The Heavenly and Hellish Legacy of Martin Luther King: Systemic Evil and the Cleansing of Memory

Personal Mortal Sin and Deep Evil

There is personal sin that is mortal, that kills the life of the soul, that breaks the relationship with God, that enslaves one in despair, sterility, futility, and isolation. But there is much worse: aggressive, contagious, pandemic evil; malice that cries to heaven for vengeance; that which we must flee with all that is in us; or if we are entangled, we must fight to the death, willing to spill blood, to be tortured and destroyed rather than submit or comply. I will call this: Deep Evil.

We get glimpses of this in Mordor, the Empire and its dark side, Hannibal Lecter, Keith Ledger's Joker and Kevin Spacey's Keyser Soze. We encounter it full-stop in Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, Idi Amin, serial rapists and pedophiles.

It is aggressive, imperialistic, contagious. At once natural, preternatural and supernatural, it is impervious to mere human agency: social action, education, therapy...all this is futile, even laughable and ridiculous in the face of hard, cold, deep evil. I used to tell our confirmation candidates that baptism brings you into the Kingdom of God; but confirmation empowers you to bring others in; makes you a soldier of Christ; compels you to confront, absorb, engage evil in its strongest forms; anoints you to defend, expand, advance the Kingdom of God. Similarly, in the Dark Empire, we distinguish personal baptism into sin and full anointing into expansive evil: the first draws you into hell, the second explodes hell into this world.

To be sure, personal sin is never private: it overflows necessarily to others. A porn habit may seem discrete and limited; but consider: the hours on the internet leaving one without rest and refreshment for work; the toll on the marriage; the way one looks at the waitress or store clerk; and the emasculation, shame and castration of one's own virility. But Deep Evil goes to another level: this is the pornographer recruiting and corrupting starlets, the pervert giving it to the young, the pimp enslaving and demeaning young girls. Case in point: the legacy of the Kennedy family is particularly vile, not because the virile men were unable to restrain their lust, but because the paterfamilias Joseph intentionally introduced his own sons to the life of lust. This passed over into Deep Evil: the tragic family and its perverse political party has been living out that legacy for the last half century and more.

Axis of Evil: Four Kingdoms of Systemic Sin

In my moral universe, four systems, kingdoms of evil stand out as incarnations of "hell on earth:"  the genocide of the Jews by the Nazis; enslavement of the Africans and the destruction of their families in our South; the communism of Stalin, Mao, Kim Jong-un, and Xi Jinping; and the sexual violation of the young and women by male predators as it has been systemically institutionalized in Cultural Liberalism.

The holocaust of the Jews was short-lived and over just prior to the birth of our boomer generation, but holds a supreme position in the history of evil: it targeted an entire population, women and children and innocents; and that group specifically because it has lived for millennia in intimacy with the true God and carries on earth His law and thought and longings. Our parents, the Great Generation, is "Great" in large part because they fought, died and defeated this Evil. Post-1945 every moral conscience will ever bow the head in dread, in horror, in sorrow for the inconceivable Shaol.

The slavery of Africans in distant in time: it ended with different bloody conflict in 1865 but survived in mitigated form until 1965. The destruction of systematic racism by the Civil Rights Movement was final, complete and utterly triumphant. It stands as perhaps the supreme, sublime achievement in 20th century USA. It is a credit to the moral integrity of a still-largely-Judaeo-Christian America (immediately before it collapsed into secular nihilism) and especially to the extraordinary, really supernatural,  spiritual resiliency, vigor, gentleness and fortitude of Christian Afro-Americans. However the horrific consequences, specifically upon the black family and the black man, survive and have been intensified by a trilogy of diabolic dynamics that exploded exactly at the time of the Civil Rights victory: the liberation of sex from fidelity and fecundity, the creation of a welfare culture of entitlement, and the emasculating mythology of perpetual black victimization, "Black Power" then and "Black Lives Matter" now.  This "victim narrative" is pernicious in many ways: it diminishes or denies the tremendous Christian vigor of Afro-Americans; it slanders the wholesome, welcoming racial awareness (with marginal exceptions) that swept our society in the 60s and afterwards; it castrates black men, stereotyping them as impotent victims overwhelmed by an oppressive society and in need of salvation by the Mother-State and liberal elites; it scapegoats and disparages the very ones, police...(yes we know there are bad actors...this is a fallen world!)... who risk their lives to protect us.

The systemic evil of communism flourishes today in China and North Korea. The abortion of the unborn especially femicide; the brutal repression of all religions; the utter suppression of human rights and liberties:  this is systemic, diabolic evil in pure form. The hope that a market economy in China would lead to other liberties has now been utterly discredited. We are clearly moving into the clear bi-polar world of liberty (however imperfect) versus slavery that defined the Cold War of 1945-1989. This conflict, like that with the Soviet Empire, is more than diplomatic-economic-military, it is Culture War but even more Spiritual Conflict. We will need prayer, praise, sacrifice, deliverance and holiness of life. We may need another John Paul II.

John Paul II's Combat with the Systems of Evil

In his youth, Karol Wojtyla combated Nazism intimately: he barely escaped death a number of times; he worked in the underground theater, waging culture war at the risk of his life; he studied to be a priest when all Polish priests were rounded into concentration camps and many killed. Even as a child in a Polish culture marred by antisemitism he affectionately befriended Jews. For most of his adult life he waged cultural/spiritual warfare with communism: quietly, covertly, heroically, intelligently, and victoriously. He had no connection with the slavery of Africans but himself suffered, as had his beloved Poland for centuries, a form of servitude to Germany and Russia. So, he shared a hunger for freedom and a disgust for oppression which gave him an empathy for the longings of the Afro-American and an admiration for their fierce, gentle spiritual resiliency. Throughout his pontificate, he waged another war: against with the Cultural Liberalism of the West. His Theology of the Body was already the definitive answer to the Sexual Revolution. He engaged the secular, decaying West...notably the Clinton abortion crusades at Cairo and Peking...in a pervasive, persevering defense of the holiness of sexuality and the sacredness of innocent life, born and unborn.

It is painful to contrast his pontificate with that of our current pope.  Pope Francis is himself certainly no Marxist or cultural liberal. But he is more than inept as a cultural warrior; he has been played by the dark forces as a naive quisling, a well-intended collaborator, an enabler. He abandoned the Chinese underground Church of martyrs and heroes them into the hands of  the vicious Communist Party. He has appeased liberal elites, implicitly renouncing John Paul's crusade for chastity and fidelity, in an effort to gain acceptance.  His politics is vague but he seems to lean towards Peronism, a soft fascism. He is transparent in his disdain for American capitalism and conservativism in contrast with his two predecessors who defined themselves against Nazism and Communism and therefore had a relatively positive, if critical (in regard to cultural liberalism), view of the USA. Any effort to reconcile his papacy as a continuity with his two predecessors self destructed in the catastrophic summer of 2018: destruction of the John Paul II Institute for the Family, death penalty change to catechism, the agreement with Communist China, and the entire McCarrick/Vigano debacle which hangs as a dark judgment over this pontificate.

Martin Luther King

For his incomparable leadership of the Civil Rights Movement, an outstanding Christian social movement, King has rightly been venerated for over 50 years. I can think of no one who rivals him in the reverence extended across races, religions, schools, media and all mainstream institutions. Yet, it became widely known after his death that he was a compulsive womanizer. Recent reports estimate that he had affairs with 40 women. This sad fact has been entirely avoided and implicitly denied across our culture. This is strange: the number one cause of the poverty of women and children, black or white, is infidelity, promiscuity and abandonment by the predatory male. King clearly fit this profile. He was granted the standard liberal dispensation enjoyed by the Kennedy's, Clinton and so many others: private life doesn't really effect public life. If ever there was a lie straight from hell, it is this! Marital fidelity is the bedrock basis for all social justice; promiscuity, infidelity and violation of women/children is social injustice and violence in its purest, most personal, intimate, systemic, diabolical form.

Things may be getting much worse for the memory of this undeniably great man. David Garrow, highly esteemed, liberal-leaning historian and Pulitzer-winning author of a biography of King has unearthed FBI memos alleging that he participated in an orgy where a woman was raped. The memo details that a drunken King laughed and encouraged another pastor in the act. It appears that there was a group that celebrated such orgies, even referring to the women victims as "parishioners." The actual FBI tapes are scheduled to be released in 2027 and at that time we should know with greater certainty what did and didn't happen. The tapes were part of J. Edgar Hoover's spying on Reverend King that originally concerned communist influence but became obsessed with his sex life. Skeptics suspect that the memos may be FBI fabrications to discredit King; but Garrow and others who have studied this fear that they are credible...heartbreakingly so!

It is charitable and prudent to withhold judgment: rash judgement, especially against such a treasured man, is itself serious sin. However, we may at least entertain the possibility that the allegations are true and what they would mean. They would mean that Reverend King had passed deeply into deep, systemic evil: the collaborative violation of women in their vulnerability. What will the Me Too Movement make of this? What of intersectionality? Would not a Womanist response be fiercely angry?

However, in the best case scenario, in which the memos are false, his history of infidelity and predatory aggression (albeit consensual) remains. Sexual sin is always grave as it involves human (eternal) life, the intimacy of the human heart and soul, and the iconic sacredness of the male/female body. Violation and abuse, intrinsic to adultery and fornication, are contagious and pernicious in the shame, trauma, guilt and grief they inflict on the victim. Adultery and fornication are already, even short of gang rape, well into systemic, deep evil!

Sins of our Fathers and the Cleansing of Memory

The Old Testament is largely a chronicle of the sins of the fathers, patriarchs, kings who triggered the Exile. It is a history of infidelity. To remember the sins of our fathers is to renounce them, to protect ourselves from repeating them. It is essential that we know and recall...with contrition, awe, and grief...the sins of our fathers. This is not to accept some vague collective guilt...as in white privilege and guilt. But it is to break the invisible spiritual/psychic bonds which chain us to an evil event of the past. Acts have consequences; the present is a result of the past; memory that is denied, avoided or repressed only increases its disastrous efficacy. If my father or grandfather was a gangster, an adulterer, a Nazi torturer...I need to know that. For starts, I need to pray for his soul, lest he be abandoned to purgatory (and not in hell) in isolation. But I need to know for myself, for my own  children and grandchildren, lest the spiritual legacy of evil be unconsciously handed on.

At this moment we are watching as rioters are destroying statues of iconic figures of our past, especially those associated with the Confederacy. I have myself sympathy with a
cleansing of our memory in that we consider the role such figures played in the practice and defense of slavery. Slavery in our South was such a deep, systemic and consequential evil that we should not honor those who actively advocated for it and defended it. Putting myself in the shoes of a descendant of slaves, I would be deeply offended. Orderly, legal removal of such statues and renaming of our military forts is part of the purification of memory that John Paul the Great taught us to practice. I personally have great respect for General Robert E. Lee. I inherited this from my great-aunt Agnes whose father was recruited (probably compelled right off the boat from Ireland) into the Southern Army and may have fought with Lee. But clearly his personal virtue does not allow that he be honored in the public arena since he defended slavery.

Conclusion

With Reverend King we again encounter Deep Evil in a most troubling form: a profoundly good man who is at the same time deeply evil. Very troubling! Just recently we faced this same mystery in Jean Vanier, an iconic and historic figure in the care of the disabled. Again in his case, we cannot dismiss his misbehavior as the dalliances (with consenting adult women) of a weak, flawed but good man. He took advance of younger women who came to him for guidance as a spiritual father; he practiced spiritual incest; and he rationalized it as itself a spiritual practice in an inconceivably perverse distortion. We have had Maciel and McCarrick and a litany of demonic/inspiring figures. This disturbing Mystery of such good and such evil co-inhabiting a person is beyond explanation.

We do well to pray for these men, for their souls.

We do well to pray for ourselves:  Deliver us from Evil!

On Father's Day: a Masculine Perspective on Black Lives Matter

When I hear "Black Lives Matter" I see A World Without Fathers: women (specifically the three founders) unprotected by men (Yes, women and children need protection by men from men who are since the fall lustful, dominating, violating!); women shrill, hysterical, suspicious of men, vulnerable, indignant; women raising boys to be themselves insecure in their virility, hysterical, paranoid of police, agitated and unrestrained; gangs of thugs, without mentoring, imitating a false machismo of violence and cruelty; other men, insecure and indecisive, alienated from their own virility and paternity, deferential to a feminism that is unfeminine; police who are far from perfect themselves but accept the fatherly role of protection, engage the violence of the black/white male underclass and then are themselves slandered as racist and evil; and a pervasive "woke" culture that despises virility and genuine paternity. On Father's Day I recall the prison chaplain who discovered that on Mother's Day all the prisoners (many black) wanted to write to Mom or mother-surrogate (often Grandma) but on Father's Day no one wanted to write. That is a "World without Fathers!"

Violence and Masculinity

"There are always idiots around, guys who just want to throw down; who want to fight; who want to beat someone up. It has nothing to do with skin color. We have all seen that." The three of us nodded in agreement. My namesake nephew was talking about the "systemic white racism" allegation. He is a tender husband and father, but also a man's man:  an outstanding athlete, he could pass for a navy seal and is comfortable and confident in a man's world. My other two nephews are much like him. They all grew up in comfortable suburbs, but have mixed well with other ethnic groups over the years. He was affirming what I have been saying nonstop: police work attracts violent, even sadistic and psychopathic, men in a way that has nothing to do with race. But the way he said it illuminated something else. Men are familiar, especially in adolescence and early adulthood, with aggression, violence and combat. We have all seen fist fights and sundry forms of violence, very little of it  related to race. Therefore, when we see violence, we see classic male-on-male combat, like the black-on-black kind that kills hundreds every day. Women do not have that experience: physical violence is  strange, horrific and unintelligible to them. They do not see the same thing as us. I have a woman friend who likes to say "all wars are fought over food." She has not the slightest understanding of the male world of aggression, violence, and combat.

The Gender War over Black Lives Matter

In my little world...(Aside: it is true that each of us lives in our own little world. However, we vocation and destiny is to expand and transcend such through study, travel, a broad range of friendships, an open heart and an inquisitive mind.)...there is a huge gender gap on this allegation of "systematic white racism." Perhaps 85% of my masculine family and friends reject the idea as false and toxic. Of the remaining, half would attend a protest or mount a BLM sign in their lawns; the other half try to straddle, valuing both blue and black lives, seeing truth on both sides, avoiding a hard, binary true/false decision. Of my women (mostly my family), only about 15% would agree with me. Of the remaining 85%, about half stand with BLM and the other half straddle, remaining open to the allegation without coming down clearly on either side.

Why this gender gap? It appears to me that the 15% of women are largely influenced by their husbands and their leaning into traditional values; while the 15% of men are affected by their wives as well as a pervasive "woke" feminism. It may be helpful to distinguish three dimensions to this gap: the contrasting masculine/feminine psyche; the suspicion of masculinity; and the diminished self-confidence of masculinity.

1.  The woman's psyche has more empathy, sensitivity and the impulse to comfort and nurture. It is more inclusive and welcoming. The man by contrast is able to detach and consider dispassionately. He has far more physical aggressiveness. He values distinctions, boundaries, rules, authority, tradition, accountability, strength, and competition. To simplify: the woman loves instinctively, the man seeks truth. Love without truth becomes sentimentality; truth without love is oppressive. Men like to argue intellectually: they value precision and clarity and enjoy the agonistic intensity of debate. And so, it is understandable that my women-folk, impulsively compassionate, welcoming and inclusive will sympathize with the suffering of the blacks and maintain an intellectual openness; but my men-folk will more soberly study the complexity of the tragedy.

2.  The suspicion of masculinity is the scourge of our society. It is understandable: we lack strong, gentle father figures. The critical mass of our men are thugs or wimps. Suspicion of men is the heart and soul of Black Lives Matter. In my circle, this takes a softer form:  our women love their husbands/sons/brothers as they favor the gentle side of virility and distrust the military, businessmen, and evangelical preachers. They hate Republicans. They despise the harder aspects of masculinity such as combat, authority, accountability.

3. Our men have lost confidence in their own virility as paternity and so we have a culture bereft of fatherhood. There are many causes for this. The contraceptive-sexual revolution freed sex from paternity and opened the door to lust without consequences. The birth control pill might be called the "anti-father pill;" and abortion as back-up contraception is the fall-back  position of the Anti-Father who kills his child to protect his promiscuity.  A hard feminism has attacked the very idea of "masculinity" and "paternity" and redefined "patriarchy" as the oppressive power of the male over the female. This blending into androgyny has entirely deconstructed virility and eliminated the necessary itinerary of formation for men and left our 30-year-olds as perpetual teenagers.

The Moderate, Neutral, Reconciling Position?

As mentioned, many women and a few men in my circles neither accept nor reject the "systemic white racism" allegation. They are agnostic: I don't really know! This is a wholesome position in several ways:
- It is humble: I don't see it in my world but I can't rule it out in other areas and across the culture.
- It is open to a variety of viewpoints: on the one hand....; but on the other hand....
- It looks to reconcile: to affirm the feelings and views of those who are oppressed as well as the police and those on the other side: blue and black lives both matter.
I myself may have positioned myself there when I was in my 20s, 30s, even 40s. But at this point, at the age of 72, having searched for "systemic racism" for my entire life and not found it, I must say it is not there. But it is more than that. What I see is that the allegation is not just false, but viciously destructive: it slanders the police with catastrophic consequences; it emasculates the young black, identifying him as an impotent victim of the system, vulnerable at all times to an overwhelming white racism.

If I am pulled over by a trooper for doing 80 in a 65 I know I broke the law; I brace myself to be meek, respectful, cooperative and contrite, hoping he will at least reduce my ticket to a $200 no-seat-belt or broken-signal-light rather than a fine with points on my insurance. If a black youth is pulled over in the "Black Lives Matter" world, he may blank on the fact that he was speeding; he will think he is being picked on because he is black; he may get testy, indignant, resistant; worst case scenario, especially if he is high or drunk, he may resist, initiate a struggle,  reach for gun or tazer and provoke a life-or-death struggle. What caused this: the deliberate intention of the trooper to harass blacks? Unlikely! The "BLM" narrative drummed into his head by 20 viewings of the horrific George Floyd video? Very likely!

And so, the moderating, neutral position is valid as a temporary, learning pattern. But it is a binary reality that calls out for a Yes/No answers. Most moral, life questions are thus: Will you marry me? Is he dead? Am I pregnant? Can women become priests? Is abortion or contraception or co-habitation or homo-sex ok? Should we go declare war? Is he guilty? Do we arrest him? In real war, there is no neutrality. When Pearl Harbor was bombed, we had two choices: go to war or cede Asia and the Pacific to Japan and Europe to Hitler. A pacifist position is not neutral: it favors Japan and Hitler. Eventually, a living, thinking, engaged heart and intellect has to decide: BLM: good idea or bad idea?

A Non-Violent, Feminized World?

When I walked the Camino to Santiago I took very little reading material but decided to read those parts of the Bible we "systemically" ignore: most of Numbers, Deuteronomy, Leviticus in particular. What I found was blood, violence and sacrifice. At the same time, I observed ancient statues and art work full of blood, battle and violence: Old Testament scenes, memorials of the 'Reconquista" and remembrance of the horrific civil war of the 1930s. I realized that our culture had been largely scrubbed of violence. But then I wondered: was it really cleaned away or just hidden? The holocaust of the unborn is an unspeakable genocide but entirely hidden from sight. We have sequestered the bleeding and violated away: into nursing homes, prisons, boarding homes, group homes. The real violence, of the underclass both white and black, is engaged by our police. I don't have to protect my home because I can call the cops. We have placards like "War is Not Working" as if we could sit down, talk things over, and do away with the military. We blame the police and military for violence when they are the ones who protect us from it. I confess: I took malicious delectation in the explosion of the Middle East into violence during the Obama years. He took office, brimming with "hope and change" and confident that his philo-Islamic, reasonable, calm and reconciling approach would bring peace to that turbulent part of the world. The opposite happened: in his time, the place went red with blood and violence. It is not that he caused it; but it is blatantly obvious that his soft, reasoned approach is impotent in the face of virulent, irrepressible violence. The liberal myth that violence there is caused by the oil-lust and aggressiveness of Bush-Cheny-and-crowd was proven false. If the USA disappeared from the earth tomorrow, the Sunnis, Shia, Jews, Jihadists, and corrupt Saudis would keep killing each other until the Lord returns in glory.

In the Church this emasculated, scrubbed-of-blood-and-violence approach is evident in the liturgical theology since Vatican II. We no longer have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, with graphic awareness of Calvary, the blood flowing, the body broken and tortured. We no longer have kneeling in reverence and silence;  the confession of sin and reparation. We have happiness, friendship, hugs, gaiety. The catechetical literature compares it to a birthday party. Underlies it is a spirituality bereft of masculine combat, violence, sacrifice, suffering, and heroism. No wonder men don't want to go to Church!

Sam Harris on Police Violence

A leading atheist, Sam Harris is not one I would normally look to for guidance. But in an outstanding podcast on police violence (https://samharris.org/can-pull-back-brink/) he draws from his martial arts experience to give a realistic picture of police violence. He stresses that our violence is transferred to the police who absorb and engage it, if not always perfectly. He summarizes the data that show that, given crime statistics, police are favorable to black criminals; and that black and Hispanic cops are worse to black youths. Most significantly, he sees that any resistance to arrest, given that a gun is involved, becomes immediately a life-or-death struggle. Should the resister get the gun, the life of the police and others are endangered. The same goes for the tazer which can incapacitate and allow the cop to be beat to death. A real life-or-death struggle places one in a zone of violence; adrenaline flows; rational deliberation is disallowed; and the only concern is survival through triumph. It is similar to temporary insanity due to psychosis, rage, profound anxiety or depression. Most women that I know have not been in a life-or-death struggle. If they have been attacked or raped it is probable that it was not a struggle as they were vastly overwhelmed and understandably paralyzed by hysteria. This is certainly not to argue that an 8+minute knee on the neck or a shooting-in-the-back is justifiable. It is not! But, to understand an act we need to put it into context. Resistance to arrest leads to life-or-death struggle leads to a different place, a place unintelligible to women but intuitively obvious to anyone who grew up in a man's (violent) world.

