Sometimes, though (and with increasing frequency--I am getting older after all!) I can't help myself. On facebook I recently passed along Heartiste's characteristically acerbic post on Wendy Davis and the decadence and decay of the Western world she so aptly illustrates. In so doing, I garnered censure from, among others, my own sweet mother, who wrote:
Do you really respect a writer who lowers himself to using that kind of vulgar name-calling to try and make his point? Sounds like a mad junior high kid without much of a vocabulary.That junior high kids the country over would die to have a tenth of his experience in the field and that his vocabulary is quite expansive aside, this is hardly an uncommon reaction among the (proportionately shrinking) good, polite, instinctively traditionalist middle-American silent majority to the tact Heartiste takes. Yet on no point of substance does she disagree with him.
With that bit of context, my response to her:
Cultural Marxism's march through the institutions has been going on more-or-less unabated for half a century now, to the extent that nearly all of the major institutions of civil life in the West--major media, big business, the political classes, academia, popular culture, mainline religious denominations, etc (conveniently described in short-hand as the Establishment or the Cathedral)--are primarily run by people with self-described progressive views. These views are at odds with the time-tested, traditional social mores of most of the country's long-settled populations. Even with control of all these megaphones, the sort of irreverent vulgarity displayed by Heartiste is still far more characteristic of the Cathedral's votaries than it is of the traditional and mostly polite mainstream traditionalists who they so viscerally despise.Extending that martial metaphor a little further, it's a mentality--one of a spy behind enemy lines!--I've increasingly come to adopt. Fight the Cathedral and its forces wherever you are able to and in whatever capacity you're able to do so.
How has that civil approach worked out for us over the last several decades? I'd say not very well. Sometimes it is necessary to fight fire with fire--or, in the case of someone with an adroit command of the written word like that displayed by Heartiste, fire with greek fire. As ribald as his delivery may be, the collateral damage done by a societal acceptance--and, as Davis illustrates, even glorification--of single parenthood is orders of magnitude more destructive to the social fiber (not to mention financial viability) of the country than a colorful rearguard attempt to stigmatize such damaging behavior is.
Those who state the obvious and/or things that would have hardly been controversial--let alone considered beyond the pale--just a generation ago are now at serious risk of having their careers ruined and their lives destroyed. The situation is bad. The middle class is hollowing out at a staggering rate and the incorrigible--if grimly predictable--effects of demographic changes across so much of the Western world are only accentuating that.
Speaking figuratively, I don't think there is anyway we win the cultural war at this point, but I'm confident that our chances are more dismal still if we continue to fight it asymmetrically, absorbing all sorts of insulting hyperbole and slanderous ad hominem attacks while quixotically--if nobly--refusing to repay in kind. They have the more favorable terrain and nearly all of the big guns and yet they're far more willing to employ terrorist tactics than we, the desperately besieged, are.
They are increasingly aware of the Dark Enlightenment. A person hardly takes note of an ant, even if the creature has hostile intent, because it's innocuous and thus can be safely ignored. A snake or a scorpion, however, spells trouble and, accordingly, gets harshly dealt with.