Monday, November 23, 2015

When Righteous Wrath Goes Bad

“They burned their own corn to set fire to the church; they smashed their own tools to smash it; any stick was good enough to beat it with, though it were the last stick of their own dismembered furniture. We do not admire, we hardly excuse, the fanatic who wrecks this world for love of the other. But what are we to say of the fanatic who wrecks this world out of hatred of the other?
And yet the thing hangs in the heavens unhurt. Its opponents only succeed in destroying all that they themselves justly hold dear. They do not destroy orthodoxy; they only destroy political and common sense.” 
- G.K. Chesterton, Chapter VIII of “Orthodoxy”

Chesterton is speaking here about the lengths some people will go to in order to attack the belief system of the traditional church, specifically Catholicism. There are individuals who begin by attacking the church (“orthodoxy”) for the sake of liberty or justice or some other ideal, but who eventually end up denying justice and liberty in order to attack the church. Their obsessive hatred leads them to sacrifice even their own ideals in order that they might destroy the object of their wrath.

I’ve noticed a parallel with this recently, but the object of wrath in this instance was not the Roman Catholic Church. Rather it was political conservatism.

Over the last couple of weeks I’ve seen posts and pictures defending the “right” of Muslim women in western nations to wear Burkas (veils). In each case these were put forward by individuals who, as far as I can tell, were fairly left-leaning politically. Now, one should find this surprising. People of leftist persuasion usually champion themselves as defenders of women’s rights, against the “conservative” and “old-fashioned” values of traditional western culture. Women should be fully independent of any sort of patriarchal system that would put limits on their personal/sexual/reproductive freedom, they argue.

Yet, in spite of this, they defend a cultural practice that is linked to the extreme denigration of women. There is perhaps no major religious/cultural force in the world that holds women in contempt more than that of Islam. How in the world can these people defend a woman’s “right” to be treated as a shameful object, a mere piece of property? I’ll tell you how. Because it’s a way to further oppose the political conservatism they hold in utter contempt. For the last couple of years Stephen Harper (cue the theme song for the Galactic Empire) and other conservative leaders and intellectuals have openly opposed some of the cultural practices of Islam. They have attempted to take steps to limit some of these practices. And of course, they’ve met opposition from individuals who, if anyone other than an evil conservative had put forward these motions, would back them fully in the name of women’s rights and freedoms.

It seems they are willing to sacrifice even their most cherished ideals, if only they might continue to oppose the greatest threat they see to humanity – political conservatism. At this point one begins to wonder, do they have any positive vision to offer the world? Is there no place that the two can meet and agree? Has the debate devolved into “whatever they stand for, I stand for the opposite?”…“Multiculturalism and women’s rights have clashed into one another and been found incompatible, now what do we do? We see what “side” the enemy takes, then oppose them because they are bad and wrong all the time. That’s what we do.” That’s the easy way to feel like a crusader for justice without having to do the hard work of figuring out just what justice really is.

Of course, I’m not ragging on all lefties. I am more right-leaning myself, but many individuals of the opposite political persuasion are genuinely nice, well-meaning people (though I still hold that they are mistaken about some of their views). The people I am intending to beat on, however, are the loudmouths with oppositional defiance disorder. That type of attitude destroys rational debate and leads to the dumbing down of public discourse.

I guess the lesson is that one should be careful not to fall into the same trap! The wise man must remind himself daily that he is never, ever above any particular fault – especially one in which he is emotionally invested (perhaps emotionally compromised is a better phrase). Don’t let your righteous anger become an unrighteous prejudice.
  

No comments:

Post a Comment