The West, sinking steadily into oblivion, without even an audible cry of resistance
Randy writes:
The quote below is from a story in Stars and Stripes, the official newspaper of the U.S. armed forces, about the first gay wedding at a military chapel:
Coming out on base was much easier than Erwynn expected. Right after the repeal of DADT, his squadron held a farewell luncheon for him before he began a special duty assignment. In front of 40 of his fellow airmen, Erwynn announced that he wanted to thank a particular person for support and encouragement in helping him succeed. Everyone assumed he was referring to a colleague. Instead, he announced that this person was his partner and fiance, Will Behrens. Two beats of dead silence were followed by a standing ovation.
Why did they give him a STANDING ovation? We can talk about the failings of the Republican candidates, but the reality is that a traditionalist, conservative view of the world is dead in the U.S. and Europe. I don’t see any way it can be revived apart from a Christian revival. Europe has learned nothing from their experience of the last 90 years of nihilism. Michele Bachman was the only candidate who was consistently conservative, yet she was only able to get a few percentage points of the so-called conservative Republican party. There is no anger or concern that western Europe and the U.S. are being invaded and will be taken over by hostile non-Western peoples that will do everything in their power to tear down the existing order. In fact, that is the goal of the left as well. We are about to enter another Dark Age once the rotten structure finally collapses.
LA replies:
Dean Ericson’s comment in the Noël Coward post is relevant here as well:
I recently watched (on Netflix) In Which We Serve, a 1942 movie Coward wrote, directed, and starred in, about the sinking of a British ship and the loss of nearly all the crew. It did a beautiful job of portraying the best of the British character; courageous, forbearing, understated, and honorable. You wonder how a people so constituted could fall so far so fast.
- end of initial entry -
James P. writes:
Randy wonders why there was a standing ovation when the Air Force guy announced he was “marrying” another guy.
I have noticed that Americans are peculiarly prone to giving standing ovations to artistic performances that are no more than ordinary. I feel this degrades the standing ovation, which should be reserved for truly superior performances.
Furthermore, Americans are sheep when it comes to standing ovations—it only takes one person to stand and ultimately the entire audience will follow suit. It takes a strong person indeed to remain seated when everyone else is standing. Many years ago I attended an address at which Ronald Reagan spoke. For reasons I won’t go into, Sarah Brady also spoke. When she made her predictable plea for gun control, she got a standing ovation—but not from me, and I was probably the only person who did not rise.
Matthew H. writes:
The first sentence of the article says it all: “Coming out on base was much easier than Erwynn expected.”
Randy asks: “Why did they give him a STANDING ovation?”
Maybe it’s for the same reason Politburo members used to leap to their feet when Stalin spoke. They knew they’d damn well better. Granted, the old Communists could expect a bullet in the back of the head for dissenting, while the worst today’s military man faces is dishonorable discharge for “homophobia.” So let him go ahead and sit there while his comrades cheer on the sodomites. Let him then go home and explain to his little girl and his pregnant wife that daddy is getting kicked out of the Army. Let him tell them why his promising military career was cut short and why the family will now be going on food stamps. Let him explain to them how he will have to go out looking for a job in the worst economy in seventy years. With a dishonorable discharge. Let him then explain to potential employers why he got sacked.
Stand up and applaud the filthy perverts? Yes, sir!
But then, they didn’t even have to be told.
The United States of America, 2012.
Buck writes:
Matthew H. wrote:
Stand up and applaud the filthy perverts? Yes, sir!
But then, they didn’t even have to be told.
The United States of America, 2012.
Well said. However, I continue to advocate that we drop the “of America” after the United States. It’s oxymoronic, incongruous, counterintuitive, insulting, and no longer true.
LA replies:
How about the United States of Anti-America?
Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 21, 2012 11:53 AM | Send