Posted on 03/21/2004 9:08:15 AM PST by mrustow
That's a very condensed, "armchair" view of history. There's some truth in it, but a lot to object to. Had Christianity's religous passion really "peaked long before it arrived on the Continent?" That would have been news to generations of popes, clerics, theologians, reformers, and artists. Does a thousand years of Medieval religion count for nothing? By Stix's logic, America itself doesn't hold a candle to the Middle East of two millennia ago, so we can't be especially religious today.
Was Christianity really a "decadent, empty shell" by the mid-19th century? The situation might have looked that way to philosophers like Nietzsche, but for millions of the faithful it certainly wasn't the case. Even down to the mid-20th century, religion was quite strong, especially in Southern and Eastern Europe, but even in France and Germany.
Comparing European elites with ordinary Americans is an "apples and oranges" comparison. Ordinary Western Europeans today, do seem to be particularly irreligious, but that wasn't always the case; nor are American elites especially devout for something close to a century. The point of Nietzsche's judgement was that he saw through what many openly professed to the void he thought lay beneath, and his judgement on 21st century America wouldn't be so different from his condemnation of his own era of European History.
European Christianity certainly has been in decline and probably Europe itself, but Stix is too quick to assume that America is immune to Europe's problems. Contemporary political divisions do reflect deeper conflicts, but one can overstate the historical differences between Americans and Europeans.
This guy is right, England is NOT europe, but it's rapidly becoming european and those brave souls who cherish their British heritage will end up fleeing that valiant isle as more and more cowards break flood the country from their "european" brothers.
That is one wicked, tasteless pun -- and dead on!
Maybe I've missed it, but has any commentator/politician mentioned that Spain's new Prime Minister might as well send up the white flag to ETA and just let the Basques go for good?
I believe you're the first.
If ETA hasn't mailed a letter to Zapatero "Let us go or we'll blow up more Spaniards than Al-Quida did." the Basque separatists are too dumb to earn their freedom.
Sometime during the past year, a pundit noted that AQ had so raised the stakes that old-fashioned terrorist groups were keeping a low profile. (I don't remember the entire argument.) With the Spanish surrender, they will surely -- in Spain, at least -- be raising their profile.
With you, at any rate. For most readers, it merely depends on how germane the quote is.
If he wrote an uncondensed, 200,000 word, "general's" version, would you hang around to read and comment on it? Well, you make some valid points (re Medieval European Christianity) and some invalid ones:
Even down to the mid-20th century, religion was quite strong, especially in Southern and Eastern Europe, but even in France and Germany.
Not in France and Germany, it wasn't. Even I know that much.
European Christianity certainly has been in decline and probably Europe itself, but Stix is too quick to assume that America is immune to Europe's problems.
"Since FDR, unfortunately, we have been moving toward the Old World, as the American people have acquiesced to creeping socialism, centralization, absolutism and anti-scientific thinking....
Thus should Americans study Europe's triumphs ... and its decline. For if we are not careful, in the not-so-distant future, Europe's fate will be our own."
Doesn't sound like an assumption of American immunity to me.
Well, actually, I don't. I don't know of any high school juniors who write on this level, but maybe you went to a very special high school with, I don't know, Hunter Thompson, Tom Wolfe, and some other, similar juniors. But hey, it's your prerogative to find any excuse for not liking a writer. Pundits are a dime a dozen, and one does need some personal sorting mechanism. Yours, or so you say, is quoting from fiction. So, that would preclude your reading political essays by any author who quotes from Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, Homer, Sophocles or Goethe, for but a few examples.
I think it's a class thing. They elevate Europe, to make themselves feel sophisticated, and superior to the hoi polloi. Of course, they don't know spit about Europe, which makes it easier to romanticize it.
This guy is right, England is NOT europe, but it's rapidly becoming european and those brave souls who cherish their British heritage will end up fleeing that valiant isle as more and more cowards break flood the country from their "european" brothers.
I think the only hope for England -- as well as any number of other European countries, is to break with the EU.
He lost me right there. Perhaps a tour in LA is in order so that he can see the Mexican flags.
I thought he was being sarcastic.
Now, you're flip-flopping.
Further, you seem to equate the quality of the writing in this article with the writing of Hunter Thompson and Tom Wolfe.
I threw in Wolfe's name, due to his being from the same generation as Thompson. But I've read plenty of Thompson, albeit years ago. Do I equate the quality of the writing in this article with that of Thompson? Sure.
Not content with that, you then seem to equate an exchange in "A Few Good Men" with quotes from Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, Homer, Sophocles or Goethe.
I was simply applying your maxim or principle. You can't turn around and criticize me for simply following YOUR directive. Unless, that is, you have no maxim or principle, and were simply grasping at rhetorical straws.
That you can seriosuly make comparisons like that speaks volumes for you. WHISPERED HINT: It isn't flattering!
Yes, I'm sure you're right. I must stop taking people at their word.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.