Apres le deluge — Dieu?
Bookworm on Jan 04 2010 at 9:46 am | Filed under: England, Europe, Religion
There’s been a fair amount of talk lately about Brit Hume’s “come to Jesus” suggestion to Tiger:
I don’t have a whole lot to say about that, other than it goes a long way to explaining why Hume left the MSM. Not only could he not say that when he worked for ABC, he’d probably be barred from even thinking it. As is often the case with me, my thoughts headed in a completely opposite direction from the obvious.
I was actually thinking about the end of Rome, Georgian England and pre-WWI America. All three of them were distinguished by out-of-control behaviors. One responded by collapsing, as it was unable to defend itself against external forces. The other two responded by clamping down, hard and fast on societal wrongs. I wonder if we’re again at that tipping point in time.
I won’t belabor Rome. It rose; it fell. Part of its fall was its overextended borders. Part of its fall was an internal moral collapse that rendered it incapable of defending itself against its external enemies. That collapse didn’t happen quickly, taking, as it did, hundreds of years, but it still happened.
When we think of Georgian England, we think of elegant architecture, and the calm rationalism of the Enlightenment movement. The writer I always think of, of course, is Jane Austen, with her cool sarcasm and unwavering morality. We see it as a formal, intellectual, rational time — which it was, in one sector of society.
Georgian England was also a time of exceptional licentiousness. It’s no wonder that Hogarth bloomed artistically in that era. His etchings exposed the evils of drinking, as in Gin Lane:
He also examined prostitution, which was overwhelmingly prevalent in Georgian England. The plate below, the 6th in a series entitled “A Harlot’s Progress,” shows a clergyman masturbating a woman at the harlot’s funeral, mourners drink from atop the coffin and try to steal from within it, and a prostitute pick-pockets a mourner:
And of course, most of us are familiar with Hogarth’s famous “Rake’s Progress,” showing debauchery in the high life. This is the last plate, with the Rake reduced to insanity, thanks to syphilis:
By the way, modern England faces very similar cultural scourges today. Here’s a New Year’s picture of a modern-day rake’s progress — a British girl so drunk, she’s passed out in the snow:
That’s just one of thousands of pictures of debauchery that routinely find their way into the British tabloids, all of which bemoan the alcohol soaked culture that is modern Britain. Most of these pictures are ignored outside of the tabloids, although there was a suitable furor when a drunken University student urinated on a war memorial. Apparently, there are still some lines one cannot cross:
America is having her own debauchery festival. Performers simulate sex on stage (and in the audience); cities turn whole streets over to orgiastic behavior; and middle and high schools host x-rated “instructional” meetings for “victim” groups and promulgate pornographic reading lists — and that’s just the short list of cultural horrors.
The question is, where do we go from here? And that’s where I think things get interesting. The Romans fell apart (albeit in slow motion). The Georgians responded with Evangelicalism. Victorian propriety didn’t spring out of nowhere. It was a very direct, and religiously based, response to the debaucheries of the Georgian period. While Jane Austen demonstrates that the Georgian era always had a core of middle class moralists, it took the Victorians to elevate that morality to a national doctrine.
America’s path was a bit different. America, as a frontier country that had fought a revolution steeped in Protestant doctrine never had the Georgian cultural experience, although it also embraced Evangelicalism. (America, too, had giant revival meetings.) It was, simply, a more moral county in the 1700s, so it didn’t need to have a Victorian cultural backlash in the 1800s.
However, America had her own severe problem in the 1800s, and that was alcoholism. In the early to mid 19th Century, Johnny Appleseed wasn’t out there planting Golden Delicious and Fuji applies. Instead, he was planting trees with apples specifically selected to make hard cider, a strong alcoholic drink. And in the Wild West, the saloons weren’t cute places with sassy showgirls. They were centers of exceptionally hard drinking and truly pathetic prostitution.
The temperance movement, rather than being a sour-faced movement of small-minded women dedicated to destroying men’s fun was, instead, a direct response to an unprecedented wave of enormously destructive alcoholism. That women spearheaded the movement was unsurprising, since it was they who were at the mercy of alcoholic men who raped them, beat them and left them alone to raise children in a pre-birth control age.