The Obligatory Trump Rant

I was distracted in the Harris explication by his Trump Rant. I agree fully that our President has made things worse; that he is an idiocy, a dysfunction, an immorality, and a catastrophe. I cannot vote for him for a litany of reasons. But the problem with Trump Derangement Syndrome is:
- It distracts from the problem. Black Lives Matter is about "systemic white racism" not about Trump.
- It plays into his agenda: as a narcissist he craves all the attention; if he can't be adored, he wants to be despised.
- It implies that he is worse than the alternative: very problematic assertion!
- It is itself a symptom of diminished virility. In no way does this vile man detract from my own paternity, my virility, my protection of and provision for those I love, my purity-humility-courage, my heroism and self-sacrifice, and my reflection of the strong-but-gentle love of our heavenly Father. The compulsive whining about Trump is another symptom of a world lacking in fatherly strength, sobriety and calm.

For Father's Day

I intend
-  to commend myself to serenity, sobriety, confidence, quiet, restrain.
-  to speak clearly and calmly, including in this blog, the Truth as it has presented itself to me.
-  to detach from the mania, insanity, rage and hysteria that is sweeping our culture, on left and right.
-  to draw close to our heavenly Father, Jesus his Son, in the Holy Spirit, in prayer.
-  to keep myself under our Lady's mantle of holiness, purity, beauty and love.
-  to support and be supported by my community of faith, friendship and love.
-  to open my heart to others: those who suffer; those who disagree with me; those who don't like me.

Case Study in Systemic Racism: Black on Latino

"Muchos negros aqui. Yo no vengo aqui. Negros son malos." We were driving through a relatively modest neighborhood of Maplewood, an upscale, liberal town in suburban Essex NJ. "A lot of blacks live here. I avoid the area. Blacks are bad." Ecuadorian, Luis is a marvelous worker, marvelous! The guy can do anything, fix anything. He works quietly, energetically, efficiently. Speaks very little. He has become a friend.  He is devout in his Catholicism. I did have to intervene, gently but clearly, when he said he planned to live with the woman he loves before being married in the Church. I mentioned that sex outside of marriage is always a serious sin. I did not get into how profound a desecration such is of the woman he loves; or how such masculine lust-outside-of-wedlock is the root cause of most poverty.  He received that calmly. But I did not give him a talking-to about racism.

Clearly there are racist feeling, thoughts, attitudes in the Hispanic community. Not "racist" in the sense of a hard ideology: one race dominating another. It is softer, more modulated. This probably because there was so much intermarriage in the different countries so people of mixed races prevailed in most families. Also, for the most part, there was not the stark, literally black-and-white binary system of our southern slavery. There is surely a widespread preference for more European features, a holdover from the colonial past. I recall a meek, deferential little elderly woman from the Dominican Republic. She didn't speak English; always wore a hat; and spoke softly. One day she was asked about her father's appearance: "he had hair like mine, ugly hair." It became clear his hair was more Afro-like than Euro-like and that she saw that as ugly. But in general there is more a live-and-let-live relaxed attitude. That is the drift of our culture, certainly where I live. But ironically, the BLM narrative of systematic racism is reviving and inflaming this sense of black/white in contrast to the rainbow range of beautiful brown colors that actually is coming to prevail in our country.

In any case, Luis is not racist. I know what he is talking about. Hispanic manual laborers, many undocumented, work for cash. They don't want check, credit card or electronic transfer. He explained to me that he prefers the simplicity of cash: he can never buy anything unless he has cash in hand. He owes nothing, ever. As he spoke, I envied the simplicity: Ivan Illich, of Tools for Conviviality, would have been impressed. So at the end of the work week, Friday afternoon at 5 PM, thousands are walking around with hundreds of dollars of cash in their pockets. Much of this, by the way, is transferred home to families where there is real scarcity and poverty. Black thugs who live in the same areas know that and they are ready at 5 PM to mug the workers, tired after a long week of real work.

This is a simple, clear if less than cosmic case of systemic racism. There is a system to it: a time (5 PM Friday), a place (bus stops, construction locations, Hispanic neighborhoods), a plan (a pack to overwhelm the victim), a victim class (Hispanic male laborers). There is no racial hatred involved: the thugs have nothing personal against their targets; they would do the same to Eskimos or Visigoths; it is strictly business.

It is a "social structure of sin" in that it is a group, a social, a patterned thing. It is gravely unjust: to the guys who worked hard all week; to the families, including the poor in Ecuador, who wait for this money for their food. It is oppression of the weaker by the stronger. The victim is undocumented and probably fears the police. They are often smaller in frame and outnumbered by the predators.

You will not read about this in the NY Times; nor see it on CNN or MSNBC. You will not see "Brown Lives Matter" signs on $750,000 suburban homes. But it is a "life issue" in the broad, innocuous sense favored by liberals who want to minimize abortion, euthanasia and infanticide. The "limousine liberal" who rants against the wall and grieves for "dreamers" (BTW: I myself disapprove of the wall; and care about dreamers) is blissfully unaware and indifferent because it doesn't fit the "white oppressing black" narrative so dear to his heart.

But it is an actual, clear, and vicious if modest case of systemic racism.

Race and Culture Wars, Jersey City 2020: Black and Jew and Cultural Liberal

Antisemitism?

2020 kicked off in Jersey City with a horrific antisemitic killing by a black terrorist group less than a mile from where I live and work. They had planned massive killings of the Jews who recently moved into the neighborhood. To consider the killings as instances of "systematic Black racism" or even "systemic antisemitism" would be ridiculous. However, outrageous comments by a black politician did unveil the racial tensions that had been percolating quietly. There is resentment across New Jersey against Orthodox Jews who are accused of:  aggressively buying up real estate in a designated area, paying cash at good rates but later deflating property values; organizing effectively so as to benefit inordinately from government funds like busing to their religious schools; being distant, unfriendly and indifferent to the needs of other groups, including low income blacks. A gentleman knocked on my own door some time ago and offered to buy our home, on the spot. I was flattered and pleased, declined the offer and took his card. But many are offended by their aggressiveness; cities have passed ordinances forbidding such house-to-house solicitation.

I am defensive of the Jews.  The allegations seem accurate but their actions are neither illegal or immoral. Nothing wrong, in itself, with  aggressive purchase of property and competent community organization. Saul Alinsky ( Aside: quintessentially a secular Jew, he rejected his strict Judaic upbringing at the age of 12 and dedicated his first book to Satan who rejected the establishment and created his own kingdom) would have approved of the later, even as he despised their faith. It is not morally obligatory, to my knowledge, to be nice and friendly. Every community of faith and value has to balance concern with their own legacy/survival with an outreach to others.

I do not see "systematic antisemitism" in Jersey City or the USA. I am not worried about Jew-Black warfare. They are living together fine in our area from what I can see. These tensions are part of the chemistry, energy and dissonance of diverse, urban dynamics. The extremes, such as the shooting, are deplorable. But a certain inter-ethnic conflict is normal and irrepressible. Antisemitism is as marginal, impotent and pathetic as white racism.

If real antisemitism is a fringe phenomenon, there is real  anti-Zionism on the political left and anti-Judaism on the cultural left. To clarify the terms:

-Antisemitism is racial hatred of the Jews as a Jews (Nazism, KKK, skinheads). They are despised because of their Jewish blood, not because of their religion, politics or behavior. Similar to white racism, antisemitism in this sense is banned by a broad consensus; punished by strong systems of "anti-antisemitism;" monitored by a militant Jewish constituency; and symptomatic of a pathological fringe. The Catholic Church was never antisemitic, but often anti-Judaic:  people of Jewish blood were welcomed into the Church but required to renounce Judaism as a "God-killer" that had been entirely replaced by Catholicism. Antisemitism, like all forms of racism, is antithetical to Christianity, an expression of pagan tribalism that exploded with Hitler. Monsignor John Ostereicher, himself a convert from Judaism and an architect of the Vatican II document on Judaism, accurately diagnosed Nazism as deeper even than racism, as a hatred for God and the law of God that was redirected to His people.

-Anti-Zionism is political opposition to the state of Israel. In the early days after the war, this was held by communities of Orthodox Jews so it is essentially different from antisemitism. It is strong on our political left where there is sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians and criticism of the aggressiveness of the state of Israel. This is balanced by a passionate Zionism of our Jewish community that is shared by evangelicals in their theological conviction that the Jewish state is playing a role in salvation history. Trump leans Zionist because of his family and the support of the Christian right; Obama was more critical of Israel. Catholic thought tends to be moderate and tolerant of a range of political views on Israel, although there is considerable sympathy, post-Holocaust, for Israel.

-Anti-Judaism is rejection of the traditional rabbinic Judaism which developed after the time of Jesus and the destruction of the temple. It prevailed in Catholic theology until Vatican II when it was firmly rejected. Catholic thought since 1965 is extremely philo-Judaic due to renewed interest in the Jewish roots of our faith and a sorrow and shame over the Shaol. This direction is laudatory except that it has tended to be deferential and incapable of criticism of Judaism, much like Zionists can be tolerant of the misdeeds of the state of Israel.

Anti-Judaism?

Underlying resentment against Orthodox Jews in the broader culture seems to be the odium of the Cultural Liberal. The alleged "liberalism" and "diversity" of the Left does not extend to observant Judaism which blatantly violates their absolutes. Their ten commandments:

- Thou shall celebrate sexual freedom and expressiveness, unhindered by fidelity and fecundity;
- Thou shall practice religion, if you must, in a private, apologetic, discrete, deferential manner;
- Thou shall be friendly and warm to everyone;
- Thou shall not practice exclusive forms of piety even if such is dear to your tradition;
- Thou shall abolish all gender distinctions;
- Thou shall eliminate the inconvenient, before and after birth;
- Thou shall abolish all authority and treat everyone like your buddy;
- Thou shall move in fluidity and avoid all final vows of any sort;
- Thou shall have compulsory secular schooling, a  successful career, comfort, security and status.
- Thou shall quarantine from the undesireables, sequestering them into nursing homes, prisons, etc.
- Thou shall seek guidance, comfort and protection from Science, Government and Technology.
- Thou shall confess and celebrate white guilt and black victimization in protests and reparations.

