|
|
Post by kj on Jun 9, 2022 7:44:05 GMT
An interesting critical piece by the National Party on David Quinn's recent remarks re immigration and religion. It cannot be said enough that mainstream Irish conservatism is a blight on the body politic. In trying to appeal to the centre ground and appear pitiably respectable, the Quinns of this world have tried to out-liberal the liberals. Unlike in the United States of America, where conservative ideologues have been dragged kicking and screaming to the right, Irish conservatives remain stuck in the mud and begging for occasional scraps from the high table of the dominant globalised worldview. But they will go hungry, as without access to political capital they remain beggars and paupers in a political system which thinks of them as relics and anthropological oddities of a bygone age.
Conservatism and the Religion of the Future
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Jun 9, 2022 9:42:11 GMT
An interesting critical piece by the National Party on David Quinn's recent remarks re immigration and religion. It cannot be said enough that mainstream Irish conservatism is a blight on the body politic. In trying to appeal to the centre ground and appear pitiably respectable, the Quinns of this world have tried to out-liberal the liberals. Unlike in the United States of America, where conservative ideologues have been dragged kicking and screaming to the right, Irish conservatives remain stuck in the mud and begging for occasional scraps from the high table of the dominant globalised worldview. But they will go hungry, as without access to political capital they remain beggars and paupers in a political system which thinks of them as relics and anthropological oddities of a bygone age.
Conservatism and the Religion of the Future
"Similar to his counterpart in England, Peter Hitchens, Quinn has thrown in the towel and acknowledged that new demographic realities are a permanent and irreversible fixture of Irish society." And I think they are both right to do so. Ireland is now de facto multi-ethnic and multicultural. But there are many different ways of responding to that and I don't think they are all require plunging into banal rainbow "diversity". I think we should aim for "salad-bowl multiculturalism" instead of "melting-pot multiculturalism". I kind of agree with the author in that I think it's a lazy assumption that immigrants will necessarily hold onto their religious adherence when they come here. Anyway, "ethnic" religiosity always seems to turn sour, as we see in Ireland and other "culturally" Catholic countries. Personally I think David Quinn is a hero, someone who has thrown himself into the fight time after time. It's not his fault he's fighting a losing battle. |
|
|
|
Post by kj on Jun 9, 2022 11:14:55 GMT
Oh I agree. It was just a piece that I thought was interesting.
The historical clock rarely reverses, so the reality of a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious Ireland is a fact and that's that. There isn't any turning back to some pre-90s, Dev, or Medieval Ireland no matter how hard some people may wish for that.
I see why Quinn may hope for the religious effect of immigration, but in England most immigrants are very religious in comparison to the natives and fill the churches and mosques but that doesn't seem to have the slightest effect on the body politic or popular culture as a whole, which is overwhelmingly materialist and consumerist. Plus I assume most religious people also want their share of the material pie, so the either/or choice that certain religious commentators pose between religion and secular society may simply be false or a desired figment of their imagination.
|
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Jun 9, 2022 11:18:39 GMT
An interesting critical piece by the National Party on David Quinn's recent remarks re immigration and religion. It cannot be said enough that mainstream Irish conservatism is a blight on the body politic. In trying to appeal to the centre ground and appear pitiably respectable, the Quinns of this world have tried to out-liberal the liberals. Unlike in the United States of America, where conservative ideologues have been dragged kicking and screaming to the right, Irish conservatives remain stuck in the mud and begging for occasional scraps from the high table of the dominant globalised worldview. But they will go hungry, as without access to political capital they remain beggars and paupers in a political system which thinks of them as relics and anthropological oddities of a bygone age.
