Or, How I Learned to Love the Boss

This is a dashed-off list of the main 10 thoughts that led me to recognize the sweet, sentimental affection for freedom I have inside me, reach deep down in there, and start choking that bitch out.

  • Zippy Catholic, in particular his idea of the “unprincipled exception”: rules and ruling that do not proceed from the principle of liberty, but from something else, like “good”, or “just”. As well as being repeatedly confronted with the idea that I find it preferable to have a “free government” over a “good government”. That is just dumb.

 

  • Thinking about the Men’s Sphere complaint of the conservative formulation of familial headship–authority is responsibility but no command–is not true authority.

 

  • The interchangeability of the words: power, liberty, command, freedom, etc. We play subtle but corrosive games with these words. We think we understand each other, but I doubt it.

 

  • Taking stock of what few freedoms I actually have (in contrast to the things that are restricted from me), and how I’m mostly ok with that. My problem isn’t a lack of freedom. My problem is that I can’t count on my authorities to uphold me in justice when I make a good decision.

 

  • Martial Law. When things get bad, real bad, so bad that we have to resort to violence, we enact martial law. That is, we become overtly authoritarian. Obviously then we think that is the best, must-have form of government. And that means that everything else is half-ass measures. We’re playing shadow games here with liberalism.

 

  • The Kingdom of God. I must admit that the government the Lord chooses is the best, wisest, and most just kind of government.

 

  • Contemplating “Alt-Right”. As a lifelong member of GenX, Alt-Right is a gay term. It reminds me of Third Eye Blind’s “pierced queer teens in cyberspace”. I don’t want an alternative right. I want the good right. I want the just right. And I want a legitimate place in it, with authority over my own domain. I don’t want to be free to own a weapon. I want to be authorized–expected–to be armed.

 

  • Recognition that love for authority doesn’t mean all authorities are to be loved. Some kings need to be fought, abandoned, or killed…but they should be replaced with good ones.

 

  • Recognition that authoritarianism isn’t a synonym for, tyranny, despotism, etc. As well as recognition that authoritarianism doesn’t necessarily mean monarchy, inherited aristocracy, etc. (As well as some recalculations of whether those are good or bad, and how.) Authoritarianism just means liberties and responsibilities descend from authority, for real.

 

  • Respect is impossible to derive from freedom itself. If we’re all merely free to do or say this or that, then from whence can respect come? It’s just, like, your opinion, man. This is a big one.
Advertisements

26 thoughts on “Or, How I Learned to Love the Boss

  1. Your statement 6 about God’s Kingdom is the thought-line that got me a couple years ago. It started to unshackle me from my Americanism, basically thinking that our system of government is best. God’s ways are always best.

  2. Agree about respect. Everyone is an impolite asshole nowdays because “we’re all equal” so I have no reason to show respect or deference to anyone. “I do what I want” is the obvious mantra of a society enamored of freedom.

  3. > Martial Law. When things get bad, real bad, so bad that we have to resort to violence, we enact martial law. That is, we become overtly authoritarian. Obviously then we think that is the best, must-have form of government. And that means that everything else is half-ass measures.

    I’m not following this logic.

    Our acceptance of martial law doesn’t mean we consider overt authoritarianism the best government.

    Do you mean that we consider it the best government for emergencies and danger? Or that we consider it essential, the baseline of government?

  4. You lack the framework of Natural Law, so don’t see Lawful Authority v.s. tyranny. The founders knew it by its right names. Even MLKjr noted that unjust laws were not laws, quoting Aquinas.

    We can call it the Dark Ages, or laugh at the Medieval Discarded Image (Lewis), but they managed to get freedom, liberty, FREE WILL (required for love), sin and evil, law and crime, all to harmonize.

    We are all freer than we know, but freedom means choices and choices have consequences. Single-motherhood has fewer now, Defending Christianity has more. The early Christians often lost their lives. Today most are afraid of losing their Twitter account or cushy Job.

  5. You lack the framework of Natural Law, so don’t see Lawful Authority v.s. tyranny.

    I fail to see how anything he says implies this, except that you dislike the word authoritarian.

  6. The centurion who requested Christ heal his servant humbly noted that he was not worthy to have Christ enter his house, and understood that Christ need only give the command and his servant would be healed. The centurion understood this because he was both a man under authority and a man exercising authority. Christ’s healing of the servant was a demonstration of his authority, and he commended the centurion’s recognition of that authority as a demonstration of extraordinary faith. It would be well to note that the centurion also manifested an extremely high level of respect towards Christ as a result of recognizing His authority.

    Christ demands absolute obedience of His church, and does so based on precepts of law. He is authoritarian, and as we learn from John’s letters to the seven churches in Asia, He will cast out even His own if they rebel. Yet Christ Himself is no tyrant; He rules in perfect love, with perfect justice, tempered by perfect mercy. He is the model of all good husbands and all good kings. And He is absolutely, without apology or reproach, authoritarian.