The Observant Jew is the Cultural Liberal's worst nightmare: even worse than the devout Catholic or zealous Evangelical. I admire Orthodox Judaism because it is a "thick" religion: zealous, passionate, counter-cultural, unapologetic . They honor their God as they understand, according to Tradition, and don't really care what everyone else thinks. Three cheers! They have long been the "Benedict Option"...cherishing traditions in defiance of a larger culture that despises them. As a hard-core, red meat Catholic myself, I see them as a friend and ally in the Culture War against  the totalitarianism of cultural liberalism.

Ironically, the cultural liberalism that despises traditions of authority and sexual chastity has largely been led  by brilliant secular Jews: start off with Freud and Marx and then the merging of their thought by Marcuse, Reich, Fromm, and many others. They are disproportionately represented in the media, Hollywood, the pornography empire, psychoanalysis, Marxism, labor and left wing politics. They are outstanding cultural warriors.

They dominate culture the way Kenyans do the marathon and Afro-Americans the NBA. Is it biological? in their DNA? Not impossible; I wouldn't rule it out.  (To even be open to that possibility is to be shunned as racist and evil)  More likely it is the result of centuries of Talmud study, disciplined ethical and religious living; a cultural legacy. Even more deeply, I see Jews as inherently gifted, even when most defiant against the moral order, because of centuries of walking in the friendship of God.

I respect the genius of the Secular Jew. He is a worthy opponent in our Cultural War. But I stand with the Observant Jew in championing of tradition, authority, the godliness of the family/sex/gender, and the sacredness of every human life.

Postscript: This topic is fascinating in its density, complexity, and dynamism and happily avoids the master-slave, white-on-black paradigm that has become tiresome, paranoid, emasculating, inflammatory, scapegoating, trite, self-congratulatory, rash-judging, hysterical, delusional, indignant, obsessive, sterile, polarizing and SO annoying.

Jersey City Little League: Unity in Diversity

Greenville Little League, coaches and players, reflected the diversity of the area: blacks, whites, Hispanics...a tremendous mix. The coaches meetings were interesting. These guys LOVED their baseball...Loved it. I was an outlier: never athletic, I didn't like baseball but I took a T-ball team for the sake of my son and then my daughter. I have never seen such a display of unity-in-diversity! It showed me that diversity in itself, as difference and dissonance and alterity, is useless; but diversity in a shared unity is enriching and marvelous. This league was better than the Catholic Church itself.

There was a 12-year old black player, a ringer. A huge fight erupted about his exact birth date and whether he could stay in our league or advance to the higher age level. A fierce fight, but respectful. The coaches could care less about skin color or last name or ethnic background. The kid could play baseball and that is all that mattered to them. These were working class, blue collar, salt-of-the-earth types. Not from the underclass nor the elite over-class. Their's an intuitive, wholesome sense of inclusion.

One day someone made a humorous remark about Hispanics. I don't remember what it was. But I clearly remember what followed. Charlie Hegar was a short, tough, confident Irishman very involved with baseball and hockey. With his lovely wife Maria he raised four tough boys who went on to be cops and firemen and such. Classic Jersey City ethnic white, like many who grew up with my own children. Charlie put the guy in his place: "My wife is Hispanic. I will not hear that kind of remark here. Ever!" There was quiet. I doubt the guy ever make an ethnic joke in public again. This was not political correctness; it was human decency.

This is the world in which I have lived all my life. It is a happy world. I wish everyone's world was like mine.

Praying for George and Derek: Sinners in Need of God's Mercy

In this life, it is a bad idea to idolize or demonize anyone: the best of us have bad and the worst of us good. The Church, requiring deep investigation and two certified miracles, is slow to canonize; she has never condemned anyone to hell. With Balthasar "we dare to hope!" But personally, when I contemplate the Shaol of the Jews and the devastation of the black family over the centuries of American slavery, I wonder...not "how can a loving God condemn to eternal hell?"...but "how can a just God not condemn the perpetrators of such profound evil to hell?" Nevertheless, it is for God, not us to judge and condemn.

The prevailing liberal narrative has George Floyd as a Holy Innocent and Derek Chauvin as Satan Incarnate. It seems to me to be more dense, mysterious, sobering.

Judging the Act; Judging the Person

First, to be clear: the violent act of kneeling on the neck, even as the victim pleaded to breath, was vile beyond description. Death by asphyxiation is apparently most painful; torture in the true sense. George was not only killed, but tortured to death. Observing George plead for air and call for his mother is heart-piercingly poignant.  I have heard no disagreement on that; the world is in unity on that. That act as we know it from the video was blatantly evil. There is more.

1. To fairly judge the nature of the act, we need more than the perspective of that cell phone. Many questions need to be considered: What preceded it? What was George's resistance like? Was there some personal animus between them? Did Derek know of George's violent past and did that influence his judgment? What was in the mind of the assailant? What his intention?  Is Derek a "systematic racist"...holding firmly to a belief system and pattern of life by which he consistently despises and violates black-skinned people? Was he, even unconsciously, influenced by fears or resentments of blacks?  Does Derek have compulsive violent tendencies or is he clinically a sociopath or sadist?  To what degree was he blinded by anxiety, stress, confusion? To fairly judge the act we need evidence, data, sober investigation and consideration beyond the video. Hence, the trial.
 
2.  "Judge the act; not the person." This principle is the bedrock of my moral philosophy. For example, with passion and certainty I condemn racism, contraception, torture, sodomy and rash judgment. But I do not condemn the racist, the contraceptor, the torturer, the sodomite, or the rash judger. I cannot judge the heart and soul of another: I leave that to God. For example, many people (married or single, straight or gay) practice sodomy and sincerely think it is a good act. Some CIA agents torturing terrorists may be convinced they are saving our country from the next terror attack. It is not for me to judge the heart of another; but fiercely I judge these acts;  and that judgment is at the same time an act of love, in truth, for the actor. Hate racism; love the racist. Hate pornography; love the pornographer, porn star, and porn user. Hate the sin; love the sinner.

3. However, it is more complicated and subtle: in practice we are required to judge the moral character of others. The jury for Derek will make such a judgment. I screen applicants to our homes and make such decisions constantly. If I had Donald Trump as a neighbor, I would warn my children to avoid him: to be courteous and respectful, but protect themselves from his lustful propensities, his xenophobia, his virulent narcissism, his defensive/abusive tendencies. I make that prudential judgment; as parent I must. As voter, I could never vote for such a perverse moral character, as great as his policies might be. But I don't morally condemn him. I can't look into his heart. If he were my neighbor, I would befriend him: because I am secure in myself and don't fear his immoral influence or his malice, because I see good in him, because I would pray to have a positive influence and draw him to Christ whom he needs so desperately.

Derek Chauvin  

We don't know a lot about him. We will discover more, especially when he goes to trial. From the video we see a vile, violent act not merited by the evident circumstances. We see a profound lack of empathy for a man begging to breath. This strongly suggests that he is a violent man, low in compassion, possibly a sadist or sociopath. There is no evidence in the video that he is racist. To conclude that because he is violent, white and a policeman he is racist is itself a prejudice, a rash judgment, a stereotyping and an act of injustice and moral violence. He has 18 complaints against him of which two resulted in disciplinary letters. They involved: derogatory speech and violent pulling of a woman out of her car after she exceeded the speed limit by 10 mph. His Laotian wife (that does not suggest hardcore racism as a belief system) is divorcing him after the incident. The owner of the club where he provided security alleged that he would use an excess of force, especially against blacks. Did she fire him for that...or was she supportive by keeping him on staff? He has a number of medals and commendations for brave and assertive action in disabling violent criminals. He is the guy you want on your side in battle. What we know of him is not pretty. He did an evil act. He is also a scapegoat, arousing hatred, condemnation and violence to an extreme.

George Floyd 

George apparently was a career criminal and life-long drug user. He was in prison four times and arrested regularly, mostly for theft and illegal drug use. His death was consistent: high on two drugs; allegedly passing a fake $20 bill (he may not have known it was fake; we are not sure he even did it); and resisting arrest. With four other men, he broke into a home and held a gun to the stomach of a black, pregnant woman as his buddies ransacked her home. He pleaded guilty. That act might well be contemplated as we consider the entire case. It is, in my view, vile beyond words: woman! black! pregnant! gun to her child-bearing womb! But we don't know: was he under the influence? Was she herself a drug dealer or criminal competitor? Maybe she had stolen from him! He apparently fathered children by different women and it isn't clear  that he was living with any of them. He seems to sadly fit the stereotype of the black male who abuses a woman and then abandons her and his children. But we don't really know much. And it is not for us to judge and condemn him. But we do need to make prudent, practical decisions. For example, do I want to kneel for eight minutes in his memory? He was greatly loved as "a gentle giant" by those who knew him. He had apparently repented of his life of crime and seemed to be trying to amend it. The tape of him imploring black youths to give up violence was very sincere and heart-rending. His end-of-life is replete with moral ambiguity: high on drugs, resisting arrest, possible theft; but he did not deserve to die of such merciless  torture.

Rash Judgement 

Perhaps 1980, deeply involved with the charismatic renewal, I listened as our friend Vic spoke sincerely of the change in his live due to receiving Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior and receiving the release of the Holy Spirit. It was the classic witness story familiar to all "born-agains" whether evangelicals, 12-steppers, or weight-watchers: this is what I was (bad), this is what happened (the event) and this is what I am now (much better if still far from perfect.) When he finished, a wise and seasoned pastor, himself connected with Cursillo and AA, Monsignor John O'Brien, softly spoke: "You were not as bad as you think; you are not as good as you think."  A distinctively Catholic point of view! One which nicely balanced my own "born again" narrative. So similarly, in regard to the prevailing liberal narrative: George may not be as good as you think; Derek as bad as you think! We will learn more. Not for us to condemn either. But we know enough to make tentative prudential judgments: I would not send my grandchildren off on a camping trip with either of these men.

Above all: we must avoid RASH JUDGEMENT! My experience is that of all sins, the most pervasive, invidious, and unrecognized is that against the 8th commandment ("Thou shall not bear false witness."): rash judgment. I encounter it many times daily in my work. Someone will tell me, with certainty and passion:
 -"The mustard is missing and Matilda took it!"
 -"How do you know it was Matilda?"
 -"I know it was her. Everyone knows it was her. It was her."
 -"How do you know that."
 -"I know it. She did it. It's certain."
 -"Okay, but how do you know?"
 -"Well...Everyone knows Matilda steals. And Matilda had a hot dog yesterday and she always has mustard on her hot dog. And Matilda stole the mustard."

Lying, another violation of the 8th commandment, contrasts with rash judgment. Lying is a sin of the will: one knowingly and intentionally tells a falsehood. The intention can be more or less malicious: for example a child saying "I didn't break the window" is defensive; but intentional slander to destroy another's intention is grave sin. By contrast, rash judgment is less a sin of the will than of the intellect: it is a false judgment, but not necessarily intentional. The accuser really thinks Matilda took the mustard. There may be less than fully conscious resentment, jealousy or fear by which the will is darkening the intellect; but the defect is in the intellect, not the will.

