Posted on 08/24/2017 2:20:00 PM PDT by oblomov
n 2002, I got it into my head that I wanted to attend what was then described as the “Old Latin Mass.” I had been reading in the dingy corners of the Internet, which is always dangerous, and these Latin Mass people seemed able to explain some of the gap between the grand ideas I was studying in a medieval-theology class at my college and the worship at most Catholic parishes, which, to me, seemed little different from the Lutheran services I’d seen as a teenager. One Sunday morning I got in my car, and life has never been the same.
For most of the people I met there, the Old Mass was the one quixotic cause to which they were attached. They knew that the local bishop didn’t like this movement, and that it placed them outside the mainstream not only of their culture but of their own Church. But they believed.
The price for their conviction was that they had to put up with the others – the people for whom the Latin Mass was just the first or the latest in a long line of disreputable fascinations and commitments. One of these folks told me that every bishop and cardinal and even the pope himself was homosexual. Another let on that she frequently wrote encouraging letters to certain Bourbon descendants. And honestly, it was the freaks and conspiracy theorists who seemed more kind and generous with their time, and who generally were less discriminating in everyday ways. They might be worried that Freemasons in the government were spying on them, but they really didn’t notice bourgeois morality or care about what you did for a living.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
I read the whole article, and still don’t know what the author’s point was.
I wonder why the author didn’t consider this: if a man can say he is a woman, isn’t that a “pipeline” to all other sorts of irrationalism and paranoia? If “whiteness” is intrinsically bad and unredeemable, isn’t THAT belief a pipeline to irrationalism, paranoia, and - perhaps - murder?
I don't think he's saying that the ideologies are similar, but that there's a kind of person who says "I am right and the rest of the world is wrong."
When they come across other ideas that the rest of the world disagrees with, they are attracted to those ideas and in time they can end up in some very strange places intellectually.
There's an attraction to extreme or marginal ideas, also a hostility towards the average sheeple who don't question or dissent or question established orthodoxies.
There are plenty of examples of people like that out there, but one problem is that there are also people out there who'd take Dougherty himself or me or even maybe you as examples of the same phenomenon. For some people, not so long ago, National Review was seen as lunatic fringe.
I still haven't figured out what any of this has to do with the Latin Mass, though.
Not remotely what the article does. Look into remedial reading.
It DOES equate the two. Reread the headline. Then ignore the Latin Mass mumbo jumbo. The rest is obvious. Libertarianism is fascism.
Libertarianism is the opposite of fascism.
Not remotely what the article does. Look into remedial reading.
It DOES equate the two. Reread the headline.
Even the headline proves you're wrong: if libertarianism and fascism are equated, then "The Libertarianism-to-Fascism Pipeline" is "The Libertarianism-to-Libertarianism Pipeline" (or "The Fascism-to-Fascism Pipeline") ... which makes no sense.
Look into remedial reading.
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.