2016 was an emotional roller coaster for myself and many others. it felt as thought the realm of politics had hit a fever pitch. I lost a few good friends, and gained so many more throughout this election cycle.
It seems incredible what the Alt-Right accomplished, in spite of infighting. Third parties have failed for decades. The Ron Paul Revolution came so close to seizing victory, but was shunned by a party leadership determined to lie and lose rather than give up their idols. The same was slated to happen to his son this year; the values of liberty would be discussed, but the scene would be flooded with opposing voices and the party would lose simply the retain the power structure. But, we made our voices clear that the same-old same-old was done for. The basic bitch conservatism that ignored culture, ignored factual reality, and did nothing but pander to select groups all while trespassing on every single one of their promises was no longer enough. No longer would we sit back and accept the Trotskyite neocon ways of viewing foreign policy and immigration.
Being conciliatory towards the left isn’t enough anymore; being nice because we’re “above them” isn’t enough. That was just the rambling of men who had no claws, as Nietzsche would say. The New Right has claws, and we used them.
Culture is making advancements as well. Alternative media is successful like never before. There’s still the outcry about jokes that are too offensive, or mean, or whatever, but so what? We stopped caring, and more and more people are following our example. Art and literature aren’t following the trend yet, but that’s okay. We had to save a hunt to focus on in 2017, after all. No sense overworking ourselves (except when we enjoy it)!
Here’s to trophy hunting next year; now with low taxes!
Midway through the Obama presidency was something called the “Charm Offensive”. The president went around the country, taking photos and meeting with celebrities. All sorts of public appearances followed from it.
I was young at the time and saw virtually no significance in it. After all, he’d already won his second term. What was the use in drawing up popular support? It turns out it was fairly useful politically. First off was the obvious fact celebrities appeared to be able to sway the opinions of their fans. It’s a reasonable assumption to make, people look up to successful and famous figures. But what was the use?
The election cycle we just experienced showcased it. Celebrities were used in propaganda style videos and advertisements in an attempt to sway the election! People of our stock aren’t easily swayed by Iron Man telling us who to vote for, but that isn’t true for swaths of the population.
Orrrr so we thought. Turns out actors are just that; actors. People don’t regard them as hugely credible, real, etc. There’s a more promising market for celebrity endorsements however, and Trump is tapping into it like his administration depends on it. The Elon Musk cabinet pick is fairly noteworthy. Trump recently met with leading technology innovators, telling them “You are the future”. Leading black celebrities are also common, Kanye perhaps being the most noteworthy.
Trump is tapping into creators of more intimately known aspects of our life. Music is something the singer (mostly) pours their heart and soul into. Technology invades every aspect of our lives, consulting those at its frontier resonates with us.
This strategy won’t see grand payoffs until 2020, when all the accumulated wealth, convenience, and eases of hardships will be on full display, but it’ll happen.
Is the Church in America hostile to millennials? Possibly. But probably not for the reason you think.
Nobody’s Listening to Us No one needs to listen to millennials. They are by far the most miseducated, stupid, frivolous, petty, and useless. This isn’t entirely their fault, but I’m not going blame their parents for the shift to discivic societies in the west. They’re complicit, and everyone knows it. Millenials want to make a difference, I won’t deny it. But where are the cries for virtue? Humility? Empathy? Love? We don’t have those; we have cries for tolerance; ironically the only virtue measured by the others millennials have thrown to the side. Millennials have total interest in top-down enforcement of their views and little to no interest in fostering change by example. That’s Anti-Christian. If you create a special version of morality that always puts you at the forefront of virtue devoid of criticism, then your interests simply don’t align with the church.
We’re Sick of Hearing About Values & Mission Statements Oh give me a break. Am I to believe every church is suited to the exact same task, or even the exact same multiplicity of tasks? No! Certain churches are better positioned by location, IQ, education, etc for certain tasks than others and to deny that is to spit on reality. We’re creative creatures and find different solutions to different problems that many of us aren’t even aware of. A church for the disabled is not equipped to develop irrigation systems in Africa. Deal with it.