Many police shootings involve rash judgement: mistakes; reactions of panic and miscalculation in the fog of stress, violence, and confusion. Derek, in anxiety, may have "rash judged" George as a threat; or.... he may have intentionally hurt him out of malice. Objectively, Derek tortured George. Was that his subjective intention? Surely he was not homicidal by intending his death: to do this in front of a crowd with cell phones would have been an entirely insane act.

The moral certainty that Derek is a racist is itself a rash judgement. There is not at this point evidence that he was racist by belief and life habit; nor even that he harbored strong racial animosity to blacks. He may have, but we don't know this. The logic is itself prejudiced:  he is white, a cop, violent...therefore we know he is racist. Just like we know Matilda took the mustard.

The allegation of "systemic racism in police departments and society at large" is itself, in my view, a mega-rash-judgement. A grave one. That there is white racism in our society is certain; that any expression of racism is excruciating for the recipient is also certain and not to be dismissed. But that systems (deliberate and collaborative patterns of  policy, practices and protocols) motivated by racism ("...ism" being a system of beliefs and values; and racism being such a system that consciously and coherently demeans and violates a specific race) operate in USA 2020 is, again, in my view a mistake in judgement...and one with grave consequences. As a rash judgement it is a failing of the intellect, not the will; it is largely well-intended, as a redress to real suffering that is due to far more complex interactions of history, class and culture. However, underlying that judgment are dark forces of the will like guilt, resentment, inferiority, self-righteousness, and of course the horrid past history (pre-1970) of racism.

Presumption of Innocence vs.  Sacred, Scapegoating (Girardian) Violence

Working in hyper-macho environments like UPS where the herd instinct is to condemn and then strike hard ("I will kick his ass!"), I was always contrarian in my propensity to presume innocence and investigate thoroughly in reaching a decision. Thus, my allergy to rash judgement! The presumption of innocence is sacred to me. Even in the face of the nauseating George/Daryl kneeling video, I withhold judgement, presume innocence, and await evidence.

My compulsion to defend the scapegoat was only heightened by my contact with Rene Girard through his brilliant disciple Gil Baile. Every social group channels its mimetic jealousy, insecurity, rage, and violence by targeting a scapegoat. Jesus on the cross is the ultimate Scapegoat. The goat may or may not be guilty of offense. Derek Chauvin is certainly guilty of something; but he is also a scapegoat. The volume and intensity and mimetic violence erupting around the nation is sheer Girardian sacred violence.

And so, I am unashamed to protect the person of Derek Chauvin, from the stampeded of violence, even as we await due process, investigation, and determination of the nature of the act and the corresponding punishment. I want him to get what he justly deserves, no more and no less. Across the country no one dare defend him. Police unions are notorious for defending their own. That is their job in this system. The head of the police union in NYC was screaming at a rally:  "I am not Derek Chauvin. They (pointing to surrounding police) are not Derek Chauvin!" He alleged their common innocence and righteousness by distancing from and condemning the goat. Do they know much about the man except for that 8 minutes? I think not!

In past blog essays, I have had good words for Bernie Madow, Saddam Hussein, and Osama Bin Laden. Before the throne of God, Satan is always the accuser; the Holy Spirit is the Counsel for the Defense. I will roll the dice and side with the defense!

Was George a Holy Innocent? Was Derek a Herod-like Murderer of the Innocent?

In that 8 minutes of torture, George was an innocent. Overall, George was less than holy. In that 8 minutes Derek was a killer from what we can see; but probably not a murderer in the sense of conscious, deliberate, premeditated homicide.

The 8-minute-kneel thing is in principle a good thing. But not if it is an expression of broad rash judgement, or virtue-signalling, or hysteria and sentimentality. A good thing would be to pray for the soul of George; he could use the help. Another good thing would be to pray for Derek; he could use the help.

Before the throne of the Crucified Goat, each of us is Holy Innocent and each is Herod the Murderer. Each of us is an innocent victim of violation and trauma; each of us has inflicted the same on others. The worst Herod's are often also the most violated of innocents. Catholics believe in the "Particular Judgement" each of us face immediately after our death, as we face Christ and judgement: heaven, hell or purgatory. In a marvelous piece of theology, Gil Baile develops Balthasar's theology of Christ's descent into hell on Holy Saturday to elaborate on that doctrine in a splendid manner. He suggests that at the moment of death, each of us...great saint or miserable sinner...meet the Merciful, Crucified One; we see his wounds endured for our sins; we see that he descended to the deepest spot of hell to release us; we see Him offering his Mercy. And precisely there we make our final choice: to accept, humbly and contritely this Mercy, and to extend that Mercy in forgiveness to those who have harmed us...or, to refuse. It is a final, ultimate, eternal choice. At that split second, each is Holy Innocent, victim of violation by another, and able to forgive Herod the Great. But each is also Herod the Great, offered Mercy for all my murders.

Derek and George and you and me...we are all the same. Innocent and Murderer.

May your Mercy be upon us as we place our trust in you!

Politics of Hysteria, the Demise of Fatherhood and Virility, the Triumph of Cultural Liberalism

Ours has become a politics and culture of hysteria: shrill, excited, agitated, anxious, indignant, emotional, irrational, vulnerable, threatened; absence of sobriety, respectful dialogue, steadiness, interior peace and confidence, quiet, restrain, reasoned consideration, openness to listening to the other side.  I have...we all have...family and friends with whom we cannot speak about certain topics because they become SO upset. They have to walk away, if they don't erupt into indignant rage. I am shunned, quietly and courteously, because my views ...traditionally Catholic, morally conservative...are emotionally unbearable for many who are close to me. I am, well not me personally but my viewpoint, is, in their "feeling world,"...racist, homophobic, ignorant, misogynist, reactionary. In this private, anonymous blog, I am safe to express myself. Were I a famous figure and articulate on my views of gender, sexuality and race relations I would be a pariah. I would not be able to speak; I would be banned from college campuses; I would be shamed on social media; protests with BLM signs would surround my humble house in a mixed, low-income area of Jersey City.

"Hysteria" is a woman's reaction when she is unprotected by gentle, strong men; when she is vulnerable, threatened, exposed. With the demise of virility and paternity, an entire society and culture becomes hysterical. The men, insecure in their own masculinity and weakened in confidence, themselves mimic this hysteria. The defining reality of our society, our time, our culture...since the 1960s...is the demise of virility, the absence of fathers, the prevalence of hysteria, and the triumph of cultural liberalism.

The cultural liberalism that erupted and prevailed 50 years ago is defined by a rejection of fatherhood. It distrusts the paternity of God. It redefines "patriarchy" as oppression, domination and violation of the weak and vulnerable. It is suspicious of paternity as: authority, tradition, moral law, rational argument, and moral law. It's favored scapegoat is the the quintessentially masculine, paternal institution: the police, renamed as "pigs." Closely related to this defining dogma are correlatives:
- Release of sexuality from marriage; contempt for masculine chastity and fidelity.
- Deconstruction of gender and disparagement of masculinity and femininity as forms; the neutering of the human person.
- Destruction of the innocent and the vulnerable: unborn, disabled, senile.
- Dependence on the mega-state as Mother.
- Privileging of alleged victim groups: blacks, gays, women, etc.

Cultural liberalism is, in my view, more evil, vile, and destructive than communism, fascism, jihadism all together..because it strikes at the core dignity and beauty of the human person: the sacredness of innocent life, the sanctity of sexuality and marriage, the iconic splendor of masculinity/femininity, the authority of God and the godliness of all real authority.

Personalizing and Emotionalizing of politics is the hallmark of most liberal discourse. The attack goes right to the person: you are racist, you are homophobic. This characterizes, not women as such, but a overly-femininzed, de-masculinized mind that gets emotional, personal, and hysterical about political and social issues. The masculine mind is structured such that it separates arenas of life: I can fight you on the basketball court or in an argument and then laugh over a beer. The feminine mind integrates and synthesizes life. Supremely with Trump but even in regard to reasonably decent conservatives (Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, George W. Bush) the liberal shows a deep, personal and unmanly resentment.

Feminism I am myself the most passionate champion of feminism if by that is meant admiration for the distinguishing strength, resiliency, sensitivity, generosity, intuitive wisdom, compassion, holiness and exquisite loveliness (inner and outer) of women. But "Feminism USA Post-1960s" is something different: largely the urge to imitate masculinity at its worst. But more deeply it is the honestly, truthfully, validly hysterical cry of woman violated. The desecration of women is the most despicable of all mankind's sins; it is Satan's solitary delight. Abortion itself is the quintessential scream of woman violated, abandoned, vulnerable and desperate. It is a five-fold desecration: the profane sexual invasion itself (if extramarital, even if consensual); refusal to protect and provide for mother and child; the violence against her own womanly flesh; the destruction of her little one; the deception, that this act is right or good or necessary, that elicits her collaboration; the inner wound that remains; and the ideology that denies her pain and blocks grief, regret, conversion and healing. If Satan is delighted by misogyny, he is thrilled by abortion which is misogyny's ultimate consumation.

Black poverty, deprivation and suffering is rooted primarily in the lack of fatherhood. About 75% of black children are abandoned by their fathers. That doesn't count the aborted...and the abortions may exceed births of blacks. If you are conceived black, you will probably be aborted; and if born you have 25% chance of having a father. If black women, children and particularly young men are enraged and hysterical, who can blame them. But scapegoating the cops ("father figures") and pervasive white racism is not helpful. The broken black family and father have historical roots in slavery. But the black family was about three times stronger in 1970 than in 2020 measured by out-of-wedlock births. The deterioration is not due to systematic white racism. It is due to:  cultural liberalism which has had an inordinately destructive effect on lower income folks, white and black; the "racist narrative" that tells the young black that he is victim and implicitly that he is impotent; and the welfare culture of  of dependency upon government handouts. The disparagement of police, the quintessential masculine image in society, further alienates young blacks from a positive internalizing of virility, honor, and gentle strength.

The stated belief of the Black Lives Matter website is: "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other a extended families and "villages" that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable." No mention of fathers here...None! The father is entirely marginalized. The hostility to traditional marriage is blatant. Just prior to this mention is made of the rejection of patriarchy. The contempt for marriage and fatherhood could hardly be more shameless and blatant. While black children need, above all good fathers, BLM intends to systematically organize society without men or fathers.

What are the worst, very worst, very-very-very worst things you can tell a young man?
- You are a victim, powerless and vulnerable and impotent.
- You need the state, specifically the Democrats, to provide for you: reparations, welfare, full medical coverage and free education.
- Authority (fatherly) figures like cops are evil and out to destroy you.
- You can have sex and not worry about the children; if there is a pregnancy, abortion is easy, convenient, inexpensive and entirely wholesome. If the mother refuses and gives birth, you can leave her and hook up with other women as long or short as you want and then leave them.