    Our current failure to confront the false authoritarians in our own nation is a direct result of our national disposition to reject authority. The people of our nation have come to believe that rejection of authority is a virtue, and if movie reviews are to be believed irreverence is the highest goal of art. Yet the more we reject genuine and just authority, the more we become ensnared by false authorities who reject natural law and subject us to tyranny. If we reject one master we are not “free”; we simply embrace another master. We can be free from sin in service to Christ, or we can be alienated from Christ and serve sin. We can love God and serve Him or we can love mammon and serve it; but either way we will serve.

  7. I wonder how many Christian conservatives in America have ever pondered that their steadfast belief in individual liberty often puts them in alliance with pornographers and other sexual degenerates, who are champions of liberalism. I discovered the twitter feed today of Cooper Hefner, son of Hugh and the current CEO of Playboy. Found this tweet interesting:

    “As the US government steps away from leading our global community, foreign countries and agencies with great influence step in to promote agendas that often do not protect American interests. Agendas that are not rooted in the belief that individual freedom is a right for all.”

    It was life-changing when I realized that American political philosophy is not biblical. This is so difficult for people to understand because they are brought up in a culture that does not teach clearly the precepts of authority laid out in Scripture, but does an excellent job of teaching them the precepts of liberalism found in the writings of the American Enlightenment. People believe that legitimate government comes only from the consent of the governed — this is diametrically opposed to what the Bible says, which is that all authority is ordained by God and it is our duty as Christians to submit to the civil authorities. Christians in America read the Bible through the lens of John Locke instead of reading Locke through the lens of the Bible, because if they did the latter, they’d have to concede that Locke was wrong (seriously, have you ever read John Locke? The guy was a total loon). If just government only comes from the consent of the governed, that gives you and me a veto over God. That’s a serious inversion of the hierarchy, wouldn’t you say?

  8. And I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to say that this is how we’ve arrived at modern notions of marriage. If you can overthrow the civil authorities anytime they restrict your behavior to your dissatisfaction, why shouldn’t the same apply to wives?

  9. @ djz242013 says:
    March 23, 2018 at 2:17 pm

    “’I do what I want’ is the obvious mantra of a society enamored of freedom.”

    “I do what I want” is the obvious mantra of a society enamored of hedonism, not freedom. When Paul the Apostle wrote that “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free” (Gal 5:1), he did not mean that Christ died for us so that we could do whatever the hell we want.

  10. Right, freedom is really not freedom. And all circumsized men are going to hell.

    Good to see the Zippy virus spread.

  11. Should’ve put an “@Oscar.” ‘Fraid the easy pickin’s are the only ones low enough for me to reach. I’ll be quiet now, I promise.

  12. @ Elostirion says:
    March 27, 2018 at 10:03 pm

    “Right, freedom is really not freedom. And all circumsized men are going to hell.

    Good to see the Zippy virus spread.”

    I have no idea what any of that means.

  13. @ djz242013 says:
    March 27, 2018 at 12:09 pm

    “You are free to believe that.”

    Maybe you can enlighten me. When the Apostle Paul wrote that “it is for freedom that Christ has set us free”, did he mean that Christ died for us so we could do whatever we want?

  14. @Elostirion

    Gotcha. I assume all comments not specifically directed at another are comments on the post. My comment on sarcasm still applies, but I don’t hold you to your promise or your sarcasm against you. I want you men to comment even to disagree.

    @Scott

    This is basically the same stuff I struggle with when I reach down deep. I luv muh freedumbs!

    For me, what I realized is that :

    1) I was reacting in defense of things that weren’t truly at risk.
    2) I’m gonna do what I think is right, and not do what I think is wrong; free or not. If push came to shove and a friend of mine needed a body buried for reasons that I believe: I’m gonna do it. I don’t need the freedom if I have the good. It would have to be a pretty good reason.

    I thought about attributing Auster in the post, but in my life Zippy did all the work related to the concept. Even so: I’m glad you posted the link as I did not have it. Auster deserves his due.

    @Oscar

    I can’t speak for djz, but authoritarianism is no bar to hedonism. Hedonism is the pursuit of pleasure as the highest or only good and can take place within an authoritarian society. Think of rich women.

    “I do what I want” in fact is the obvious mantra of a society enamored freedom. The mantra of a society enamored with hedonism would be “I do only what pleasures me.” There are plenty of people who are enamored with freedom and yet regularly use it for displeasurable purposes. Think of working men.

  15. @ Cane

    “’I do what I want’ in fact is the obvious mantra of a society enamored freedom.”

    Okay, so then when the Apostle Paul wrote “it is for freedom that Christ has set us free”, did he mean that Christ died for us so we could do what we want?

  16. @Oscar

    Okay, so then when the Apostle Paul wrote “it is for freedom that Christ has set us free”, did he mean that Christ died for us so we could do what we want?

    No, that’s not what Paul meant. What is your point? (That’s not a sarcastic question.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s