Prohibition, the culmination of the temperance movement, brought its own crime problems in its wake. Nevertheless, Prohibition did work insofar as its goal was to break the back of the drinking culture that was destroying America. We drink today, but not as we drank then. In that way, is was a successful Constitutional experiment.
Bottom line: when debauchery takes over, society’s either collapse completely (as did Rome, which was unable to defend itself), or they take remedial steps (witness 19th Century England and late-19th and early-20th Century America). The question today is what will happen in Europe (and, specifically, England) and America. Both countries are struggling with internal cultural collapse and external enemies.
If I was a betting woman, I would say that England will yield, both internally and externally, to Islam. Externally, Islam will use bombs and guns to take over the country. Internally, an exhausted population will be grateful for the moral constraints Islam imposes on an out-of-control population. Religious prohibitions against alcohol will seem like a good thing, and the country, bounded on one side by debauchery and on the other side by guns and bombs, will willingly take on all the other limitations Islam imposes on formerly free populations.
In America, I think we’ll go the other way: It won’t be Islam that destroys us, but Christianity that saves us. I make this prediction as a Jewish woman who trusts that her Christian fellow-Americans will continue to believe in religious freedom. This means that I don’t imagine a theocracy, with militant Christians taking over Washington at gun point. I simply believe that Americans will look at what’s happening around them, and take refuge in traditional religious morality — and in this country, traditional religious morality is predominantly Christian.
Of course, America’s problems won’t end with a strong public resurgence of Judeo-Christian religious values. With Europe almost certainly having collapsed before Islam, the external hostility directed at America will be overwhelming. On the other hand, if America finds its hardcore Protestant roots, it can stand strong against that pressure.
Email This Post To A Friend
21 Responses to “Apres le deluge — Dieu?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Well, you may be making the counter-argument for Brit here, Books. After all, largely Buddhist and thoroughly non-Christian Japan has the longest continuous monarchy (I’d actually argue the Mikado is more like the Pope than a king, but let that pass) and syncretic, marvelously peculiar Tibet doesn’t seem to have had a decadent rakehell period since Buddhism got there.
Oh, and Melissa Crouthier and I will have a debate on this in PJM shortly — probably posted at midnight Pacific, although I know better than to try to make a really strong prediction of what the PJM editors will do.
Ran across this today, and it took me by surprise – I simply hadn’t considered this aspect of the situation.
http://www.4-blockworld.com/2010/01/media-racism.html
Charlie, you’re Buddhist, aren’t you? Can you expound a bit on the specifics of the statement that Brit made? I mean: his statement was that Buddhism doesn’t provide a framework for self-redemption if one violates the standards of permissible behavior, and Christianity does. There are lots of ways to approach this, I realize, but I’m not familiar with Buddhism as a structure – which I assume it has – and would welcome information concerning a) does Buddhism determine some specific behaviors as good, and some behaviors as bad, and if so, if one does that which is considered bad, what is the person supposed to do to nullify or rectify that bad act? Or can s/he?
Book,
Great article — so now you are a prophet?
For the most part I could agree with you — I would like to think that Christianity will be the salvation of America — but… we see Big Honcho “Christian” leaders succumbing to Islamic propaganda (Rick Warren, et al). Too many American “Christians” are taking sides against the Nation of the World’s Messah, Israel… and such immoral behavior can spell doom.
We must understand that if we look at Bible prophecy, we see many corrupt (Islamic and other) nations mentioned as coming together in the “last days” against Israel… but alas, America is not mentioned as aiding or being against Israel..
My conclusion (not infallible) is that America, in its downward spiral, will be swallowed up (by Islam?) and counted as just another group of nameless people among those corrupt nations who will come against Israel thus causing a world wide conflagration.
But, for my kids, g’kids and g’g'kids sake I pray you are right about Biblical Christianity
In Christ eternally,
ExP(Jack)
[...] Bookworm Room – Apres le deluge — Dieu? [...]
Book, you’re right that unshackled debauchery and total lack of impulse control causes a cultural backlash, but I’m afraid it won’t be Christianity that answers. It will be government regulation.
Case in point, when smokers got out of control, ie, they abandoned self-restraint and smoked everywhere, no matter how polite the objection (yes, I have bitter memories of that era), it was government regulation that stepped in to stop them. So instead of a voluntary courtesy, we now have inflexible, unforgiving, and picayune government regulation that always expands, never contracts, never forgives.