Do you notice? These diabolic lies are the core beliefs of cultural liberalism: black men (and gays, women) as victims and impotent; salvation from a liberal state; evil of cops and really all authorities (we are just buddies; no authority needed, especially not that of God); sexual license.

Homosexuality is  wounded masculinity. The craving for masculine love...of father, of male friends...becomes eroticized and can become compulsive. The interior wound seeks relief  in sexual acts that themselves aggravate the suffering: like the tormented teen that cuts herself or purges. The acts make things worse. The "gay as victim" narrative, similar to that of the "black victim, " expresses and intensifies the feeling of impotence and vulnerability. It further diminishes his already weak sense of masculine agency, confidence and value. "Gay pride" resembles the rage of Black Lives Matter: it is a hysterical, anxious rage; it is a mimicry of genuine masculine strength; it is the sanctification of acts that are inherently evil and self-destructive.  To say what I am saying is to be shamed as homophobic. I am confident that my love for the homosexual is more true and pure than the "gay friendly" approach that endorses acts that futile, sterile and harm-inflicting. Homosexual men deserve chaste, non-sexual, intimate relationships...paternal and fraternal...with other men; they deserve support in their weakness and encouragement in their strength, virility and paternity...as do we all.

Right wing hysteria. More pervasive on the left, it is becoming more evident on the right. For example, a emergent narrative is that the the global virus lock-down was a conspiracy of the left to increase its control. This idea, like the black anxiety and homosexual shame, is not without basis in reality. Cultural liberalism of the last half century (in contrast to the entirely noble political liberalism of my father and uncles 1945-65) is totalitarian: it closes our Churches but allows violent demonstrations; it compels moral conservatives to pay for abortions and contraception; it requires that we bake wedding cakes for what we think is not a wedding but a mortal sin; it closes our adoption agencies because we refuse to place a little girl with two gay men. This issue, like racism and the dignity of the homosexual, are realities deserving serious consideration and discussion. But there is an emotional, indignant, unbalanced, paranoid tone. It is evident, for example, in Fox News anchors like Hannity, Tucker and Ingraham. Others, by contrast, hold conservative positions but maintain a professional sobriety and objectivity: Bret Baier, Chris Wallace, Shannon Brean, and Martha MacCallum (at her best.) I was saddened by the most recent letters of Archbishop Vigano, one to President Trump and another on the covid lockdown. He expressed a hysterial, paranoid and polarizing version of the culture war and the covid crisis. His underlying concerns are reasoned; but his tone extreme, emotional and irrational. One of my favorite intellectuals, R. Reno of First Things, tweeted in a hysterical, unhinged manner about the "cowardly culture of masks." He apologized. I hope that he was drunk and that the offensive tweet did not reflect his sober thinking. The "conservative mind" at its best is virile in its sobriety, balance, clarity of thought, open-mindedness, quiet confidence, passion free of emotionalism. Hysteria I expect from liberals, not from conservatives.

Trump is a symptom of and aggravation of a hysteria of the right, anxiety and rage of the white underclass involving: unemployment, poverty, downward mobility due to loss of industrial jobs, and xenophobic fear of foreigners. Even more it is resentment, justifiable, at the privileged, liberal elites in their contempt for low-income, rural "rednecks." But even more, it is a mirror of the pathology of the black underclass: broken marriages, fatherless children, sexual license, dissolved faith and community organizations. The irrationality of the right...widespread support for Trump in his vile, incompetent, vain agenda of fear and anger...is the same hysterical contagion as that of the "Trump Derangement Syndrome." This condition really is serious; I take it to be clinical.  Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a high state of obsession, agitation, hysteria, and distorted thinking. It destroys friendship and families and renders otherwise intelligent, restrained and decent people incapable of sober reflection and respectful discussion. So Trump, in his vanity pursuit, has succeeded on a cosmic level in garnering attention, polarizing the nation and indeed the globe, and inciting mimetic hysteria and rage on both ends of the political spectrum. As a powerful, overwhelming male figure he is the Anti-Father: vain and selfish rather than generous and sacrificial; compulsively lying rather than truthful; shamelessly lustful rather than chaste and faithful; polarizing rather than uniting. That Vigano would not merely endorse him, but sanctify him as "leader of the children of light" is breathtaking: surely a sign of dementia.

Covid Lockdown. Living in Jersey City, right next to NYC, I agree that the severe lockdown was  prudent and reasoned given the uncertainty of the virus, the catastrophe in Italy, and the probability that our medical system would be overrun. Fauci and Birz were steady, sober and reassuring in tone even as they probably overestimated the danger in a reasoned excess of caution. In this they were a remedy to the ridiculous, self-centered denial and wishful thinking of our President. The pervasive anxiety was grounded and reasonable; but a hysterical dimension did emerge. I was personally smothered by the solicitude of my women...I deferred as best I could, because I knew it was their tender love and care for me and also because they were correct that I am stubborn, dismissive and minimizing of dangers. As noted, a hysteria on the right has emerged in the narrative expressed clearly by Vigano of a worldwide plot of the Left to take control. Personally,  I experienced hysteria most painfully in the timidity and failure of our bishops to defend our right to the sacraments and worship.

The Church. The loss of fatherhood has attacked the Church in a far more sophisticated, profound, demonic manner. Obviously: the priest sex scandal. Abuse by priest is similar to but worse than that by  police: both hold sacred authority and awesome power and abuse of such is a sacrilege, a sin warranting the lowest depths of Dante's or anyone's hell. The cover-up by bishops was worse than the "blue code" that shields violent cops. Sadly, the papacy of Francis has deepened the crisis. He has utterly failed to clean up the corrupt finances of the Vatican. His performance on sex abuse is weak at best: the McCarrick report is still not available after two years; the allegations of Vigano remain unanswered. He is himself emotional and lacking in sober, sound theological thinking. In his partisan zeal about immigrants, capital punishment and global warming, he has muted John Paul and Benedict's stirring call for masculine chastity and fidelity by destroying the John Paul Institute in Rome and empowering cultural liberals in the Vatican to spread their toxins. I am not alone in feeling "fatherless" as a Catholic, for the first time in 73 years.

Signs of Hope
- We are given exemplars to contemplate and emulate. A new 1,000 page biography of Joseph Ratzinger by Seward will give us an consideration of this epitome of patience, long-suffering, interior serenity, erudition, sobriety, equanimity, silence, wisdom, restrain and holy humility. Just thinking about him as I type is making me a better person. I was also pleasantly surprised to read a review of a documentary on Clarence Thomas. I never resolved the Anita Hill thing, but I have considered him an intellectual light-weight for the Supreme Court. But the anecdotes about his life convinced me that he is a man of sterling character who has been brutally persecuted, indeed "lynched", and has endured it with exquisite dignity. Thanks be to God for Joseph Ratzinger and Clarence Thomas (his character, not necessarily his rulings.)
- My son-in-law, troubled like myself by social developments, told me he needed to get off social media. A few days later he felt better. Good idea: detach as much as possible from the social insanity.
- My lawyer son has not been drinking during this time: he knows he can get argumentative and aggressive when under the influence. Good idea: protect your sobriety, serenity, and social harmony.
- That same son left me with an exhortation: "Dad: manly silence and restrain!" Wow! This is the son mentoring the father!
- My theologian son laughed that I am more like Socrates than like Jesus in my ferocity about Truth. He echoed his mentor Balthasar that today Truth and Goodness will not win hearts; it is Beauty that will do that. That message was confirmed by my young parish priest who echoed Bishop Baron, another protege of Balthasar: it is only Beauty that will win hearts and minds and souls. I find myself murmuring a prayer I never had before:
           "Lord, make me beautiful with your beauty; that others may be attracted to the Beauty in me, that is You."

Racists I Have Known: the Unsystematic Bigotry of the White Underclass

The white, anti-black bigotry that I have encountered personally and scrutinized over the last 50 years is a phenomenon of the white underclass. Unsystematic, it is a symptom of the pathological "Under-Culture of Poverty" shared by all colors: economic poverty, broken marriage/family structure, father abandonment, drug addiction, gangs, violence, despair and so forth.

It is not institutionalized, but random and chaotic; is not an exercise of a power elite but an expression of powerlessness; not a protection of privilege but a groan of deprivation and marginalization. It may be helpful to compare it to the systematic racism of the past and the systematic anti-racism of the present.

Sixty years ago, especially in the South there was blatant, shameless systemic racism: seating in the back of the bus, separate schools, absolute prohibition of black access to white institutions. We know about this from history class and the movies.

As that system collapsed, in a split second, an alternate system of anti-racist policy and practices was implemented: busing, compulsive integration, racial quotas in higher education, targeted grants for minority businesses. A huge "diversity industry" emerged as global corporations outdid the government in inclusiveness. All institutions of power colluded in the crusade against white racism: Church, university, media, Hollywood, professional sports, and all levels of law and policy. Anti-racism in our society became, immediately,  systematic, pervasive, deliberate, and punitive to offenders.

Diversity and inclusion is our national religion, shared by all faiths and the faithless. Consider the powerful iconography of Martin Luther King that pervades education from elementary level, including Catholic schooling.  The Me-Too Movement has a problem: recent revelations by liberal-inclined history indicate that the violation of women by King and his closest collaborators was far more vicious than anyone knew. It may rival that of Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein. We can expect that reality, (if it is proved true), to be repressed as it will disrupt the reigning liberal narrative which aligns white power, racism, and violence to women and LGBTQs. Kevin Spacey can be expelled from the Hollywood All-Star Rostrum, but the veneration of Martin Luther King is invulnerable. It would not be an exaggeration to consider that anti-white-racism is the most widely accepted and sternly enforced moral principle of our time: in the cultures that dominate our society, it  it is systematic, passionate, and intolerant of non-compliance in the cultures. White racism, to the extent that it exists, it is despised, prohibited and shamed. The media obsession, protests and riots are all a ritual enactment of that faith.

Hard, cold, deep evil racism...like Nazism and the KKK...is not part of the world I have known. They both vanished  as systems (some residuals remain): the former just before my birth in 1947, the later in the two decades that followed. I know about them from history and the movies, not from personal experience. The closest in my world would be abortion of the unborn: about 2/3 of blacks conceived in NYC are aborted in the womb. This is systematic genocide of blacks. Across the globe, preference for males has destroyed (it is estimated) 130 million women who would be alive today if not for gender-specific abortion and infanticide. The gender imbalance is catastrophic in China for example. This is clearly systematic femicide. It is disguised in the standard liberal narrative with a blood mythology of "choice" and "reproductive rights" which aligns itself righteously with the high moral ground of aversion to racism, guns, homophobia and such.

