On Progressive Toleration
There are people who are willing to tolerate progressive beliefs in others, provided those beliefs are kept within limits, for example, limited to the political realm, not shoved down the throats of customers seeking to play a game or read a story.
Such people do exist. They are naive.
Progressivism is a gnostic form of religion, that is, a transgressive parasite. It can only thrive by inverting the normal worldview, and transgressing the barriers and boundaries established by that worldview.
In other words, by its very nature, progressivism must transgress all norms. This includes the norm of not shoving your belief down my throat when not wanted.
They will never stop corrupting stories and games, because they will never stop overstepping any boundaries or limits or rules of logic.
The whole point of their philosophy, its heart and core, is a deep hypocrisy devoted to rebellion against reality itself.
To them, a chain of logic is a chain to be broken.
All bounds of morality to them are walls to tear down. Do you think the bounds of courtesy, of social convention, or of consumer goodwill with halt their rage and strange hunger? Not a chance.
Toleration is mutual and based on mutual respect. Toleration is strength. Progressivism is transgressive and based on contempt and hatred for the host on which it feeds and which it poisons. Progressivism is weakness.
The reason why neither Libertarianism, nor the underlying Classical Liberalism on which it is based, can co-exist with Progressivism is that Liberalism requires toleration of denominational differences, that is, heresies, without discrimination between them. Each man is to be allowed to worship God as he sees fit.
The problem is that some heresies, such as Albigensianism, preach the overthrow of civilized order, preach intolerance, preach psychopathy. One of the sure signs of psychopathy is sexual perversion.
For those of you not familiar with the term, the Albigensians, following a much older Gnostic tradition, were mediaeval dissidents who preached suicide was sacred while marriage was abominable, and that all human hierarchies, both church and state, were to be overthrown. All property was to be held in common. They were vegetarians. Their church was divided into a pure elite and an impure popular supporters allied to them. The allies could never be pure (as a white ally of Black Lives Matter can never be black), but they could take women as concubines, never as wives. Their violent plunder of Albi (from which they take their name) provoked the crusade that destroyed them.
If this seems familiar, it is because Marx and Gramsci (founder of Cultural Marxism), and Kimberle Crenshaw (founder of Critical Race Theory) follow the same tradition, adopt the same axioms, reach the same conclusions.
In Gnosticism throughout the ages, the same elements appear, of an elite of enlightened ones who reject the body as radically evil, reject organized religion, rejects marriage, admires suicide and sodomy, and practice communism. They are not infrequently vegetarian teetotalers. They are frequently sodomites and transvestites, sometimes practicing self-castration. They regard human reproduction as evil, and, long before Malthus, sought to curtail population growth.
The modern Woke movement includes Feminism and its scion Critical Gender Theory, which abominates marriage encourages sodomy and castrates children; Critical Race Theory, which rejects all social order and social norms as irredeemable; Environmentalism, which preaches austerity if not genocidal depopulation; and Utopianism, which preaches that man is god, ready to create Eden on earth, once all reprobate classes of mankind suffer mass-humiliation, mass-torture, mass-death.
But it all begins with Feminism, witches who hate femininity, hence hate beauty, manhood, wedlock, motherhood, and the Virgin Mary, but adore sodomites.
What makes sexual perversions perverse is that they disorder the passions and undermine the sanctity of the family. Without the family, society is undermined. Hence sexual perversion is always the harbinger and symptom of a society suffering sickness and decay.
If the society were to discriminate between denominations, for example, allowing Mormonism but outlawing Marxism, then the society in effect establishes a state religion. The Classical Liberal hope was that this could be done privately, by force of social custom, without using the coercion of the law.
The Classical Liberal experiment, set in motion with the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and the Bolshevik Revolution, has enjoyed a most remarkable success in the American case, and led to mass-murder and world war, guillotine and genocide, in the French and Bolshevik case. When the sickness spread to China, the Liberal experiment grew beyond genocide to mass-slaughter in such astronomical numbers that words fail.