Remember, it’s for the children. Or public health. Or someone’s self-esteem.
I think an increasing number of Americans…including many nominal Christians…are actually believers in various forms of mysticism and magic, including astrology, magical crystals, a conscious Gaiaa, and so on. Probably the best label would be pantheism. Mainstream churches/denominations are at least as likely to try to incorporate these beliefs as to try to provide a crisp alternative to them.
In “The Screwtape Letters,” C S Lewis has his very senior devil hoping for the coming of “the materialist magician” among human…ie, someone who will have mystical and unscientific beliefs in “forces” of various kinds, but will reject any formal or ethical religious framework for these beliefs.
[...] Bookworm has a typically thoughtful take that looks at the fall of Rome, the fall of the UK, and the fall of the USA: In America, I think we’ll go the other way: It won’t be Islam that destroys us, but Christianity that saves us. I make this prediction as a Jewish woman who trusts that her Christian fellow-Americans will continue to believe in religious freedom. This means that I don’t imagine a theocracy, with militant Christians taking over Washington at gun point. I simply believe that Americans will look at what’s happening around them, and take refuge in traditional religious morality — and in this country, traditional religious morality is predominantly Christian. [...]
David Foster, you have a keen observation of Lewis’ take on “the materialist magician.” It has a present-day application.
Even the so called “New Evangelicals” are falling for New Age Mysticism, Old Desert Fathers, Contemplative Spirituality, Mantras, Indian Gurus and rituals from the dark ages. These are NOT typical of knowledgeable Fundamental Christians, but a deep departure.
A great web site on exposing the corruption of Christianity and the advent of modern mysticism is here:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/index.html
As we search that site and read about these new mystics we see that, for the most part, they are anti-traditional Christianity, anti-American and anti-Israel, with a “pro-anything goes” attitude about everything, especially morality.. leading to a downfall of our traditional American values.
ExP(Jack)
Ran across an unusual book by Anne Foerst, who calls herself a “robot theologian”…ie, she studies the intersection between theology and artificial intelligence. (She has degrees in computer science, philosophy, and divinity)
Anyhow, when she proposed a course on “God and Artifical Intelligence” at MIT, there was a lot of upsetness and anger. (She did eventually get to teach the class, which sounds interesting)
I’m not a religious person at all, but I think it’s bizarre how *afraid* so many academics, writers, etc seem to be of anything resembling a religious worldview.
A rational MIT scientist would be much more concerned about the kinds of mysticism that I mentioned above, which are quite incompatible with science than about traditional religions that have managed to coexist with it pretty well. A watchmaker God who built the watch, and occasionally messes with it a little (miracles) in not antiscientific in the same sense as all the various forces and spirits which are becoming so popular.
But all those various forces and spirits are the ones paying the university with the gravy train, so that overrides all.
I don’t know about Tiger, but I think for some Americans Buddhism is just a part of the mix of other beliefs they dabble in. Catholic theology also has to be figured into any prognosis. The more watered down other denominations become, the more some people (Tony Blair) are attracted to the theological framework offered by Catholicism.
Book, what an utterly, utterly depressing world view on the Brits.
I hope that you are wrong, I fear that you are right.
Thank you for such a crystal clear job of explaining and placing developments in their historical contexts. I learned many things from your essay.
Re the evangelical era in England: the people involved in these movements seemed to come mainly from two groups. First, there was the emerging industrial proletariat–especially workers in the new textile mills. Methodism, IIRC, became particularly popular in this group. But also, the *owners and managers* of the new industrial facilities often tended to be dissenters from the established church. Here’s D S Cardwell in his book “Turning Points in Western Technology,” discussing the British cotton-processing industry:
“The early leaders were often Dissenters who were excluded from the fruits–some might say the corruptions–of office in State and Establishment. They were therefore free to devote themselves to business as their sole professional aim while the laws of England assured them their property and the profits their genius earned.” In America in recent decades, it’s been possible for a person to succeed in business without being a member of the “established church”–ie, without adopting the political & social opinions of academia, the New York Times, and public television. With the rapid growth of government intervention in all elements of the economy, it is not clear that this will continue to be true. See my (slightly) related post: Innovation and Social Structure http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/10688.html
I keep being surprised by the extent of the knowledge of bloggers of a certain calibre. You aced this one and whenever I am lucky enough to read posts such as this (which mirror my thoughs at some levels) it makes the day all that more instructive. Coming from a Caribbean country which only recently got its Independance from Britian it is so pathetic to see the level to which that once great country has fallen. I was at the UN the other day and listened as a tall Englishman rose and in his stentorian wonderful English tones began to pontificate on some issue. I was surprised at myself as I just looked at him with contempt that these people (whose Queen we still call ours) who produced Margaret Thatcher and Winston Churchill have so fallen down the civilization slope. May their continent rest in peace at the feet of Allah.
