October 2nd, 2012


Rendering Unto Caesar: Demonizing Humanism‏

For those who suspect that the Platonic Cave of Ignorance does not actually exist, I recommend reading this work by Matt Barber. He has a bee in his bonnet over humanism. His commentary makes the assertion that both Stalinist Communism and German National Socialism were manifestations of humanism. Nothing better matches the paradigm of the Cave than the redefinition of a word in order to deliberately mislead people. The misconception of Stalinist Communism (and the Maoist variety) as a form of humanism can be understood as the failure to study the phenomenon of Stalinism in depth. The same could not be said of the false portrayal of National Socialism as a form of humanism. That qualifies as willful ignorance and deliberate deceit.

It is interesting that Barber does not rely on humanists to define humanism. Instead he leans on Francis Schaeffer's definition of humanism. Schaeffer contends that humanists only obtain knowledge from humans. He fails to recognize the extensive studies that humanists make of the natural world. Like his understanding of Stalinism and Maoism, Barber's depth of knowledge of humanism is cavernously shallow.

Any form of racism is antithetical to humanism because it denies the humanity of its victim race. One of the reasons that German National Socialists detested Jewish people was for a humanistic attitude on the part of the latter that was considered poisonous to the pseudo-heroism of National Socialism. In other words, opposition to humanistic traits and tendencies of Jewish culture was more characteristic of German National Socialism than is humanism itself. If there is a theme today that resonates with the iron will of German pseudo-uebermenschhood it is Mr. Barber's zealous opposition to humanism. I would not be surprised if Barber harbors a passion to have all of the humanists rounded up to be incarcerated in forced labor camps.

Collapse )

Do you have a particularly harsh punishment in mind for those demonic, infidel, Maoist, Stalinist, Nazi humanists?

Links: American Humanists define humanism. Laurence Britt on humanist position w/r/t fascism. Francis Schaeffer on humanism.

Scott Brown / Elizabeth Warren debate in Massachusetts Bay Colony

Scott Brown had a Sarah Palin moment last night at the second debate for Massachusetts' senate seat. Debate moderator Dick Gregory asked Senator Brown who was his model Supreme Court Justice, the answer (after several seconds of silence) "Justice Scalia," was met with a big round of boos. Ms. Warren's reaction with laughter and a big smile was priceless. Quickly realizing he flubbed, Senator Brown scrambled to recover by giving a laundry list of justices he assumed the audience would approve including Justices Kennedy and Sotomayor. It brought back memories of Sarah Palin's answer when in 2008, when Katie Couric asked what newspapers or magazines she read, or when Glenn Beck asked her which "Founding Father" was her favorite: "all of them!"

[More behind here]

The context of this is important: currently President Obama is leading in Massachusetts by nearly 30 points, and polling suggests voters want the Democratic party to remain in control of the Senate. Nationally, the control of the Senate could hinge on who wins the Massachusetts senate seat. Senator Brown is running as a moderate Republican who is willing to work with the other party (a regurgitated form of "I'm a maverick!"), while Elizabeth Warren has been rather successful in tying Brown to the national Republican Party and Wall Street, and the implication voting for Scott Brown is giving the control of the Senate to the Republican party. Creating more gridlock in Washington. In another debate question that hit this point home, Senator Brown hesitated answering if he would vote for Mitch McConnell as Senate leader if the GOP did take control of the Senate. Senator McConnell is on public record as being an obstructionist and would do everything in his power to insure President Obama was not re-elected in 2012. While Senator Brown has criticized Republicans for being obstructionist, his own record, shows he voted with Republicans to obstruct legislation 30 votes out of 32 (in the period from his election to the Senate, and prior to Elizabeth Warren's entering the race). And many of his Republican colleagues who are supporting Scott Brown, tout the fact by electing him, it would ensure blocking the "Obama Agenda." And while current polling suggests Elizabeth Warren is leading by a razor-thin 2 - 4 points-- political observers in Massachusetts think if President Obama carries the state by 30 points, coat tails that long will guarantee a victory for Ms. Warren.

News Update: Pennsylvania's new voter I.D. law has been suspended for the November election.