Stephen Roney's Blog, page 60

Father Knows Best

 

A reading in a current textbook laments that fewer Britons than forty years ago want to become secondary school teachers. By a lot: college grads entertaining the thought of teaching has dropped from over 60% to 17%. I keep seeing ads in my feed urging qualified Canadian teachers to come teach in London or in Scotland. 

\The piece goes on to say that one common reason given is the impossibility of maintaining discipline in classes, compared to forty years ago. And I hear this same lament from my friends in the US. And in China.

So the next question has to be, what has changed, and changed in all these countries? Why are students more rebellious, less disciplined, than in the past? Or, how have these systems of education changed so that they can no longer effectively discipline?

My Chinese student, not bound by North American shibboleths, has an immediate insight: one reason is that so many teachers are now women.

“In the old days,” he explains, “students saw the teacher as a second father.”

And then I got it. There is an obvious and immediate difference in tone between calling someone a “second father” and a “second mother.” Seeing a teacher as a “second mother” is not going to help with discipline.

We must accept what we have been perversely denying for generations: the role of father and mother is different. The mother sees to your physical needs, that you are scrubbed and fed. The father sees to your spiritual needs, to your education, especially your education in values. To discipline.

This is not a role arbitrarily assigned by society. It is built in to the male and female soul, just as we plainly see females are physically designed to nurture the young. As little Maryanne once remarked, “Men are not mammals. They can’t feed their young with milk.”

Why would it not be? How could it not be? Maternal instinct is real. So is paternal instinct. And so are filial instincts.

Here’s an interesting example of the difference between the male and female mind: men are far better at reading maps and giving directions. This is the paternal and the teacherly role: reading the map and giving directions. Women, left to their own devices, get lost. They must ask directions of others.

I used to do this experiment with my classes; and the result was the same whatever culture or country I was in, or wherever the students came from. I would first ask all of the women in class to point north. They invariably had no idea. It was random. Then I would ask the men. Most of them could. 

QED. It is the same in spiritual matters. Men have a better sense of direction, and so are better guides.

So we are abandoning our children, denying them an education, if we give them female teachers in high school. We are letting them down with female teachers in grade school, for that matter. It stands to reason that, not getting any guidance at school, they become disenchanted with the enterprise. It also stands to reason that, not having any natural talent for the task, schools dominated by women go off the rails.

Come to think of it, this is a more serious problem than the schools. We have denied the value of fathers in the family as well, undercut their authority, encouraged family breakups, and left children rudderless. We have denied the value of men in society generally, and tried to dismantle “the patriarchy.” Not going to end well. We have, in recent decades, put women in leadership roles in all parts of society. Note the recent congressional hearing, in which the presidents of MIT, Harvard, and UPenn all spoke. And they were all women. And they had all so lost their way that they did not consider a call for genocide of a student’s entire race a case of bullying.

If women lack, at least in comparison to men, an internal compass and sense of direction and proportion, this is a sure prescription for causing all structures to begin to swerve unpredictably and wander off in odd directions.

And is that not what we have been seeing?

It is the wisdom of the ages. In the New Testament, Jesus’s ancestry is traced back through many generations to David. But this ancestry is traced back on both sides, through Mary and Joseph; even though Joseph is not Jesus’s biological father.

This is because the true inheritance on the father’s side is spiritual, not physical. The important line on the male side is the teachings and the values handed down from David; compare the apostolic succession.

Have you ever noticed, as I have, that when there is a mixed marriage, the children identify primarily with the father’s faith, and the father’s ethnicity? This is the actual distinction, in Canada, between Indian and Metis, and was enshrined in the Indian Act: father Indian, mother European, child Indian. Father European, mother Indian, child European. Or, only on the Prairies, because the father is ethnically and religiously distinct from the European majority, Metis. Metis culture is simply French-Canadian culture.

In mixed marriages when the father defers to the mother’s religion or ethnicity in the education of the children, as is often required in Catholic-Protestant marriages—the children simply grow up without a sound grounding in values or sense of their identity. 

We have been ignoring these male-female differences at our peril—or rather, to the peril of our children.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Bottom of the Ticket

 

Jefferson's rather famous running mate

The latest US polls give Trump a lead nationally over Biden; and a bigger lead in electoral votes.

Picture how the world might look in two years, if we have Poilievre in 24 Sussex, and Trump in the White House. 

One concern is that Trump will necessarily be a one-term president. The VP pick matters more than usual; we need to think in terms of a reliable successor.

Some are saying Tucker Carlson. I don’t think so. Carlson is needed where he is, and there is no reason to suppose he has the managerial chops. And it would be a crime to silence him for four years, which is what the vice presidency requires.

Ron DeSantis would be ideal. And Trump is not one to bear a grudge. I would not be surprised, and would be delighted, if he were chosen.

Some say Kristi Noem, the South Dakota governor. I think her resume is too thin for prime time.

Nikki Haley is impressive, but not compatible with Trump on foreign policy.

Some like Kari Lake’s charisma. But being a losing gubernatorial candidate is not enough to look credible in the Oval Office.

Tim Scott has the opposite problem. He looks credible, but lacks charisma.

Chris Christie would have been plausible, had he not made being anti-Trump his political persona.

Vivek Ramaswamy is too much like Trump to offer balance to the ticket—or needed expertise to the administration.

Rudy Giuliani or Newt Gingrich would have been perfect—were it not for their age. We need somebody young to balance Trump’s chronological challenges.

Rand Paul or Ted Cruz are too ideologically distinctive to fit comfortably into the role.

Nobody takes Marco Rubio seriously anymore. Chris Christie took him out eight years ago.

John Kennedy would be great; but for his age.

Trey Gowdy would be great, but I fear he’s done with politics.

How about Ben Shapiro? He comes from outside of electoral politics, making him clean; but he is surely up on the issues. His remarkable success with the Daily Wire seems to prove his management ability. He is a brilliant debater, and being the president’s point man is a big part of the job. His level-headedness and religious commitment feels as though it would give Trump needed gravitas, a kind of anchor. In terms of electoral strategy, he might tip the Jewish voting block away from the Democrats and to the Republicans. And he could reassure religious voters generally.

While we’re on the subject of running mates, I think RFK Jr. should do everything he can to get Tulsi Gabbard to join his ticket. She too is an independent now; she too is anti-war. They seem to align well ideologically. And they seem to radiate the same sincerity.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Advent Music

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Real World of Colonialism

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Real World of Discrimination

 

A typical caricature of the "eternal Jew." Always thinking, God forbid.

The image of Harvard’s black female president refusing to condemn calls for the genocide of Jews—and yet, everyone expects, able to retain her job, despite revelations that she plagiarized parts of her doctoral thesis-- is a neat visual representation of an important truth. Although we falsely conflate them, discrimination against Jews and discrimination against blacks (or women) are fundamentally opposite phenomena.

One never or rarely hears of anyone ever calling for the extermination of blacks or women. If anyone did, the outcry against them would be monumental. If there are occasional claims that someone somewhere once did, if traced back, they turn out to be false claims. The same could be said for aboriginals. If anyone ever called for their extermination, they would be hated more than Simon Legree. (And nobody apparently ever said “the only good Indian is a dead Indian.” That was a slander used against US General Sheridan precisely because it would destroy his reputation if believed.)

But one hears often of calls or sees actual attempts to wipe out Jews. Also, men, Irish, and East Asians. This is not just so in recent “woke” times, either. This is a historical constant.

Society as a whole readily sees fit to give blacks, or women, or aboriginals, special advantages: scholarships, affirmative action programs, easier sentencing in court, extra government benefits.

Society never considers giving Jews, men, Irish, or East Asians any such special advantages. The suggestion would be met with scorn or rage.

These two lists are not exhaustive; but "minority" groups always fall into one or the other decisively: the Jewish side, or the black side.

Antisemitism is fuelled by envy and malice: Jews are hated because they seem superior to the rest of us. So too, if to a lesser extent, men, East Asians, or the Irish. Discrimination “against” women, blacks, or indigenous people, in precise contrast, is almost always done out of good intentions, and is meant to be for their benefit. These groups are loved because they are looked down on as inferior. Nobody hates another for being less then they are; they hate for being better.

Not that this discrimination has ever been good for blacks or women or Indians. It is a deprivation of moral agency, and fosters passivity. People do not thrive as pets. But it also prompts them to complain the loudest about discrimination. Once one ha become accustomed to special treatment, one feels a deep injustice whenever it is not forthcoming. When, by contrast, one is accustomed to being discriminated against, one tends to learn to take it silently as one’s fate.

Opposite motives, opposite actions--and opposite results. The Jews manifestly do unusually well despite severe persecution; such as a widespread and systematic attempt to wipe every last one of them out within living memory. The Japanese have recovered from total defeat and Hiroshima within the same time period. The Irish have recovered from the holocaust of the Great Hunger a hundred and fifty years ago, civil war as recently as the 1990s, and are now the richest nation in Europe. Yet blacks are supposed to have never been able to recover from slavery a hundred and fifty years ago—a custodianship justified at the time as for their own benefit. Women cannot recover from a wolf whistle. And indigenous people have supposedly never recovered from the trauma of first contact.

We need to make the clear distinction between malicious persecution, and misguided charity.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Beautiful Losers

 

The poem “Invictus” is widely popular in Britain. Prince Harry took the title for his “Invictus Games.”

I find it Satanic. It expresses the attitude of the unrepentant narcissist. It is like the words that Milton puts in the mouth of Satan in Paradise Lost: “I would rather rule in Hell than serve in Heaven.”

Out of the night that covers me,
      Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
      For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
      I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
      My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
      Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
      Finds and shall find me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
      How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
      I am the captain of my soul.

This is someone choosing to go to Hell.

I get a whiff of the same brimstone from Rudyard Kipling. I defend him from the usual charges, of being intellectually trite and of being racist. I don’t believe he is. But I cannot warm to “If,” reputedly the single most popular poem in the UK. This does not, to me, speak well of the British character:

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
    To serve your turn long after they are gone,   
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
    Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’
… If you can fill the unforgiving minute
    With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,   
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,   
    And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!

This is too proud. This is the triumph of the will.

Rather, we are to be as little children. Rather, true courage is to surrender our will to God. Rather, there is a crack in everything.

For that is how the light gets in.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Notorious Sexual Predator Christmas Song

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

A New Hope

 

I am the eternal optimist. I keep expecting the pendulum to swing back to sense, as the world goes mad. As governments seem to act against the interests of their own people. As the churches empty, and we cannot even trust the Vatican anymore. As all the arts are moribund. As we can no longer trust the professions or to act honourably, or the media to tell the truth. As AI threatens to make us obsolete. As no one wants to have children or to raise them anymore. As our education system no longer passes on the culture. As civil society and the social contract, even our collective commitment to logic and reality break down. 

And yet… 

I do see growing signs of hope. The more so since the forces of disorder seem to have pushed matters too far. Camels’ backs cannot bear infinite weight.

The refusal of three university heads, of Harvard, MIT, and UPenn, a few days ago, to condemn calls for genocide, looks to me like an inflection point. First, this is a clear shift of the moral high ground away from academia and the left. They’re the Nazis, this makes plain, not the people they have been calling Nazis. Second, I see a demoralizing of the evil elite at the backlash; the presidents sounded rather condescending, looking down from their ivory tower. Now they will be hearing footsteps on the stairs. The UPenn president, at least, has no resigned. This in turn is a revelation to many on the sidelines that they have the collective power to resist. 

I think October 6, the barbarity of Hamas’s attack on Israel, and the loud support for it among Arab expatriate populations across the West, was an earlier inflection point. When Trump reminded us all that Arabs in New York celebrated on 9-11, people insisted he was lying. Now we see it again, and in numbers impossible to deny. There are differences between cultures beyond what they offer in their ethnic restaurants; there are deep-seated animosities and intolerances. Some cultural differences are important, and irreconcilable. This is a blow, in turn, for the leftist doctrine of multiculturalism.

Back in the 2019 election, I attended an all-candidates meeting in which the PPC candidate noted that one cause of the housing crisis was excessively high rates of immigration. And loud shouts demanded she be silenced and removed from the stage. But now, this observation is mainstream.

I remember when any non-left-wing views were simply never heard. We had only the mainstream media. Anyone who dissented thought they were alone. Then Rush Limbaugh appeared, and talk radio. Then Fox News. Now we have any number of sources on the Internet. Sure, big tech and government are trying to silence them, but they are fighting a growing deluge. We are now at the point of linking up into a distinct and well-rounded counterculture.

X in particular, has emerged under Musk as a pretty free speech platform. Breaking the illusion of any opposition being an “extremist minority.” Alex Jones has just been reinstated.

I expect X to suck all oxygen out of alternatives. Precisely because it allows more viewpoints, it will become the necessary forum for public discourse, the place everyone has to be. The media monopoly will be gone.

And the counterculture is broadening and deepening. Angel Studios and Daily Wire are constructing an alternative entertainment industry, and are getting traction.

The Bud Light boycott, another recent inflection point, is spreading to other traditional brands, now that the dissidents have realized their power. Corporations that get woke go broke. Every week now we seem to hear of another woke corporation taking an earnings hit. This will inevitably drain resources from the left over time.

There are also signs of religious revival: Pentecostal outbursts in Tennessee, proliferating eucharistic miracles. We have heard little from the “New Atheists” of late. Monotheism is in the intellectual ascendant; every week we seem to hear from another intellectual who has crossed the floor to faith. It no longer looks so cool to pseudo-intellectuals to be atheist. 

And, of course, some major woke governments have fallen, or are falling in the polls. Trudeau, Biden. A friend from New Zealand reports that their new government is well to the right. Argentina just went from Peronist to Libertarian. Italy elected “far right” Meloni, and Netherlands gave a plurality to “far right” Wilders. 

Someone recently suggested we are at an 1848 moment. 

I think it’s much bigger than that. Driven by technology, we are moving into a new phase of civilization. If things look calamitous for now, these may be birth pangs. No major chance comes easily, or without desperate resistance.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Dr Phil Has Had Enough

 

I think we may have witnessed another tipping point.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Come Again

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.