Call me a lunatic if you’d like, but I decided to continue my “education”. I hate quitting right in the middle of things and feel my time would be wasted if I don’t at least get an associates degree for my troubles. So, here I am, once again, in the same ol’ community college classrooms, listening to the same old satanic drum beat.
It was particularly strong today. I have to take a “health and wellness” class in the morning, and we learned all about how unequal distribution of resources creates lower economic households among the poor, put-upon negros, who, upon receiving the same money and country-club-style networking the whites get, would rise to attain godhood among the peoples; and so we discover the motive of the unnamed evil whites who are hell-bent on repressing them, lest they grow too powerful and fill the world with all the nobility inherent in the black race. What was tragically ironic about this class was, the black male instructor was trying to speak frankly about the way different races are susceptible to different diseases, and some pudgy little neo-Feminist white girl was so distraught by what she perceived to be politically incorrect tripe, that she argued with him for a good five minutes.
Fast-forward to British Lit (part II) where I’m learning how great the Romantics were because of how strongly they felt about equal rights for women and negros, and how they brushed off the oppression of the church in order to engage in all sorts of sexually liberated activity. When the teacher disparaged Walter Scott for displaying the “Dark Ages” in a romantic light, I almost walked out.
I like the Romantics, by the way, but “romanticism” as a movement is far broader than it might seem during a survey course. There were many opposing views and attitudes within the larger Romantic spectrum. Some scholars (apparently) place Emmerson and Thoreau in the Romantic camp, as well as Edgar Allen Poe. But Poe and Emmerson despised each other! Also, … I’m not sure how much relation there is between Walter Scott and Rousseau, if any.
I like the pastoral idea (the “return to nature” theme), and I like the opposition to Enlightenment rationalism, and I like the romanticized notions of medieval times. I love lyric poetry, and I like the Gothic aesthetic. The Romantics are fun and free, and while yes, in many cases, irresponsible, they were also averse to the sort of close-minded puritanical zealotry that so characterizes (and retards) the church today.
Moving on to the history of Western Civ, I learned all about how bloodthirsty and savage the old knights and aristocrats were in the medieval era (*and* they brutally oppressed women! ~ gasp ~). “They cut out people’s guts!”…we students were meant to issue forth self-righteous sighs of contentment with our modern situation. For my part, I’d rather rip the guts out of a few criminals, or draw-n-quarter a heretic, before slaughtering untold millions of innocent young infants in the wombs of their harpy mothers. Better to be the executioner than the abortionist on judgment day, and woe to the society who blesses the latter of the two.
The students in each of these classes simply nodded along in feigned agreement … sort of like the Sunday School child that knows the correct answer to every question is “Jesus”, whether he understands why or not. These TV-addled post-adolescent zombies have no clue what’s being done to them.
Sometimes I wonder why I bother caring about them at all.
They’re marching to the Devil’s drum, and if they miss a beat or stumble, it’s by accident, and they’re quickly reproved. I, on the other hand, am living below the parade grounds, in the underground catacombs of old Europe.