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn itself into everything.” One for the peer-review fetishists: "I've searched all the parks in all the cities — and found no statues of Committees." “There are no rules of architecture for a castle in the clouds.” - Multiverse, anyone? “The main point of Christianity was this: that Nature is not our mother: Nature is our sister.” “Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” “When you break the big laws, you do not get liberty; you do not even get anarchy. You get the small laws.” Take a bow, the EU, UK and US. On the same theme: “If men will not be governed by the Ten Commandments, they shall be governed by the ten thousand commandments” “Once abolish the God and the government becomes the God.” That's enough for today, folks. But if you want more (I've only culled my selection from among those unfamiliar to me, from pages up to and including page 3: http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/27973.G_K_Chesterton?page=1Axel_{March 20, 2012
March
03
Mar
20
20
2012
10:29 AM
10
10
29
AM
PDT}

Arguably, the over-riding problem for modern putatively democratic societies, most notably under the "first past the post" system of government, is that all politicians, of both right and left, are essentially "power" people. The former historically using the First Commandment as a front, the latter, the Second. Not that benefits did not accrue for society from both, specifically during what the French term, Les Trente Glorieuses, the three decades following the end of World War II, when the benefits from both were operative (before the right-wing "backwoodsmen", whose insensate greed had led to the war, regained the ascendancy); better, after all that vice should pay tribute to virtue, than not. When Keir Hardie, a Scottish, Methodist lay-preacher founded the Labour Party, it was a pivotal opportunity for the institutional Christian church to initiate the establishment of moral, Christian societies throughout Europe and the world; but an opportunity that went begging. As a result, it wasn't very long at all before the Labour party was taken over by the unspeakably deranged secularists, even though they were not to exercise more than a fraction of their core beliefs (or rather, “un-beliefs”) until several decades later. It meant, in fact, that they, too, soon became pawns of our own security services and the CIA, and became equally servile myrmidons of the economic neoliberal twaddle that is a distillation of normal Conservative economics. So, now, we are on the cusp of the worst of all possible worlds (already extant in the US): economic conservatism with its ever more rampant marginalisation of the poor (involving massive fraud at the highest level), together with social liberalism (code for "sexual" licence). Wall-to-wall corporatism. The author of Godwin's Law was evidently a revisionist, but for the sake of the weak-minded, and in view of our not yet having a militia in the UK, I'll avoid using the “f” word. I don't believe that Murray, or the other right-wing writers and posters on UD - I speak as a totally convinced, though inevitably flawed, Christian - have grasped either the sense or the significance of Christ's words in his most incandescent Gospel diatribes, about the wont of the respectable, moneyed, religious establishment to punctiliously pay their tithes and observe all the minutiae of the Law, while maintaining a structural set-up in which they felt at liberty to pillage and oppress the poor with a clear conscience. In condemning their structural oppression of the poor, Christ used the metaphor of “straining out a gnat, only to swallow a camel.” Were they not so fearfully catastrophic, the attempts by the left-wing secularists to replace Christian care and concern for all (involving personal responsibility under an external moral order), would be risible beyond belief. The corporatist EU, ironically, is vying with our Labour Party for the title of national and transnational governances' most wicked imbeciles. Three words: “health and safety” (never mind that VD is at record levels among school-children. I never heard of any VD among school-children with VD until the last decade – last few years, actually). The fact is, as many saints and popes have pointed out, God made the world for all his children, not just those with the sharpest elbows (or the "clenched fist", as their economic violence is also expressed in the Old Testament). Our societies' economic underpinning needs to take account of the rights of the public at large, the least worldly and characteristically, more spiritual citizenry, and not view the country as simply coterminous with the "rentier" sector, the shareholding class, as has been the case for a long time now in the UK. The synergies would be extraordinary. So, there is a balance to be struck in making good the deficiencies of both right and left. (And quite incidentally, I can't for one moment imagine single mothers being paid too much by way of social security. I don't mean, in principle; I mean, in fact.)Axel_{March 20, 2012
March
03
Mar
20
20
2012
07:43 AM
7
07
43
AM
PDT}

It is all about conclusions. People and so segments of society simply have conclusions or judgements about others. Then they articulate them. Then others condemn or approve what is articulated. We all have different lists. Therefore the establishment or upper people simply have more power and presumption to be more aggressive in enforcing their list. Just take them on and everyone. There is no common law but only the rule of power at this point in history on these matters.,Robert Byers_{March 20, 2012
March
03
Mar
20
20
2012
12:31 AM
12
12
31
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply