ClaytonB
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2011
- Messages
- 10,246
The symbolism of school-shootings
I really like Palki's style and most of her coverage is right-on. However, on this topic, she goes the way of most non-Americans and falls for all the usual gun-control canards. I am highlighting this segment, in particular, because she discusses the topic in a way that American gun-control advocates never would -- she mentions America's "soul" and she asks what the issue of school shootings and other armed violence in America says about it. Good question, Palki!
Most Christian conservatives tend to examine this issue from a strictly textual basis (does the Bible permit us to be armed?) and there's nothing wrong with that. However, it's not a very good way to persuade those who disagree with you, since you're just telling them, "God doesn't say I have to not be armed." To someone like Palki, that will feel like a very "Get off my lawn!" type of response. It's not wrong, but it's not very persuasive, either.
So, let's step back and analyze this from a symbolic standpoint. This is a topic that I would love to discuss with Jonathan Pageau because, as a Canadian, I'm pretty sure he doesn't understand the American viewpoint on firearms (based on some of his remarks about this topic). Notice how Palki frames the issue: when will Americans wake up and realize that it's the right thing to do to give up their guns to stop these shootings? As conservatives, we tend to snicker at these kinds of questions because they are missing the point. Nevertheless, if you were raised in a typical left-of-center suburban liberal American household, it sounds like a perfectly reasonable question. And that's one of the reasons that the 2A has eroded so far as it has (which is itself dangerous!)
Pageau spends quite a bit of time on his channel talking about sacrifice and its symbolic significance. It's long but this vlog is quite worthwhile, and I'll put it here for reference:
Essentially, the language that Palki employs is that of sacrifice. Unlike an American, she's probably even aware of that, because sacrifices and offerings are still a living part of Indian culture. When there is a scourge upon the land, a real scourge, the first instinct of society is to make a sacrifice. It's been a long time since the West has faced those kinds of conditions -- WWII probably being the last true example of this phenomenon -- but it's present everywhere in society. Palki is asking, "There is a scourge of school-shootings, why don't Americans get together and give up something to rid themselves of this scourge?" In the past, if there was a drought, or pestilence, etc. the society would get together and make a sacrifice to ask God to deliver them. The sacrifice can be understood as a cry for help, as an expression of sorrow and repentance, as a dedication, etc. It's a way of saying, "We know we've lost our way, please send us help from above because we don't know what to do."
But would Americans giving up their guns actually be a righteous sacrifice, like Abel's? Would it accomplish its goal or any goal at all? Or, would it be a Cain's sacrifice, a false-sacrifice made to put on a show of "doing something", without addressing the real rot in the soul of America?
Let's go back to the essence of the right to bear arms. Another way to call it is the right of the public at-large to bear state-of-the-art defensive equipment, or, popular armament. What is the spiritual essence of this idea? In the old days when monarchy was prevalent, no commoner could be armed in the king's court, nor likely in the presence of anyone of rank, unless they were in active duty in the military and, even then, only as permitted by the guidelines of martial law. In some countries, it has been unlawful for anyone -- even nobles! -- to be armed in the presence of the king. Only the king bears the sword in the court. So, when a group of free people are together, armed, they are according to each other a kind of implied rank or nobility. "I trust you not to do something stupid/irresponsible in my presence, or draw swords over a petty verbal dispute like common crooks." If you've ever been around yahoos shooting guns, you know what I'm talking about. I've withdrawn from such activity before because I simply did not trust the present company not to get someone killed out of sheer stupidity. The point is that according the right to my fellow citizens to keep and bear state-of-the-art weapons is an act of brotherhood.
In Scripture, the body of Christ are called kings and priests (Rev. 5:10 et. al.) Note, kings. So, we are of royal status, spiritually. We are not commoners who must hand over our sword to the gatekeeper when entering the king's court, and hope to get it back on our way out. We are entrusted to have our sword on our belt, in the king's presence, because he has accorded us that rank.
So, is "giving up our guns" a Cain's sacrifice, or an Abel's sacrifice? Let's look at another metaphor to help. Suppose guns and all other weapons are out of the picture. You still have some natural defensive weapons -- your fingernails. Suppose that we are under some terrible scourge of murders and the tribe comes together to make a sacrifice to cry out to God for help. Suppose there was a simple painless way to remove your fingernails, and the chief proposes, "Let's all give up our fingernails and, in this way, we will cry out to God to take away this scourge from us." Of course, the chief and his bodyguard cannot give up their fingernails, because, what if there is a foreign raid? But it should be pretty obvious that this has nothing to do with making a righteous sacrifice to plead for God to take away a social scourge. It's simply an act of tyranny, covered with the fig-leaf of aping the form of a righteous sacrifice. In other words, it is a false-sacrifice, a Cain's sacrifice.
God doesn't want our guns, he doesn't need them. In fact, we don't need them in that sense, either. Not in the sense that we rely upon our guns rather than God or because "God might not be there." In fact, this line of thinking points us towards the true rot in the American soul -- we have become arrogant and self-reliant. We have forgotten God. We have built high, fortified walls and we have placed our trust in them, rather than in God. We have become Moab:
The US military is possibly the single greatest idol in the world today. Dozens of millions worship it and billions of people sacrifice to it, whether willingly or unwillingly. Is the US military an aspect of the 2nd Amendment? In fact, the US military is an aspect of globalist imperialism. In its modern incarnation, it was built and funded by the globalists for the purposes of bringing about globalism, which it has nearly accomplished. The rot in America's soul has a lot more to do with our foreign entanglements and military adventurism -- which our Founders explicitly warned us against -- than with law-abiding citizens keeping and maintaining state-of-the-art defensive weapons. It has a lot more to do with the innocents that are killed as "collateral damage" in the mad rush to global imperialism. In fact, these school shootings truly have nothing whatsoever to do with lawful gun-ownership. For non-Americans, this can seem difficult to understand; it's hard for them to see through the propaganda, since they have never been directly exposed to traditional American culture. For them, popular gun-ownership is the yahoos at the gun range. In fact, I've never seen a yahoo at a proper gun range (just when target-practicing out in backwoods). Yes, they exist, but they're not the cause of armed violence in the US, either. No, popular gun-ownership is the Koreans on the rooftop. Popular gun ownership helps secure private property rights and greatly increases the political price-tag of domestic tyranny. Both of these dovetail with the principles which make a free society possible. And it is freedom -- real freedom, based on peace and prosperity -- that is the thing.
We need to reject the calls to make a Cain's sacrifice, with prejudice. A false sacrifice made in order to "show that we're doing something" is just a way to avoid doing actual spiritual heart-searching, which is what we're really avoiding. It's easier to think about "giving up our guns" than to ask why we have wandered away from God. Why have we wandered away from Scripture and the flock? Is it really so much easier to give up our guns, than to return to the one who is the basis of the freedoms by which we are able to keep and bear arms, in the first place? We absolutely need to listen to the wake-up call of school-shootings, but "make a Cain's sacrifice and give up your guns" is not the answer. The answer is to make a true sacrifice of the heart by returning to God and worshiping him, instead of ourselves...
I really like Palki's style and most of her coverage is right-on. However, on this topic, she goes the way of most non-Americans and falls for all the usual gun-control canards. I am highlighting this segment, in particular, because she discusses the topic in a way that American gun-control advocates never would -- she mentions America's "soul" and she asks what the issue of school shootings and other armed violence in America says about it. Good question, Palki!
Most Christian conservatives tend to examine this issue from a strictly textual basis (does the Bible permit us to be armed?) and there's nothing wrong with that. However, it's not a very good way to persuade those who disagree with you, since you're just telling them, "God doesn't say I have to not be armed." To someone like Palki, that will feel like a very "Get off my lawn!" type of response. It's not wrong, but it's not very persuasive, either.
So, let's step back and analyze this from a symbolic standpoint. This is a topic that I would love to discuss with Jonathan Pageau because, as a Canadian, I'm pretty sure he doesn't understand the American viewpoint on firearms (based on some of his remarks about this topic). Notice how Palki frames the issue: when will Americans wake up and realize that it's the right thing to do to give up their guns to stop these shootings? As conservatives, we tend to snicker at these kinds of questions because they are missing the point. Nevertheless, if you were raised in a typical left-of-center suburban liberal American household, it sounds like a perfectly reasonable question. And that's one of the reasons that the 2A has eroded so far as it has (which is itself dangerous!)
Pageau spends quite a bit of time on his channel talking about sacrifice and its symbolic significance. It's long but this vlog is quite worthwhile, and I'll put it here for reference:
Essentially, the language that Palki employs is that of sacrifice. Unlike an American, she's probably even aware of that, because sacrifices and offerings are still a living part of Indian culture. When there is a scourge upon the land, a real scourge, the first instinct of society is to make a sacrifice. It's been a long time since the West has faced those kinds of conditions -- WWII probably being the last true example of this phenomenon -- but it's present everywhere in society. Palki is asking, "There is a scourge of school-shootings, why don't Americans get together and give up something to rid themselves of this scourge?" In the past, if there was a drought, or pestilence, etc. the society would get together and make a sacrifice to ask God to deliver them. The sacrifice can be understood as a cry for help, as an expression of sorrow and repentance, as a dedication, etc. It's a way of saying, "We know we've lost our way, please send us help from above because we don't know what to do."
