TheGaggle
Politics • Culture • News
Our community is made up of those who value the freedom of speech, the right to debate and the promise of open, honest conversations.

We don't agree on everything but we never silence our followers and value every opinion on our channel.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
Is the New Moral Consensus Irreversible?

I am posting an article by a British journalist. The article makes some interesting points, but in the end I found it facile, superficial and unconvincing.

There is a type of conservative--I assume the author Ed West is a small "c" conservative--who always wants to throw in the towel and declare the other side victors before the fight has even started. That way you get the best of all words. You receive praise from conservatives because, well, you sound like a conservative. And of course you receive praise from liberals for paying due deference to the winning team. Invitations to TV studios naturally beckon. It was a genre of writing perfected by the late Peregrine Worsthorne.

The author's thesis, in so far as I understand it, is that there once existed a moral consensus that the 1960s shattered. After 50 or so years of social and moral revolution we have more or less settled on a moral consensus, with fierce moral guardians enforcing the new woke norms with the same puritanical zeal that their 1950s predecessors had once applied.

It's a clever conceit, worthy of the late Peregrine Worsthorne. In fact, I am sure Worsthorne had written stuff like this himself over the years. However, I am not sure we have really reached a moral consensus, the enforcement of which will be all that straightforward. You could argue it the other way: It was during the 1960s that a consensus of sorts was forged. Back then, the guardians of society decided that it was silly to ban James Joyce and D.H. Lawrence and the movie "Clockwork Orange." The guardians decided that it was silly to outlaw homosexuality and abortion, that it was absurd to expect nice girls not to have sex before they got married and that it was reprehensible to be a racist. The public wasn't happy about it, but eventually accepted the new moral order.

What's happening today though is beyond what anyone could have imagined to be reasonable back then. Did anyone back then think that we would be forced to accept gay marriage as normal? Did anyone think that everyone would be free to decide what gender he or she is and would have the right to force others to accept it? Did anyone think that it would be reprehensible to object to late-term abortions? Did anyone think that taking down statues of anyone from the past with retrograde views would be acceptable? Did anyone think that children would be taught that whiteness is a debilitating condition? Maybe the guardians of the old pre-1960s order thought so, but their concerns were of course dismissed without too much effort.

So is everything settled now? Is there a new consensus? Are the views of AOC and the knee-taking English footballers the new normal? Maybe so. Countries such as Spain or Ireland, from whom you might have expected resistance to the new mores, are now among the wokest countries in the world. On the other hand, there is pushback against all of this in--of all places--France. No footballers other than those of England and Belgium have taken the knee. There is serious pushback from Russia. There is pushback also from Hungary and Poland--but they are small countries and will probably succumb once serious pressure is applied against them.

There is a wild card though: geopolitics. Within the next few years it will become increasingly apparent that the West is failing to keep up with China, that China is racing ahead in one field after another. China's social, economic and, above all, moral model is very different from that of the West. Will this cause a change in attitude in the West? Will the West suddenly decide: "Hey, maybe white men aren't so bad after all, maybe tearing down the past isn't the best way to build a future, maybe changing genders isn't the best way of ensuring population growth, maybe preoccupying yourself with rectifying past injustices is not the most effective way of reviving manufacturing industry?" I don't know.

What West fails to appreciate that the new moral consensus is one that appeals to very few people. Ultimately, a consensus can only take hold if more people benefit than lose from it.

https://unherd.com/2021/07/the-wests-cultural-revolution-is-over/

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
TG 2141: Is Trump Embracing The EU View Of The War In Ukraine?

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss the new dominant consensus, according to which not only is Ukraine winning the war against Russia, but President Trump has concluded that Ukraine is winning the war and has agreed to escalate the war.

02:03:45
TG 2140: Europe Careening Towards World War III

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle sat down for a conversation with Dmitry Polyanskyi, permanent representative of the Russian Federation to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna, and discussed the likelihood of another world war breaking out on the European continent.