Conservatism and the Religion of the Future
"Similar to his counterpart in England, Peter Hitchens, Quinn has thrown in the towel and acknowledged that new demographic realities are a permanent and irreversible fixture of Irish society." And I think they are both right to do so. Ireland is now de facto multi-ethnic and multicultural. But there are many different ways of responding to that and I don't think they are all require plunging into banal rainbow "diversity". I think we should aim for "salad-bowl multiculturalism" instead of "melting-pot multiculturalism". I kind of agree with the author in that I think it's a lazy assumption that immigrants will necessarily hold onto their religious adherence when they come here. Anyway, "ethnic" religiosity always seems to turn sour, as we see in Ireland and other "culturally" Catholic countries. Personally I think David Quinn is a hero, someone who has thrown himself into the fight time after time. It's not his fault he's fighting a losing battle. I don't think any type of multiculturalism works. It might even be argued that multiculturalism is an oxymoron - you don't really have 'a culture' if you have a multiplicity of competing cultures. I get the fact that liberal Ireland is forging ahead with immigration and is changing Ireland and we have to face the reality as it is. But it is okay to say that it is both wrong and will end up dysfunctional and try to stop it, although I am the first to admit that it is nearly impossible to do so as the reins of power are almost entirely with the Globalist establishment. |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Jun 9, 2022 11:27:26 GMT
"Similar to his counterpart in England, Peter Hitchens, Quinn has thrown in the towel and acknowledged that new demographic realities are a permanent and irreversible fixture of Irish society." And I think they are both right to do so. Ireland is now de facto multi-ethnic and multicultural. But there are many different ways of responding to that and I don't think they are all require plunging into banal rainbow "diversity". I think we should aim for "salad-bowl multiculturalism" instead of "melting-pot multiculturalism". I kind of agree with the author in that I think it's a lazy assumption that immigrants will necessarily hold onto their religious adherence when they come here. Anyway, "ethnic" religiosity always seems to turn sour, as we see in Ireland and other "culturally" Catholic countries. Personally I think David Quinn is a hero, someone who has thrown himself into the fight time after time. It's not his fault he's fighting a losing battle. I don't think any type of multiculturalism works. It might even be argued that multiculturalism is an oxymoron - you don't really have 'a culture' if you have a multiplicity of competing cultures. I get the fact that liberal Ireland is forging ahead with immigration and is changing Ireland and we have to face the reality as it is. But it is okay to say that it is both wrong and will end up dysfunctional and try to stop it, although I am the first to admit that it is nearly impossible to do so as the reins of power are almost entirely with the Globalist establishment. I'm not a big fan of multiculturalism but it arguably works in America. And indeed the UK. I suppose it depends on what you count as success. It's easy to talk about race riots and so on, but most people seem to get on with each other pretty well on a daily basis in those countries. |
|
|
|
Post by kj on Jun 9, 2022 11:32:51 GMT
I'm not a big fan of multiculturalism but it arguably works in America. And indeed the UK. I suppose it depends on what you count as success. It's easy to talk about race riots and so on, but most people seem to get on with each other pretty well on a daily basis in those countries. Exactly. It may not be interesting, spiritual, aesthetic or whatever but on a banal level it functions. There's also the fact that if you want to be a devout Christian, Muslim, Jew or whatever, you can as long as you respect the limits between fellow citizens. There's nothing stopping you. |
|
|
|
Post by kj on Jun 9, 2022 14:40:07 GMT
Just to add that I am playing Devil's Avocado (as a friend puts it) a little bit in my last comment above, but it ties into a bigger question: how much should your religion dominate the general culture? Clearly there are plenty of online Catholics who dream of a sort of Reconquista of the public sphere, as seen in some recent yak about Integralism, but realistically this seems utterly unlikely to me (putting it politely).
|
|
|
|
Post by hilary on Jun 9, 2022 15:06:38 GMT
I'm not a big fan of multiculturalism but it arguably works in America. And indeed the UK. I suppose it depends on what you count as success. It's easy to talk about race riots and so on, but most people seem to get on with each other pretty well on a daily basis in those countries. Exactly. It may not be interesting, spiritual, aesthetic or whatever but on a banal level it functions. There's also the fact that if you want to be a devout Christian, Muslim, Jew or whatever, you can as long as you respect the limits between fellow citizens. There's nothing stopping you. Well that's not exactly true. I think there could be problems reconciling the status of women in Ireland with how marriage is seen in Islam. In Ireland our Constitution still has its roots in Christianity and men and women are treated with equal dignity because of that. Emma Webb of Civitas and New Culture Forum has done research in this area and it's very interesting. I don't know to what extent this has cropped up in Ireland yet - maybe there are Sharia courts here? Would we know if there were? civitas.org.uk/publications/fallen-through-the-cracks/Parts of mainland Europe have big problems with immigration - no-go areas for women etc. It would be naive to think that couldn't happen here. I enjoyed some of the Iona Institute talks and appreciate their efforts with the various referenda but was a bit shocked at David Quinn falling in with the Covid narrative in the Times and Breda O'Brien too in the Irish Times. |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Jun 9, 2022 15:13:47 GMT
Just to add that I am playing Devil's Avocado (as a friend puts it) a little bit in my last comment above, but it ties into a bigger question: how much should your religion dominate the general culture? Clearly there are plenty of online Catholics who dream of a sort of Reconquista of the public sphere, as seen in some recent yak about Integralism, but realistically this seems utterly unlikely to me (putting it politely). It seems both unlikely and unappealing to me, to be even more honest. How much merit does religious belief have if it just comes from social or cultural conformity, anyway? I know there was much hoo-ha about the Pope saying that God wills religious diversity. But surely religious diversity is the natural outcome of people honestly seeking religious truth. In that sense, I understand the statement. I do get nostalgic for Catholic Ireland, but how much of that Catholicism was a tribal badge, or even worse, a way of defining ourselves against the British? Certainly I would like a public sphere where there was more respect for religion in general. I don't really get nostalgic for Christendom, because it just seems like the all-too-familiar lust for power. So many factions and ideologies are intent at gaining power, why should Christians be one of them? I once had a Catholic integrist-- an intelligent guy, an academic-- tell me "I believe in religious freedom, but only for Catholics". He wasn't joking, either. (I'm not talking about things like Catholic holidays being public holidays, or the Angelus being broadcast on RTE, or anything like that. None of that ever upset anyone but blowhards.) |
|
|
|
Post by hilary on Jun 9, 2022 15:37:38 GMT
Would this be integralism?
1738 Freedom is exercised in relationships between human beings. Every human person, created in the image of God, has the natural right to be recognized as a free and responsible being. All owe to each other this duty of respect. The right to the exercise of freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person. This right must be recognized and protected by civil authority within the limits of the common good and public order.
1912 The common good is always oriented towards the progress of persons: "The order of things must be subordinate to the order of persons, and not the other way around." This order is founded on truth, built up in justice, and animated by love.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Maybe we need to be faced with the challenges of hosting people of other religions while preserving the way of life and freedoms we are used to, to appreciate the benefits of Catholicism and defend it.
|
|
|
|
Post by kj on Jun 9, 2022 15:56:48 GMT
How much merit does religious belief have if it just comes from social or cultural conformity, anyway? I know there was much hoo-ha about the Pope saying that God wills religious diversity. But surely religious diversity is the natural outcome of people honestly seeking religious truth. In that sense, I understand the statement. I do get nostalgic for Catholic Ireland, but how much of that Catholicism was a tribal badge, or even worse, a way of defining ourselves against the British? Certainly I would like a public sphere where there was more respect for religion in general. I don't really get nostalgic for Christendom, because it just seems like the all-too-familiar lust for power. So many factions and ideologies are intent at gaining power, why should Christians be one of them? It's very complicated. I certainly wouldn't say that someone who was genuinely sincere in their belief in 1930s Ireland was somehow less "authentic" than a person who defies the cultural tides of 2021 and goes to Mass, but I've occasionally thought myself that in many ways the current climate should almost be one that Christians welcome as it will in many ways test their faith. But of course that in itself can lead to extremism, as we see some reactionaries go racist, anti-other religions and so on. So I really don't know. As for Christendom, as I always say when you look at any period in detail the purported unity of Christian nations was fragile at best. My favourite example is 16th century France - "beloved daughter of the Church" and all that - at one point forging an alliance with the Ottomans to fight the Habsburgs and the Pope, and allowing them to take over Nice and use the cathedral there as a giant stable!!!:-) |
|
|
|
Post by kj on Jun 9, 2022 16:33:17 GMT
Coincidentally, I just came across this interesting article. "To be not conformed to this age is not to succumb to nostalgia, nor to the golden-age rhetoric of social traditionalism. Rather, it is to recognize that transformative power of Christian life to create a body that transcends our understanding of flesh." Bad Traditionalism |
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Jun 13, 2022 11:30:17 GMT
Coincidentally, I just came across this interesting article. "To be not conformed to this age is not to succumb to nostalgia, nor to the golden-age rhetoric of social traditionalism. Rather, it is to recognize that transformative power of Christian life to create a body that transcends our understanding of flesh." Bad TraditionalismI quickly read the article. The lady is sincere and makes a few good points but I inwardly groan a little as I see how she displays and portrays her journey, because in some ways it will be near impossible to roll back many of the assumptions that seem to be part of her make up. In short she seems to be looking for a completely satisfying and fulfilling spirituality without taking into account that she is dealing with the whole plethora of people and humanity in all its failings. If I understood the article she was into queerness, new age, Tinder, partying and witchcraft and came back to some of these people for comfort after her relationship fell apart. I feel that the lady will never achieve contentment as she will always find imperfection amongst adherents and render this imperfection reason enough to dismiss a religion or ideology. Here is a quote: "But there is a danger, too, in fetishizing its opposite: a nostalgia that mistakes the Medieval era, or postwar America, for the New Jerusalem. We find it in Michael Brendan Dougherty’s nationalist-cum-Christian memoir My Father Left Me Ireland. We find it in Rod Dreher’s increasingly Orbánist vision of a Benedict-Option-as-integralist-autonomous-zone, in which we take refuge from culture warfare. We find it in the vocal support of Bishop Robert Barron for masculinist self-help guru Jordan Peterson, who preaches a gospel of fleshly predestinarianism."