White racism in USA 2020 by contrast, taboo and despised, is a symptom of the pathology of the white underclass: it expresses inferiority, powerlessness, emasculation, envy, exclusion, and hopelessness. It is related to addiction, unemployment, under-education, poor work ethic, criminal activity, violence, pornography/promiscuity, despair, and self-harm. There are many causes but the primary one: abandonment by father. It is NOT expressive of  power, privilege and status. By contrast, actual elites, affluent, comfortable and protected, salute themselves righteously as anti-white-racist-deplorables-who-cling-to-religion-and-guns.

Racists I have known:

Barbara is high on my top-ten-worst-residents-list. Heavy alcoholic, vicious racist, and miserable human being, she would sit on the Church steps by our home, get drunk, and spit out vile racist epithets to passing black men. Our's being a violent, gang-infected area, I was convinced someone would pull her into an alley and shoot or stab her. She survived; we got rid of her somehow; but I would get a call from her every 12 to 18 months when she was desperate for a home. Of course I never had an vacancy when she called. My nurse-wife knew her well in the hospital as she would cycle through there regularly: boarding home to street to hospital to another boarding home to street... Time passed and I hadn't heard from her. Then she called.  Her tone was different. She didn't ask. She said calmly and sweetly:  "I called to tell you that things have changed for me. I met someone; I fell in love; he changed my life. I gave up drinking and let God into my life. I lost him a year ago but I see his daughter every day and she takes such good care of me. I called to thank you for what you did for me. And to ask you to forgive me for what I did. I am so sorry." I stopped in my steps; frozen with shock. I could not believe my ears. If there ever was a hopeless case, it was Barbara. If I didn't believe in miracles already, that phone call would have been my conversion.

Paul, came to work at UPS out of high school and was promoted at a young age to supervision. I was training him to drive a tractor trailer so he could train our drivers. For a few weeks we did nothing but drive around, one day in NYC another on country roads. It was such a sweet assignment: get our morning bagel and coffee, drive around and chat pleasantly all day. We had an easy, father-son kind of friendship. He had grown up in lily-white working class Lyndhurst and didn't know anyone that wasn't white. Well into our second week he was relaxed enough to tell me his racial philosophy. He hated Asians most because they were obviously far superior to us whites. At the bottom of his hierarchy were blacks. Between white and black was a scale of the brown-skinned: Latinos, Arabs, and such. The whiter the skin, the higher on the scale. I laughed when he told me this. "You are kidding. You can't believe this." He insisted he was sincere. I repeated, five or six times: "No you can't possibly believe this. It is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard." He persisted; he meant it. I was speechless. The belief seemed to defy any reasonable conversation. He was eventually promoted to manager, above my rank. He was the UPS kind of guy: virile, confident, decisive, aggressive, with considerable charm and affection. Not an intellectual. I lost touch with him. But knowing the world of UPS for 25 years, I can assure you that to survive and ascend in that world, he would need to discard his racist ideology. First of all, on a day to day basis you work with outstanding people of every race and ethnicity; the unreality of his viewpoint would be undeniable. But if he were pathologically bound to this racism, he would need to repress it, keep it "in the closet" because of the systemic anti-racism prevalent in the UPS managerial and labor cultures. If Human Resources knew what I knew, he would be fired immediately. A capable, competent and energetic guy in an environment that rewards just that, he would have shed his racism as he ascended the ladder of affluence, power, status and prestige. He would shed the pathetic pathology of his lower class background. He was moving into the upper class, which is systemically anti-racist.

Brendan's Brother was a shockingly, nauseatingly racist NYC policeman from the Queens. Brendan was my friend and classmate in Maryknoll Seminary, where we were studying to be missionary priests. Most of us were, to say the least, systemic in our anti-racism. Especially at the time: 1968, the race riots, post Vatican II, passionate Catholic concern for social and especially racial justice. I myself was one of the more passionate, righteous, indignant crusaders. Brendan was different: lighthearted, humorous, down-to-earth, entirely delightful and charming in a working-class Irish manner. A hard drinker, he went on to overcome his alcoholism, become a missionary priest in Korea, and die a premature death. When he told us about his racist brother; we were horrified. Here was racism at its worst; a real "pig" in the deepest, moral sense. We finally visited their home in Queens and drank beer and got to know him. He put on quite a performance: retrospectively, I suspect he was entertaining himself by shocking us. Brendan laughed heartily as we sat quiet, solemn, and contemptuous as he spilled out his hatred for blacks. Looking back over the years, I retain my aversion to racism; but I regret the righteous, shrill, moralistic position I shared at the time with the mainstream Catholic. Rightly we supported the civil rights movement. But we lacked empathy for working class, ethnic, low-class, uneducated whites who were often good Catholics and themselves struggling with poverty and the black violence of the 1960s. We enlightened liberals were part of an arrogant upper-class, disparaging the underclass in its bigotry and ignorance. Happily, I converted and am am now an ex-liberal-in-recovery.

A Kid In My Class  1965 Senior retreat at the Jesuit Retreat House in Morristown NJ: the priest was telling us sternly of the gravity of racism as a community sin. I had no problem with that: son of a union organizer who attended the I-Have-A-Dream speech, I read America and NY Times weekly. An Italian classmate from Newark raised his hand: "I get where you are going Father. Ok! But wait a minute: my father is a barber in an Italian neighborhood of Newark. He is a good Catholic. He is not a racist. But he couldn't cut the hair of a black man: he would lose his business. He would have no way to support us, his family!" The priest was shrill, unrelenting: "That is exactly what I am talking about: systematic racism. It is evil. It is inexcusable!" The boy: "Are you calling my father racist. He is not racist. I resent that. It is a lie." Well, the conflict built; it was an ugly scene; if it wasn't a priest, the kid would have clocked him for disrespecting his father! Even at the time I felt an empathy for the boy; a respect for his father; and a regret that the priest was so lacking in compassion, so righteous and judgmental in his (correct) ideology of anti-racism.

Light Rail Station was quiet when I heard vile, racist remarks from some youths. I looked at them and realized I knew them and their family from neighborhood and parish: I had instructed one of them for the sacraments. They later became drug-addicts and are probably now in prison. I froze because I didn't really want to confront them but I had to. My discomfort was short-lived: a stern, clear, articulate male voice forcefully, confidently but properly reprimanded them. Wow! I thought: that was fantastic. I could not have done as well! I turned to see a 30-something black man, well-dressed in business-professional attire. The boys meekly and correctly apologized. I hid my presence as I was embarrassed for them. But I wanted to give the anonymous stranger a medal. This was a prototypical correction of under-class delinquency by an over-class, or certainly upwardly mobile,  man of character, gravitas and authority. White under-class, black over-class!

My Story I was about 13 years old, skinny, timid and uncoordinated and I dutifully walked, even though I hated it, every week to the YMCA in Orange NJ where my parents wanted me to learn to swim. Rough area, I was surrounded by about 14 black boys. They were a little smaller than me and that made it worse. One, quite a bit smaller, stepped into the circle and was bouncing and weaving to take me on. I was terrified. They sense that and mocked me. I had to keep turning around as they would sneak up and smack me in the back of the head. I think I sensed that my physical safety was not at risk. But I was humiliated and shamed by their ridicule; the small stature of my opponent magnified my shame. I think that I have retained, throughout my life, a residual fear of the black male as menacing. I am not racist.

My Sons Where we still live, my sons were on numerous occasions mugged and beat up by groups of blacks. My sons are not racists. They grew up also with lower-class whites, who also fought and grew up to become, classically, Irish and Italian police and firefighters.  Some of them may carry racial resentment. When we moved here, our parish parking lot was the hangout for Bones: Beat On Nigger Every Saturday. I taught some of them. It was low class whites who fought with the black gangs from the nearby housing projects.  We are talking here about West Side Story , inter-ethnic juvenile delinquency: adolescent male insecurity and aggression festering in conditions of economic vulnerability. This is not white power, affluence, privilege. To the extent that those youths are able to climb the ladder of affluence and status they will adapt, as part of the paraphernalia of power, a systematic and ostentatious anti-racism.

To conclude: the narrative of systematic, powerful, white racism is a myth, a fabrication, a fallacy. It is itself a righteous posturing of a privileged and protected over-class, white and black, that endlessly congratulates itself on its moral superiority as anti-racist, pro-gay, and militant about "woman's rights."  To the extent that white racism exists, it is a symptom of an under-class, white as well as black, afflicted by a cascade of calamities, first of which is abandonment by fathers. The privileged class, white and black alike, are unabashed in their contempt for these "deplorables." Personally, I like them! Hate the sin (racism); love the sinner (racist)!

"Racist Police Brutality is SYSTEMIC": A Grave Moral Judgement

Police Killing of an Innocent

Three years ago in Minneapolis there was a police killing of an innocent: Justine Diamond, an affluent, popular woman, recently engaged, was shot to death after she called in an alarm when she startled a policeman, Mohamad Noor. It was tragic; and clearly unintentional. A rookie, he had been  heralded as the first Somali police officer. His training had been shortened, possibly to expedite his entrance into the department and its diversification. He had complaints against him, including assault, and had been judged twice as unfit for police work. He may have been a "bad cop," prone to violence; or incompetent, due to poor training and a rush to diversify; or he may have just made a mistake, a "bad choice." No allegation of racism. You didn't see him and her on CNN for the following five days. The victim's family received $20 million in compensation; the perpetrator was found guilty of 3rd degree murder and manslaughter and got twelve and a half years. The Somali Policemen's Association alleged the conviction was racist.  (Thanks to my college classmate Tim Regan, a resident in Minnesota, for alerting me to this case. Tim is a successful, Stanford-educated lawyer whose intelligence is evidenced by the fact that he regularly reads this blog and converses with me. LOL!) The death of Justine is tragic; but uninteresting to the national media as it contributed nothing to their white racist narrative.

There is a large, thriving Somali community in Minneapolis. They are businessmen, skilled workers, and hard laborers. They have strong communal bonds; the men stay with their women; family structure is good; high school graduation rate is an amazing 98%. The Somalis in Minneapolis may not be marching against systemic white racism. Like many immigrants, they are busy building their businesses and raising families. Their homes and businesses may have been destroyed in the current explosion of violence. I know the type, like Ethiopian and Kenyan women who work for me: they are women of gravitas; they are confident, assertive, compassionate, deeply religious, energetic, generous. Outstanding women and ideal employees! They are nobody's victim. They do not complain of systematic bigotry. I would pity the white policeman or anyone who messed with them in any way.

We might, loosely, distinguish three distinct groups of blacks in our country: immigrants from Africa and the islands; upwardly mobile Afro-Americans; and the Afro-American underclass. The first two groups flourish here; the last is vulnerable, violated, and miserable. It is not about skin color. It is about class and culture: male fidelity, fatherhood, family stability, work ethic, bonds of community, faith life. The last unfortunate group is essentially the same as their white cousins in low income communities where broken families, abandonment by fathers, and disintegrated communities prevail.

