Western Media, white Western liberalism, Christianity
The Pope versus the dictatorship of white, liberal relativism
By Anthony Oluwatoyin
Thursday, September 21, 2006
The Western media continues to present Moslemist monsters as the primary spokesmen for Islam. These savages are in fact pseudo-Muslims who no more speak for any religion than pedophiles are child-care practitioners.
The Pope knows all about this. Just last year, in what would turn out to be the last moments before the election that elevated him to the Papacy, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, vigorously fleshed out his criticism of what he so brilliantly called the "dictatorship of relativism." Relativism is the crazy, contradictory idea that there are no absolutes, nothing is "definite," -- except, of course, the absolutely never-to-be-questioned idea that nothing is absolute.
And now Pope Benedict XVI is reeling and retching from the most venomous relativism in the world today. The toxic terror of white Western liberalism. This bagged-spinach lethally and literally bags all religions, all faith, all beliefs, all values in one mad equation of moral equivalence. No bag of of values or beliefs is better or worse than any other in the supermarket of liberal declarations.
Except, of course, if you are white and believe that your religion is the true religion. Then your religion is downgraded to racism, dehydrated of all spiritual credibility.
Except, again, (try to keep up with the "exceptions," eh) if you are non-white and believe that your religion represents truth, then you and your religion both, are excused.
Except, again, if you are non-white but your religion which you consider to be true, is a traditionally white religion, a religion traditionally associated with white Westerners -- oh heck, let's drop the charade -- Christianity! Except, Christianity. (Judaism is only a problem if it's the Jewish State as opposed to the Jewish Soul -- oh heck, let's drop the charade -- Israel! Except, Big, bad, American-powered Israel.)
In any case, how dare you, non-white or white, think that Christianity could possibly be true. Unless you're white, you must be a colonial simpleton. You are not excused. You are one punk'd dupe.
Except, again, if your Western religion has been "adapted," or has otherwise "evolved" into the most liberal of liberationist theology, unloading old oppositions only to unleash endless new ones. Embracing gay marriage and imposing Bishops to suppress traditionalist dissent; embracing the choice to murder unborn children while opposing the simplest choices of simple free markets; embracing every deadly species of so-called "Revolution."
If you are dizzy from the exceptions and excuses and explanations, you know now what the Pope must be going through. You can feel his pain.
We deal here with the media that likes to boast of its "speak truth to power" role. So what about "truth to terror"?
That is where the Pope went wrong. He thought that a cool academic context, which he chose for his address, would protect his attempt to deal with gripping nuances that bedevil our time. As a long-serving academic, a former University Professor, he should have known that it is academia, in fact, that breeds the loon-lib extremists who populate Western media.
The headlines brazenly took everything the Holy Father touched on out of context, calculated to inflame pathological Moslemist ignorance.
The Holy Father said that force, of any kind, is just not compatible with authentic faith. Men come to God in freedom of the will. They sustain this faith with reason in freedom of assembly. Violence can only violate. It has no place in the soul. It has no role in life.
The esoterics of free-will; the metaphysics of "conversion, " by sword or through soul. These were the concerns the Holy Father wanted to dialogue.
Baiting savages. That was the intent of our media. Guess who reeled whom in?
The ugly truth is that our media speaks "truth to power," only when it's white power, and even then, only when it's the kind of white power that our media cannot abide. White, Christian, Conservative.
Some time ago, at the outbreak of the war to liberate Iraq, CBC self-anointed "experts" like Julie Van Dusen claimed that they were "only" speaking "truth to power," in attacking President Bush, in speaking so favourably of then Prime Minister Jean Chretien's breaking ranks with the U.S. So I sent some simple questions to the CBC:
What about a critique of Chretien? Why not at least ask if he is in fact simply abandoning Iraqis to the continued dictatorship of Saddam, using skepticism about (whether Saddam had or did not have) weapons of mass destruction for cover?
Why not aggressively question Chretien in terms of whether he had or should have an alternate plan to liberate Iraq and other such slave pens around the globe, especially if Liberals, at the time, were not being disingenuous when they said, weapons or no weapons of mass destruction, they "really" thought Saddam was a "bad man," a proven danger and a threat "in the region"?
Why not speak truth to power to Chretien? Why only to Bush?
Oh, I'm still waiting, still holding my breath for a CBC response. In the interim, the CBC evolved to the point where last year, in the wake of the London bombings, our Communist Broadcast of Canada (CBC) reportedly wondered in an internal memo if they should even refer to the bombers as "terrorists."
That's the new hug-a-terrorist-a-day media that the Pope came up against. Indeed, he should have known better.
Remember, Benedict strongly condemned the so-called Mohammad cartoons, when that controversy erupted, just hours into his Papacy. He urged respect for the convictions and religious practices of others.
The Muslim world did not urge widespread respect for Benedict's celebrated scholarly bent, in the last week or so. There was a call to assassinate. He was burned in effigy. Churches were torched. Apologies were demanded and rejected before they could be formulated. No different from the cartoon protest. Any excuse for Moslemist violence in the name of Muslims.
Remember, Benedict found no moral justification in the war to liberate Iraq. Now Moslemists can find no justification simply to let him live.
Remember, Benedict condemned Israeli self-defense in response to Hezbollah terrorist cross-border murder in the recent conflict in Lebanon. What does he now have to show for it?
When will Christian Conservatives learn from their own deadliest enemies? When will Christian Conservatives learn how indistinguishable and indistinguishably deadly their untold and united enemies are?
Anthony Oluwatoyin, a columnist for The Afro News, writes on politics, race and religion. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org