Nice article, Bookworm. New to your blog, and appreciative of it so far. I only see one problem with your thoughts on this particular topic. It is this: never in its history has Protestant Christianity made a steadfast resistance to the spread of Islam. Instead, Protestant countries have always preferred to do business with Muslim nations. There are sporadic counter examples, such as the very brief “war” against the Barbary pirates, but their very infrequency and smallness of scale make my point.
Charlie (Colorado): I’d argue against Japan being largely Buddhist, simply because Japan is mostly Shinto (which is animist with only a minimal amount of Buddhism sprinkled in for taste), adding pseudo-Christianity for that additional zest. Looking at the manga Inuyasha (which Takahashi Rumiko did without reference to a single Western mythology) and you can see a rich tapestry of religious background that is pretty far removed from any form of Buddhism I’ve ever seen. And as for Tibet, well, it’s got its fair share of bloodshed under Buddhism also.
Also, Japan has a veneer of pseudo-Christianity, let’s not pretend it doesn’t. I think a better example for your argument would be China, which despite its ‘communist’ government and the ‘Cultural Revolution’ (hah! what a euphemism!) had maintained an unbroken and largely unchanged culture and tradition up to fairly recent times.
suek: Buddhism is largely atheistic in nature; Buddha would be providing us with reliable, cheap and perpetual energy now if he could see what the modern Buddhist has done to his teachings. The primary thing behind Buddhism is that man is destined to suffer forever until he realises that desires (all desires, even the ones we call good) cause suffering and loss. When you get that enlightenment, then you realise you need to purge yourself of those desires (after all, if you no longer desire something, then losing it or failing it will not cause you pain anymore). And the way you can hasten that process is through the Eightfold Path, and some other stuff which I was no longer inclined to go into. Let’s just say that your basic Vulcan would find Buddhism quite logical indeed. Except for pon farr but that’s biological and not something Vulcans are very proud of anyway.
withouthavingseen: That is because the very notion of a ‘Protestant’ country is laughable. In no country with a real foreign policy and a real armed force has Protestanism ever really been the State religion long enough for it to seep into the bedrock of the culture. Germany? When there was essentially no Germany during the Thirty Years War? Sweden, where the daughter of Gustavus Adolphus turned Catholic? The UK, which Church of England is actually Catholic-lite (let’s be honest)? And where the State religion changed with every new Queen and King for a fairly long while?
I’ll give the British this much, though – during Empire, they came down hard on any troublemakers… and if the troublemakers were Muslim, they didn’t care.
>>after all, if you no longer desire something, then losing it or failing it will not cause you pain anymore)>>
Heh. “Freedom’s just another name for nothing left to lose”??
@ #15 David Foster:
But also, the *owners and managers* of the new industrial facilities often tended to be dissenters from the established church.
According to Darlington in his Evolution of Man and Society, nearly all of the scientific and technological advances in England from 1600-2000 came from religious dissenters. A partial exception would be Isaac Newton, who held unorthodox religious views but still was associated with Cambridge from an early age, at a time when one had to belong to the established church to be associated with either Oxford or Cambridge. Apparently Isaac dissimulated well enough.
I don’t hear any of the libs using this as a talking point. Disclaimer: I am not a churchgoer.
suek: I’m sure I’m doing Buddhism a slaughter, but that is more or less what their belief structure is. Originally, that is. After that, of course, you got it imported into China, where Buddha, instead of just being the founder and leader, becomes the Ur-God. And then various other deities get imported into the mythological framework. And then it gets exported to Japan, where the locals did an ever greater number on it.
And now, in South East Asia, Buddhism and Taoism are so closely intertwined that it’s just the ‘Chinese religion’.
Disclaimer: I’m a Christian myself. What I know about Buddhism is from secondary sources (namely, people around me).