Thought Experiment

Imagine: A video of a mail deliverer, in uniform, molesting a child goes viral on the internet. It is so repugnant that it cannot be shown on television. Graphic, repulsive, unforgettable! A small but clever media-savy group called "We Hate Letter Carriers" creates a narrative that pedophilia is rampant in the US Post Office. Statistic show that letter carriers (we will assume) are less prone to this condition than most other occupations, probably because their daily exercise of walking is psychologically as well as physically healthy and their relationship with the community is overwhelmingly positive. But, many families, already anxious from the pandemic and so nauseated from the image, become fearful for their children. They realize the postman is around every day; he can observe family routines; he can judge which children are vulnerable, he seems friendly in an unusual way which is said to be typical of predators. And so a protest movement is launched: media coverage, demonstrations, petitions. Their intention is only to protect the young, but they make a catastrophic error in judgment: they decide that mail carriers are systemically pathological. They join peaceful protests carrying signs like "Keep our kids away from the mail" and "Go with UPS or FED EX and keep America Great." Those protesting are overwhelmed with compassion and concern; their hearts are tender. Their judgment is: bigoted as they are stereotyping an entire group according to a single incident, however horrid; slanderous as they perpetuate an extremely serious falsehood against an entire group; and a rash judgment as they jumped from their feelings into condemnation without sober and judicious evaluation of all evidence. Imagine the harm unleashed by these well-intentioned, sentimental but imprudent activists: the mail carriers beaten and abused, the climate of anxiety and distrust, the children of post office employees who are humiliated!

"I Know He is Racist"

In a mimetic stampede, millions of Americans, from an 8 minute video, KNOW  Derek Chauvin is racist. How do they Know? They just Know. There is zero evidence. That is what is called prejudice: he is white, he is a cop, he looks tough like the bigoted cops in the movies. So they Know he is racist. We see on the video evidence that he combines violent propensity with lack of empathy and these may be increased under stress. But racist? You know this only if you know white police are widely racist. You may never have met a white racist cop but you know it. He may have a black wife and black children and two black girlfriends for all you know. This kind of moral certainty is bigotry pure and simple. Those sitting on the judgment seat are themselves making stereotypical generalizations, however warm their feelings.

A Grave Moral Judgment

Our entire country was nauseated by that brutal 8 seconds. But to jump from that to a judgment of systematic police racism is a huge, monumental leap. To accept that condemnation on the basis of visceral feelings and input from the media and without sober study of the facts is a grave violation of the eighth commandment: Thou Shall Not Bear False Witness.

Perhaps I am wrong in withholding my approval of the white racism narrative. But if I am right, those accepting it are slandering an entire group of people. And not just any group: the police are among the very most courageous and important of us. They risk their lives daily. They protect us. They deal with the quagmire of misery, violence, and chaos in which we have cast our black adolescents ...as the rest of us rest comfortable and safe in our segregated residences. And yet we presume to condemn them. There was a crucifixion of George Floyd; since his death there have been a litany of crucifixions of police and blacks and other innocents, all under the banner of "Black Lives Matter."

This narrative serves to undermine legitimate police authority, deplete the confidence and trust they need to do their challenging job, and deter the young from choosing a career which should have our very best. This is, of course, part and parcel of the broader discrediting of masculinity, paternity and God-given authority, a discrediting that is has possessed the soul of our culture since the cultural revolution.

Who suffers most when the police are stigmatized? Black communities. In the wake of the Ferguson and Baltimore riots, police understandably stood down from strong enforcement and crime rates in poor neighborhoods escalated. Protests like "Black Lives Matter" hurt the black communities.

The narrative also strengthens the perverse image of the black man as victim, passive, impotent, lazy and incompetent. It feeds passivity and lethargy, even as that explodes into senseless, irrational violence. The demand for reparations has a similar logic: not only the materialistic dogma that money with solve things, but the positioning of the black male as wanting and needing a large handout for no effort of his own...the dependency syndrome that was unintentionally supported by the war on poverty and the welfare culture.

Most evidently, in light of all the current rioting, is that the narrative is a classic example of what Rene Girard called "a myth of sacred violence." In this logic,  the chaos of anxiety, conflict, resentment and envy resolves itself by contriving a scapegoat, without or without some rationale, and the community finds itself in a harmony of euphoric righteousness as it condemns the pariah and vents its anger. And so, our scapegoat: the white racist police. This figure works so well because it blissfully marries the rage of the fatherless black youth at all masculinity and order with the limousine liberal's insecurity, repressed guilt and resentment of discipline, sacrifice, order, accountability, authority and order. Together they despise, in the spirit of the 1960s, the "pigs."

I Just Don't See It

We have been hearing about systematic police racism for half a century:  I just don't see it. I have known a half dozen or so white racists: they are abnormalities, anachronisms, usually harmless but deformed and pathetic persons. Since my youth, late 1960s, I have been fascinated by "structures of sin and injustice" which have been a burning topic in Catholic intellectual discourse. I could rattle off a litany of them and pour out a five-page essay on each. Regarding race, what I see is institutional anti-racism. UPS where I worked for 25 years gave preference to women, blacks and minorities in its anxiety to be inclusive. We were put through hours of diversity workshops. My oldest granddaughter will be applying to colleges this year: with her achievement, she would stroll into the ivy league school of her choice if she were black; but since she is white most will be out of her reach. I am fine with these "institutions" of racial preference in light of the history of slavery and discrimination. But I just don't see the institutional white racism. The writing of Heather Mac Donald (article in WSJ this week) shows that the statistics unequivocally disprove the narrative.

The Success of the Civil Rights Movement

Structural racism collapsed swiftly, almost immediately in the 1960s. In this it resembles the fall of Communism in 1989, Vatican II in 1962-5 and the triumph of gay rights in recent decades. These changes were not sudden disruptions, but had been percolating for decades. Gay liberation is an inevitable result of the hegemony of contraception: if heterosexuals are practicing sterile, non-unitive, non-committed sex, why can't homosexuals do the same. The reforms of Vatican II were already pervasive in Catholic culture in the 1950s when my generation was growing up. My family and education raised me in the "Spirit of Vatican II" so that the so-called "reforms" were by 1965 common sense. The Latin mass people were the freaks! Communism was in an advanced stage of decline by the time of Reagan although it still presented itself as a powerful empire. And so, the post-War period in America was a privileged time of national unity and inclusion: having suffered a depression, waged a world war, and engaged in building an extraordinary economy, there was already an easy if inarticulate acceptance in our country of Catholics, Jews and blacks. The hegemony of the WASP was in collapse: this is why they were frantic to develop a birth control pill to stymie the fertility of Catholics and blacks. When Martin Luther King came marching down the street, the entire culture welcomed him...it was so obviously obscene that black people must go to the back of the bus. The universities, churches, media, Hollywood, law, politics, the labor movement...all the respectful cultural institutions outdid each other in their denunciation of structural racism.  This was a good thing.

What Do We Do?

Skin color is no longer a problem. But we face a monumental evil: the under-culture, multi-colored, of poverty, powerlessness, addiction, male infidelity, broken families and communities, promiscuity, pornography, unemployment, under-education, poor work ethic, resentment, inferiority and despair.

What do we do?

Jesus said: "The poor you always have with you." The reality of suffering, injustice, violence and vulnerability is beyond our control. Intractable and invincible: There is no solution. We are (as 12-steppers will recognize) powerless and overwhelmed in the face of inexorable, abysmal suffering. But not absolutely powerless!

I am suspicious of the social engineering of the left: the conviction that we can politically, by governmental action, resolve such problems. Often, state solution is as bad as the root problem: the war on poverty gave us a welfare culture of dependency and family breakdown and may have increased poverty; the war on drugs gave us astronomical numbers of imprisoned male fathers and decimated the black community; the war on the Covid demolished our economy and leaves us with incalculable psychological damage.

In our complex society we cannot avoid social policy, but we should have modest, minimal expectations: we will not solve things; we can mitigate slightly; we must be vigilant lest we make things worse. I appreciate the paralysis in D.C. since neither side can impose their horrific visions on us.

An example of positive policy: police brutality, essentially inclusive and non-discriminatory, is a persistent  reality given the self-selection by violent types and the chaotic, stressful nature of the work. It is a good suggestion that we sternly prosecute police who tolerate excessive physical force by their fellows. This may somewhat deter brutality, mitigate the "blue code", elevate police culture, and protect vulnerable young men from the underclass.

My conservative instincts prefer minimalism on the part of government (even as I prefer smallness in business): less done, less damage. Last week Supreme Court Justice Roberts ruled against the freedom of the Churches to open: this issue was dear to me and I was disappointed. But, true to his modesty and restrain, he deferred to the judgment of elected officials of the executive branch (governors) and did not impose his own views. (Although my belief is that freedom of religious expression is so sacred that repression of it requires the very strictest scrutiny.) Earlier he upheld Obamacare, similarly disappointing conservatives, in a show of humility and deference. In recent Sunday NY Times piece Ross Douthat perceptively pointed out that Trump used the pandemic to indulge his insatiable vanity but did not centralize power. He allowed governors, mayors and private industry a maximum of leeway. This made for a less efficient "war" on the Covid; but it preserved liberty and enhanced a wholesome subsidiarity. A Democrat would have instinctively centralized state power; further reduced freedom and the efficacy of smaller, mediating institutions;  amplified state control and atomized the isolated individual; even if they may have decreased the death toll by a percentage. I will take the deaths; and the free way of life.

I have long cherished the distinction (I learned 50 years ago from Hannah Arendt) between authoritarianism and totalitarianism: the former monopolizes political control and represses any opposition but leaves largely untouched cultural/social organisms that do not threaten him: schools, businesses, churches, families, traditional and voluntary organizations. Far worse is the totalitarian who imposes an absolute way of life and destroys all alternate, independent, subsisting institutions including family, and religion. Saddam Hussein was authoritarian; Isis is totalitarian. Franco authoritarian; Hitler, Stalin, Mao were totalitarian, as are China, North Korea and Iran. Trump shamelessly displays his authoritarian impulses; but the entire Democratic Party disguises in righteousness the totalitarian compulsion...to make the Little Sisters of the Poor pay for contraception and abortion and some little born-again baker to make the gay wedding cake.

But again: what do we do?  Rather than policy, protests, ideology and moral crusades, I prefer the concrete, the immediate, the personal. I am inspired by Mother Theresa, Dorothy Day and Catherine Doherty. My prescription: draw close to a person who is poor and afflicted: smile, look in the eye, listen, smell them, relax in the presence of God. My approach would be the opposite of the war on the Covid: in place of social distancing, draw close; in lieu of masking, unveil yourself and let the other present herself; instead of quarantining lets mix it up, poor and rich, black and white, educated and ignorant; instead of a lock-down, lets open ourselves up.  Drawing close you will be overwhelmed and powerless in the face those who don't bath, who steal, who dirty themselves, who lie, who clutter their rooms with filth, who are tormented with anxiety and anger. You will not be able to stay close to such unless you are close to God. But in His Merciful presence, you will overflow with serendipitous delight in the beauty of His children.