00:31:02
Live Chat
Monday Night At The Movies: "Grand Prix" (1966)

Join Gagglers for "Grand Prix"!
The screening starts at 3 p.m. ET sharp.
Share all of your thoughts, comments and criticisms on the Live Chat.

See you at 3 p.m. ET

02:55:57
Monday Night At The Movies

Please choose which one of the following 8 movies you would like to have screened next Monday, June 22.

To mark the World Cup, the theme, is "football and international sporting events."

Please continue to vote in this poll after June 22, so that we can determine the runner-up. The runner-up will be screened on June 29.

Catch my presentation that will be aired tomorrow night on the Promethean Action show!
I will make an appearance Saturday, June 27, 6:00 pm, where I will promote my new book, The Right to Pursue Happiness.
The ZOOM link is below.
Buy the book on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0H63P77XB/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0
HERE IS THE PROMETHEAN ACTION PROMO:
Saturday Class—June 27—6pm et/3pm pt
Judy Hodgkiss and Tony Papert

Prepare to Challenge Everything you Thought you Knew about America's Founding Ideals

ZOOM INFO:
Zoom link
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_gtbh2cPoQHiIjIVulcFYjg

Passcode: 202145

Or Telephone:
(for higher quality, dial a number based closest to your current location):

+1 646 558 8656, New York
+1 301 715 8592, Maryland
+1 312 626 6799, Illinois
+1 720 707 2699, Colorado
+1 346-248-7799, Texas
+1 253 215 8782, Washington

Webinar ID:
Webinar ID: 751 4991 6989
Passcode: 202145

President Trump has declared the year 2026 to be an entire year dedicated to celebrating the 250th birthday of the United ...

19 hours ago

Roland Bartetzko
·
Following
Logistics in Ukraine (2022–present)41m
How far is Ukraine from being without manpower?

Although Ukraine is in its fifth year of war, most combat units still have a strength of more than 50 percent.

Compare that to Bosnia where my brigade was down to 30 percent after only three years.

As for non-combat units, which make up more than half of the army, there has never been a lack of personnel.

Of course, Ukraine needs more soldiers, but this is pretty normal in such a situation. Even the Russians have problems finding enough men without upsetting the population too much.
A recruit from an assault regiment that we support. (Picture: all rights by the author of this post)

I see more of a problem when it comes to the quality of the new recruits. Honestly, most of them would never have been allowed to serve in peacetime. A lot of them have health issues, are alcoholics, are not very bright, and are completely unmotivated. Desertion rates are climbing.

The ...

January 21, 2023
More Leftie Than Thou
"Jacobin" Magazine Celebrates A Strike Against Ol' Blue Eyes

Here at "The Gaggle" we have very little time for the "more Leftie than thou" school of thought--that's the approach to life according to which the only thing that matters is whether you take the right position on every issue under the sun from Abortion to Zelensky. No one in the world meets the exacting standards of this school of thought; any Leftie leader anywhere is always selling out to the bankers and the capitalists. The perfect exemplar of this is the unreadable Jacobin magazine. 

The other day I came across this article from 2021. It's a celebration of trade union power. And not simply trade union power, but the use of trade union power to secure political goals. Of course (and this is always the case with the "more Leftie than thou" crowd), this glorious, never-to-be-forgotten moment on the history of organized labor took place many years ago--in the summer of 1974 to be exact. Yes, almost half a century has gone by since that thrilling moment when the working-class movement of Australia mobilized and prepared to seize the means of production, distribution and exchange. 

Well, not quite. Organized labor went into action against...Ol' Blue Eyes, the Chairman of the Board, the Voice; yes, Frank Sinatra. Why? What had Sinatra done? Sinatra was certainly very rich, and he owned a variety of properties and businesses. But if the Australian trade union movement were, understandably, searching for the bright, incandescent spark that would finally awaken the working class from its slumber there were surely richer, greedier, more dishonest, more decadent, above all more Australian individuals it could have discovered. Australia was never short of them. Rupert Murdoch immediately springs to mind. Why Sinatra?

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals