Thursday, June 24, 2021

It'll be fine.

The bloodlust in revolutionary civil wars stems from the apocalyptic nature of such contests, the attempt on each side to create a new society and cultural order, not merely a different political system, totally purged of antagonistic elements.

In these conflicts, the enemy is perceived not as an ordinary political rival, but as a kind of metaphysical incarnation of evil that must be eradicated before it infects, or imposes the same terror on, one's own side. 

A revolutionary civil war is not an ordinary political contest, but a conflict of ultimates about society, religion, and culture, perceived to demand a total and uncompromising solution.

5 comments:

  1. I disagree, it is just one side that attempts to create a new society.

    Moral equivalency rears its ugly head.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Do you really think social conservatives are happy with the current state of society and have no desire to change it?

    ReplyDelete
  3. By the way, the quote is from Stanley Payne's one-volume history of the Spanish Civil War.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Do you really think social conservatives are happy with the current state of society and have no desire to change it?

    They have no influence in the apparat and aren't playing Alinskyite games with anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  5. There's been *some* successful pushback at the local and state levels.

    More to the point, the above analysis is not one of moral equivalence. I'm quite aware of which side will give me the gulag treatment, and which won't.

    Rather, it's a recognition that the worldviews are incompatible, hardening and mutually-reinforcing.

    ReplyDelete

Be reasonably civil. Ire alloyed with reason is fine. But slagging the host gets you the banhammer.

Goodwill, and How to Lose It.

Gaming corporations are obviously profit-making entities.  But it happens a lot that those who come to control such corporations come to the...