I’m sure you’ve heard that Madonna performed a half-time show for the Super Bowl. I think she was the perfect choice.
She’s like a prophetess for the new American religion. She ended the performance with her most serious (and religious) song: “Like a Prayer” to furious applause. The music-video for “Like a Prayer” showcases the final end of modernity, though in a falsely glamorized state. (Modern reality is more of a nightmare.)
By “showcases the end of modernity” I don’t mean that her song showcases the actual *end* of Modernity. I mean to say that it showcases the ends to which Modernity has lead the West.
One of my favorite thinkers, Richard Weaver, says this:
“When democracy is taken from its proper place and is allowed to fill the entire horizon, it produces an envious hatred not only of all distinction but even of all difference.”
then a little further on, he adds:
“So democracy, a valuable but limited political concept, has been elevated by some into a creed as comprehensive as a religion or a philosophy, already at the cost of widespread subversion.” ~ Visions of Order, pg. 15
Madonna is the priestess of this democratic religion which comes complete with its own rituals and rites. Her music video is too vulgar to post so I’ll provide a brief overview and a few comments. (Look it up on Youtube if you have a strong stomach.)
A gang of evil whites (representing us all) attack a hooker. They beat her senseless then stab her to death. During the struggle, a brave and noble negro (is there any other sort?) interferes on her behalf. Of course, the white boys run off in time for the police to show up and blame the negro for the death of the woman. Luckily though, Madonna was singing and dancing in the bushes and saw the whole thing.
The bulk of the video follows Madonna as she decides how to deal with what she’s seen.
She wanders into a church and has a religious experience with negro-Jesus and presumably decides that the only way to cleanse the sins of the white-race is to have sexual intercourse with the negro, while worshiping him (literally.) I’ll repeat, the scenes are disgusting so watch with care (if at all.)
(A brief note: Those of you who read “Cambria Will Not Yield“ will note that he repeatedly discusses the new-found negro-worship among Westerners. When I first started reading his blog, I thought he was using poetic license or being metaphorical somehow. But, sadly, I’ve become convinced that he is right in a very literal way, as Madonna’s video clearly demonstrates.)
Devotees to Madonna’s religion want to destroy all natural distinctions — all natural “boundaries” among men. These (God-created) distinctions among men introduce inequalities and segregate certain people from others. This is blasphemy to the modernist. The only distinctions and segregations that can be allowed in this new religion, are those artificially imposed on man by the state. In other words, man controls who can and cannot associate with each other. Man sets the boundary markers! Man will be sovereign over his own context!
When I speak of “context” I’m making an analogy. To put it simply, I’m saying that a man is like a word in a sentence. If you remove a word from a sentence, it becomes meaningless. Take the word “dog” for instance. In its decontextualized state, it has no meaning.
“Dog” could refer to a particular, likeable and furry animal. (Though which likeable furry animal is being referred to, we have no clue.)
“Dog” could refer to the class of all fuzzy, likeable animals.
“Dog” could be someone’s nickname.
“Dog” could be a nonsense word used to carry the beat in a song: (dog it’a dog, a dang a dang dang).
Really, when the word “dog” is abstracted from its proper context, it becomes meaningless.
The same is true of a man. When you remove him from his particular time, place and environment, he loses all traces of person-hood. His environment isn’t just the trees, grass and rivers where he grew up — it includes things like: his genetics, his family-history, his intelligence, etc. All of these natural distinctive-traits, define a man. When liberals speak of him in an abstracted way (the most famous example of which is that whore-monger MLKjr speaking about the ‘content of a man’s character’) they are literally destroying him.
They hope to become their own gods by modeling themselves after a fallen and grotesque caricature of Christ and become sovereign over their own “context.”
Richard Weaver puts it this way:
“Enough has been said to show that our culture today is faced with very serious threats in the form of rationalistic drives to prohibit, in the name of equality, cultural segregation. The effect of this would be to break up the natural cultural cohesion and to try to replace it with artificial politically dictated integration.”
Notice Weaver specifically claims that the politically-directed integration is artificial! It is not a natural integration, but an artificial one imposed on us all by trickery and force.
Such “integration” would of course be a failure because where deep inner impulse is lacking cohesiveness for any length of time is impossible. This crisis has been brought to our attention most spectacularly in the attempt to “integrate” culturally distinct elements by court action. It is, however, only the most publicized of the moves; others are taking place in areas not in the spotlight, but all originate in ignorance, if not in a suicidal determination to write an end to the heritage of Western culture.
The more power these religious zealots gather, the more unstable Western culture will become until finally the house crashes down — as Christ has told us:
Every city or house divided against itself, shall not stand.
Of course, I know how the average Super-Bowl attendee will respond:
“It sure is a catchy tune though…”