But would Americans giving up their guns actually be a righteous sacrifice, like Abel's? Would it accomplish its goal or any goal at all? Or, would it be a Cain's sacrifice, a false-sacrifice made to put on a show of "doing something", without addressing the real rot in the soul of America?
Let's go back to the essence of the right to bear arms. Another way to call it is the right of the public at-large to bear state-of-the-art defensive equipment, or, popular armament. What is the spiritual essence of this idea? In the old days when monarchy was prevalent, no commoner could be armed in the king's court, nor likely in the presence of anyone of rank, unless they were in active duty in the military and, even then, only as permitted by the guidelines of martial law. In some countries, it has been unlawful for anyone -- even nobles! -- to be armed in the presence of the king. Only the king bears the sword in the court. So, when a group of free people are together, armed, they are according to each other a kind of implied rank or nobility. "I trust you not to do something stupid/irresponsible in my presence, or draw swords over a petty verbal dispute like common crooks." If you've ever been around yahoos shooting guns, you know what I'm talking about. I've withdrawn from such activity before because I simply did not trust the present company not to get someone killed out of sheer stupidity. The point is that according the right to my fellow citizens to keep and bear state-of-the-art weapons is an act of brotherhood.
In Scripture, the body of Christ are called kings and priests (Rev. 5:10 et. al.) Note, kings. So, we are of royal status, spiritually. We are not commoners who must hand over our sword to the gatekeeper when entering the king's court, and hope to get it back on our way out. We are entrusted to have our sword on our belt, in the king's presence, because he has accorded us that rank.
So, is "giving up our guns" a Cain's sacrifice, or an Abel's sacrifice? Let's look at another metaphor to help. Suppose guns and all other weapons are out of the picture. You still have some natural defensive weapons -- your fingernails. Suppose that we are under some terrible scourge of murders and the tribe comes together to make a sacrifice to cry out to God for help. Suppose there was a simple painless way to remove your fingernails, and the chief proposes, "Let's all give up our fingernails and, in this way, we will cry out to God to take away this scourge from us." Of course, the chief and his bodyguard cannot give up their fingernails, because, what if there is a foreign raid? But it should be pretty obvious that this has nothing to do with making a righteous sacrifice to plead for God to take away a social scourge. It's simply an act of tyranny, covered with the fig-leaf of aping the form of a righteous sacrifice. In other words, it is a false-sacrifice, a Cain's sacrifice.
God doesn't want our guns, he doesn't need them. In fact, we don't need them in that sense, either. Not in the sense that we rely upon our guns rather than God or because "God might not be there." In fact, this line of thinking points us towards the true rot in the American soul -- we have become arrogant and self-reliant. We have forgotten God. We have built high, fortified walls and we have placed our trust in them, rather than in God. We have become Moab:
The US military is possibly the single greatest idol in the world today. Dozens of millions worship it and billions of people sacrifice to it, whether willingly or unwillingly. Is the US military an aspect of the 2nd Amendment? In fact, the US military is an aspect of globalist imperialism. In its modern incarnation, it was built and funded by the globalists for the purposes of bringing about globalism, which it has nearly accomplished. The rot in America's soul has a lot more to do with our foreign entanglements and military adventurism -- which our Founders explicitly warned us against -- than with law-abiding citizens keeping and maintaining state-of-the-art defensive weapons. It has a lot more to do with the innocents that are killed as "collateral damage" in the mad rush to global imperialism. In fact, these school shootings truly have nothing whatsoever to do with lawful gun-ownership. For non-Americans, this can seem difficult to understand; it's hard for them to see through the propaganda, since they have never been directly exposed to traditional American culture. For them, popular gun-ownership is the yahoos at the gun range. In fact, I've never seen a yahoo at a proper gun range (just when target-practicing out in backwoods). Yes, they exist, but they're not the cause of armed violence in the US, either. No, popular gun-ownership is the Koreans on the rooftop. Popular gun ownership helps secure private property rights and greatly increases the political price-tag of domestic tyranny. Both of these dovetail with the principles which make a free society possible. And it is freedom -- real freedom, based on peace and prosperity -- that is the thing.
We need to reject the calls to make a Cain's sacrifice, with prejudice. A false sacrifice made in order to "show that we're doing something" is just a way to avoid doing actual spiritual heart-searching, which is what we're really avoiding. It's easier to think about "giving up our guns" than to ask why we have wandered away from God. Why have we wandered away from Scripture and the flock? Is it really so much easier to give up our guns, than to return to the one who is the basis of the freedoms by which we are able to keep and bear arms, in the first place? We absolutely need to listen to the wake-up call of school-shootings, but "make a Cain's sacrifice and give up your guns" is not the answer. The answer is to make a true sacrifice of the heart by returning to God and worshiping him, instead of ourselves...