The American experiment differed primarily because Puritans and Catholics and other religious nonconformists fleeing England wished primarily to establish communities beyond the reach of the Established Church of England. Others came later for economic freedom, a chance to make fortunes.
The sickness of the French Revolution, its atheism and communism, did not gain a foothold here until after World War Two; communism did not gain a foothold until after the Cold War. Liberalism proved stronger than McCarthyism (if we may understand that term rightly: it means patriotism, not witch-hunt). It became commonplace in the United States that to advocate communism, that is, to advocate for the forceful overthrow of the government, was protected by the First Amendment. Freedom mean being free to advocate for tyranny.
The Classical Liberal theory was, as in Laissez-faire capitalism where the more efficient servant of the consumer will prevails, in the free marketplace of ideas, the more truthful ideas would prevail against the false. Liberty debating tyranny would have a clear winner, and need no aid from the Caesar’s coercive power to silence opposition.
However, the Founding Fathers in America did not foresee, nor make any institutional provision for, crony capitalism, that is, the regulatory capture of the marketplace by fascist plutocrats, and likewise did not foresee the capture of the press and media by projection Mockingbird a la the Twitter Files, nor by an ESG conspiracy controlling ad revenue.
Under a crony capitalist control of the public debate, the truth is censored by the Deep State, with the active cooperation of Big Tech Giants and the Liberal-Media-Industrial Complex, and heresies intolerable to a free society flourish, while orthodoxy is suppressed, and its advocates arrested in midnight raids by FBI SWAT teams, sentenced to decades in prison.
Sodomy and Liberty cannot coexist. This is because sodomy is not a private behavior harmless to others. The sodomites will not stay behind bedroom doors, quietly pursue their vice as a hobby. By their very nature they must groom the next generation of children to replenish their numbers.
Their guilt-complex seeks to be assuaged by public honors. For sodomites to be granted the legal right of “civil unions” is insufficient: it is the imponderables, the sacrament, not the legal right, of marriage they demanded. As soon as that demand was met, transvestites and transsexuals and all manner of demonic clown-men, castrati, and lesbian witches with face-piercings, shaved heads, or blue hair made additional demands, including the demand that their flag of conquest be displayed in schoolrooms and courthouses, and their heraldic colors shined on skyscrapers and capitol buildings.
Their guilt complex will never rest. The unspoken social contract underpinning the Liberal Experiment is to make denominational differences private, and public worship voluntary and personal, rather than communal and compulsory. This is feasible only so long as all denominations agree on the shared dogma that denominal difference are tolerable.
But the foundational dogma of Albigensianism, Marxism, Cultural Marxism, and Wokethink is that the world is deplorable and must be destroyed.
Feminism preaches that the roles and differences of male and female must be destroyed, and children killed in the womb. Critical Gender Theory preaches that children must be sexually molested and genitally mutilated, and that men must love trans-men, and be sexually attracted to them. Marriage and Motherhood must be destroyed, which means society must be destroyed.
Marxism preaches that the marketplace must be destroyed, which means society must be destroyed.
Critical Race Theory preaches Antiwhitism, which means the West must be destroyed, which means society must be destroyed.
Environmentalism preaches austerity measures to decrease industrialization and energy use, to increase poverty, and induce mass-starvation, to enact and Great Reset to depopulate the planet. All must be destroyed.
Whether the customs and manners of the West are sufficient, without use of coercion, to reject these doctrines, destroy the colleges that nurse them, the newspapers that spread them, the bureaucrat-plutocrat alliance that benefits from them remains to be seen.
If not, the Classical Liberal Theory must be declared a failure, and theological laws must curtail the First Amendment, to forbid the spreading of communism, sodomy, atheism, feminism, antiwhiteness, in all its forms, just as it once, and one day soon again, forbad the spread of pornography.
Who or what could write and enforce theological laws without itself being corrupted is a delicate, and most likely, an insoluble problem.
That is the hellish world awaiting the American public if we do not rouse ourselves to act in private coalition, without force, by soapbox and ballot box, to reform Wokethink out of the public square, even in the same fashion as they are currently, and with devilish success, reforming Christ out of the public square.
About John C Wright
John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.