There are quite a lot I would disagree with in that passage alone which would make me tend to doubt her assumptions and conclusions. I think for example that Dreher's Benedict option is not first and foremost a nostalgia for a forgotten golden era of Christianity but more a survival strategy for Christianity in an ever increasingly hostile secular world. I would have also thought that Jordan Peterson was, at least at the level of the individual, a strong advocate of personal responsibility, championing the idea that you can change your life for the better and that nothing is predestined. |
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Jun 13, 2022 12:30:19 GMT
I don't think any type of multiculturalism works. It might even be argued that multiculturalism is an oxymoron - you don't really have 'a culture' if you have a multiplicity of competing cultures. I get the fact that liberal Ireland is forging ahead with immigration and is changing Ireland and we have to face the reality as it is. But it is okay to say that it is both wrong and will end up dysfunctional and try to stop it, although I am the first to admit that it is nearly impossible to do so as the reins of power are almost entirely with the Globalist establishment. I'm not a big fan of multiculturalism but it arguably works in America. And indeed the UK. I suppose it depends on what you count as success. It's easy to talk about race riots and so on, but most people seem to get on with each other pretty well on a daily basis in those countries. I tend to differentiate between the new world and old world. The chances of multiculturalism working in America are higher because it was, in our collective memories, a relatively recently established political entity or country comprising the mainly incoming British people, quickly followed on by German, Irish and Italian amongst others. So it is more malleable, at least in theory because it was so big a land mass and the native American tribes were not a unified set of people. The British on the other hand, again in the collective memory, perceive themselves as having an established ethos and people, having built up a substantive history and tradition over many generations. The great pity and irony about America is that those who claim to be most in favour of multiculturalism, the Democrats, are the ones who have deliberately weaponised racism and immigration to further their own party and ideological ambitions, and have caused further division which may ultimately lead to the breakdown of America. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbuck on Jun 26, 2022 18:57:01 GMT
How much merit does religious belief have if it just comes from social or cultural conformity, anyway? I know there was much hoo-ha about the Pope saying that God wills religious diversity. But surely religious diversity is the natural outcome of people honestly seeking religious truth. In that sense, I understand the statement. I do get nostalgic for Catholic Ireland, but how much of that Catholicism was a tribal badge, or even worse, a way of defining ourselves against the British? Certainly I would like a public sphere where there was more respect for religion in general. I don't really get nostalgic for Christendom, because it just seems like the all-too-familiar lust for power. So many factions and ideologies are intent at gaining power, why should Christians be one of them? It's very complicated. I certainly wouldn't say that someone who was genuinely sincere in their belief in 1930s Ireland was somehow less "authentic" than a person who defies the cultural tides of 2021 and goes to Mass, but I've occasionally thought myself that in many ways the current climate should almost be one that Christians welcome as it will in many ways test their faith. But of course that in itself can lead to extremism, as we see some reactionaries go racist, anti-other religions and so on. So I really don't know. As for Christendom, as I always say when you look at any period in detail the purported unity of Christian nations was fragile at best. My favourite example is 16th century France - "beloved daughter of the Church" and all that - at one point forging an alliance with the Ottomans to fight the Habsburgs and the Pope, and allowing them to take over Nice and use the cathedral there as a giant stable!!!:-) Well, as someone is about to put out a perhaps five hour video (!!) on Christendom (and how, despite all odds, the unlikely course of my life over the last 25 years led me to embrace this) I unsurprisingly have some variances with the above. Because I'm still slaving away round the clock on this 5 hour monster—I call it Frankenstein's monster—I can't take time to document my variances. I will just say I note feelings/arguments like "tribal badge", "factions and ideologies are intent at gaining power", "fragile at best" — and certainly I understand them. But the last 25 years have led me elsewhere, which will be evident to the, I know, very, very few people who will watch my five hour video in its entirety. Warmly and weirdly yours, Roger Frankenstein |
|