“Helping the Poor Isn’t a Priority” This in particular is a disgusting lie. The author complains about how “Americanized” the church has become. America happens to donate rather absurd amounts of money to charity, often leading the world in that area as a matter of fact. Millennials care so much about the poor, now do they? Where are “Millennials Against the Welfare State”? “Millennials Against Authoritarianism”? “Millennials Against War”? Based on the last election we know they don’t exist.
We’re Tired of You Blaming the Culture Did she not just whine about Americanized churches? Our modern political dynamic stacks you with either an amalgamation of people attempting social reconstruction at the point of a gun or war-hungry wastrels, and the line between those two are often blurred. Our art is worthless, our stories boring and tired with not-so-subtle political messages. Our education system is a revolving door of worthless teachers paying dues to the same people their miseducated students pay their debts. Older generations have a habit of critiszing the new because our civilzation is in decline. If you’re not smart enough to assume you’re not impacted by the cultural rot of decades, you’re not thinking. You might regard yourself as heroic far beyond the average human being, but thanks to the aforementioned electoral map I have no reason to believe any such claim.
The “You Can’t Sit With Us” Affect
I will be kinder with this one. I agree that churches are cliquey, but that’s not because of the Church. People have natural (and I would argue good) in-group preferences. Cliques form naturally because people with common interests and talents attract each other. This fosters specialization, honing people’s skills for dealing with more specific problems and situations. It’s a good thing! Granted, people may feel like this is exclusionary, but if one desires to talk to people in a clique, why not explore their interests? You’re not going to find a terribly large number of religious Jews in church because their interests don’t align with the purpose of the institution. It’s similar with the cliques. I’d note this isn’t a justification for animosity between groups within the church, however.
Distrust & Misallocation of Resources
I don’t see this as a bad thing on its own, but given the author makes the claim that “Millennials, more than any other generation, don’t trust institutions”I’d invite the reader to re-examine the aforementioned electoral map. No, they most certainly do not distrust institutions. Quite the contrary, they worship them. The institution of college in particular is idolized, as I’ll explore more in the next paragraph. I’d note Churches being more efficient in the realm of finances would be lovely, and that community influence on those decisions (given that they fund them) would indeed be proper. A means of tracking these finances as the author proposes wouldn’t be such a bad thing in practice.
We Want to Be Mentored, Not Preached At
Yeah, this is a lie. All the craze nowadays is going to college to get a degree, any degree and on someone else’s dime. Professors do not hold your hand (try looking for compassion if you disagree with them politically). Lecturing is all they do! I’m absolutely in favor of church leaders and elder members setting the example and making a personal investment in the lives of the young. But this idea that the function of exploring some truth in the Bible, some fact or nuance relevant to current events, displaying the character of God, or better preparing church-goers to defend the faith is somehow worthless because millennials find it disinteresting is a travesty. This is the disgusting response of the stupid to the sacred, nothing more.
We Want to Feel Valued
The author complains here of feeling drained by the reliance on youth in ministry. I thought the church neglected ministry? Ah, but this was written by a millennial so I suppose consistency is just optional. Sad! “We desperately need the church to tell us we are enough, exactly the way we are. No conditions or expectations.” The problem with this it’s anti-Christian. You’re not enough! You’re flawed, corrupt. You don’t need a church that believes in you; you need a church and a God that molds you into something worth believing in. Your big crazy dreams are not the purpose of church. They’re not even the purpose of life, outside how they glorify your creator.
We Want You to Talk to Us About Controversial Issues (Because No One Is)
As long as they match with your preconceived notions of what’s acceptable, right? If they come to a different conclusion than you, then what? People talk about controversial issues all the time. The millennial response is playdough and safe-spaces. You don’t want the church to “talk” about controversy; you want the church to talk about your beliefs concerning controversy, and the moment they step out of line you’ll abandon them. The church is not your political platform, clear off if you don’t like it.
The Public Perception I thought there was nothing wrong with the culture? Seriously, I can’t help it at this point. The church is doing a great deal in our communities to better life. The church will appear to be a force for good when people who don’t believe any such thing stop intentionally spreading the lie that they are not, or better yet simply have no platform with which to do so unchallenged. It’s that simple.
Stop Talking About Us (Unless You’re Actually Going to Do Something) No, I don’t think we will. You will continue to be mocked, ridiculed, and criticized in the public arena until you stop acting like a spoiled mass of left wing zombies. We’ll continue watching your ever move and will critique it incessantly, because no matter what those who came before us will likely die before us; and many of them have no intention of letting you destroy what they built. If you insist on following in and even increasing the severity of their mistakes, you deserve to be criticized for the sake of those who will follow you.
You’re Failing to Adapt You’re failing to comply.
If you think yourself so god-like that you can warp the human consciousness to create some new sort of culture as opposed to the one forged in blood, sweat, and tears over 2,500 years to afford us the rights and duties we have today, go right ahead and try. You’ll fail, because you nor any other creature on this planet can do that. We have tradition because it sent us forward, that which did not already died out. We on the planet have the unique ability to disregard that which keeps us alive in both malice and mad idealism. You are no different and you will fail if you try to change that. You are here to serve the church: not the other way around.
The traditions of man and God run deep in our hearts and souls; they came long before you or I and will last beyond you and I.
There is nothing you can do to change that, and in that I find relief.
I haven’t done a great deal of study on Rothbard. Being young of age looking at a man who practically wrote more than one can read I’ve found his content daunting to say in the least. However ideas of language I find terribly intriguing and I’ve found one in a question on Rothbard’s legacy.
How did a man so brilliant and scholarly found a movement that so miserably failed in living up to his name and relative success?
I think I’ve found a relatively simple but potent explanation. Rothbard had an excellent means of convincing people to join in on the advancement of an idea. Rather than explain the jigsaw of views stemming from a single piece of an ideology that peopl would constantly be bothered about consistency and nuance and all the things that make philosophy ideology tiresome for people disdainful of them, Rothbard simply put forth the notion that this was, deep down, what they wanted. Want more money in your pocket? Here’s a system that permits it! Want people to foster individual virtue? Here’s a culture that encourages it! Don’t want people having total control over your life? You get the idea.
Rothbard tapped into people’s natural and cultural desires and curiosities, leaving them breadcrumbs to what he held sacred. What was the result?
The people who would become the torchbearers of his ideas were so enamored by the brilliant correlation Rothbard drew between his presentation and their desires that they mistook the totality of their desires for Rothbard’s philosophy.
His philosophy which they liked was replaced by what they simply liked, and ignored that of his which they did not. The moral of the story? The LP never breached 5%, complaining all the while that others were selfish in that they were not as selfish as the LP.
There is a warning in this; in mistaking the totality of the appeals of an ideology you like for the totality of the idea you shun success.
Is there truly such a thing as bad press? We’ve spent an election cycle watching the MSM flounder about with decreased trust from the public.
I’m going to be as straightforward as possible in saying this because it is a dynamic that will fuck us over if we do not understand it.
Donald Trump was able to trip up the media at every turn because he was familiar. Trump spent 50 years (longer than many in the media have even been alive) building up a brand. Everyone knew who he was. Trump was a household name for decades, his achievements in the workplace not unknown to the general populace.
Any lie told about Trump from the MSM wasn’t immediately consumed; it was immediately put under suspicion because the average American had a basis to believe otherwise. The entire hierarchy of media power over information was flipped like an upside-down pyramid. Every lie they told hurt them and helped Trump.
All of this, in addition to the rigorous work done by those in the alternative media creates a dynamic where no matter what the media says, they are met with distrust. This means Trump is free to say completely outrageous things without negative consequences; it gets him free media coverage and he has a private army to debunk the lies of an already delegitimized media.
Now, ask yourself before trying the bait and switch tactics with MSM; “Do I have what Trump has?”