Gay Patriot Header Image

Re: Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery”

Posted by V the K at 9:41 am - March 19, 2018.
Filed under: End of Human Race

Trusting the average GP reader is familiar with the story.

Every Generation Before Millennials’ Reaction: “What a horrific story of human sacrifice demonstrating how ordinary people can be made to perform evil by social pressure.”

Millennial Reaction: “Bitch Got Stoned LOL

Then in the 1990s, something started to change dramatically in how her students responded to the sobering tale. Rather than being horrified by it, some claimed they were bored by it, while others thought the ending was “neat.”

When Ms. Haugaard pressed them for more of their thoughts, she was appalled to discover that not one student in the class was willing to say the practice of human sacrifice was morally wrong! She describes one interaction with a student, whom she calls Beth:

“‘Are you asking me if I believe in human sacrifice?’ Beth responded thoughtfully, as though seriously considering all aspects of the question. ‘Well, yes,’ I managed to say. ‘Do you think that the author approved or disapproved of this ritual?’

“I was stunned: This was the [young] woman who wrote so passionately of saving the whales, of concern for the rain forests, of her rescue and tender care of a stray dog. ‘I really don’t know,’ said Beth; ‘If it was a religion of long standing, [who are we to judge]?’”

This here is about 90% of the reason our society is as fecked up as it is.

Share

15 Comments

  1. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/sullivan-things-are-better-than-ever-why-are-we-miserable.html

    Comment by Ignatius — March 19, 2018 @ 11:33 am - March 19, 2018

  2. Creepy, indeed. Jackson once said that the story was about anti-semitism that she experienced being married to a Jew in 1950s Vermont. When Elizabeth Taylor revived “The Little Foxes” in the 1980s, audience members were disappointed when the righteous Horace refused to enrich the corrupt but entertaining Hubbard family. Sort of a Dallas audience.

    Comment by miss marmelstein — March 19, 2018 @ 12:28 pm - March 19, 2018

  3. https://gunfreezone.net/index.php/2018/03/19/i-have-a-different-conclusion/

    Comment by J- — March 19, 2018 @ 12:35 pm - March 19, 2018

  4. Well, of course the educational establishment has spent the past forty years inculcating a lack of morality among the youth. The Progressives in charge know that their philosophy cannot bear the slightest scrutiny, and so they teach that no judgement is valid. It’s of a piece with “Shared responsibility is no responsibility”.

    Comment by Blair Ivey — March 19, 2018 @ 2:55 pm - March 19, 2018

  5. This is what decades of teaching moral relativism brings us to. The result is inescapable.

    Once you teach people that any set of moral values is equal to any other set, you can justify anything.

    Comment by Craig Smith — March 19, 2018 @ 3:32 pm - March 19, 2018

  6. Loved this story in school.

    Doesn’t surprise me about attitudes now. The left has used language as a weapon, and now it’s terrible to “judge” people. (in reality, we all judge people, as well we should, by their behavior)

    Comment by Charlotte — March 19, 2018 @ 3:34 pm - March 19, 2018

  7. Well V the K,
    I would point out that the blog post that came from Instapundit is just an old fashioned “bash the liberal pinata with anything, I mean anything because I am too lazy to actually look for something new…”
    Why? Because the article he (and you) quotes from comes from 1997–so, sure, it is the 1990s… in the article. Feel free to extrapolate of course to the modern day … but don’t you think you could find something a smidgen more up to date? It has to be way worse now–libruls must actually be doing human sacrifice on Berkeley Campus by now, I mean … come on! Progress! 🙂

    Comment by Cas — March 19, 2018 @ 4:03 pm - March 19, 2018

  8. does anybody think the lack of parents in the home and children growing up in daycare and pre-schools helped to produce this generation?

    Comment by salg — March 19, 2018 @ 4:07 pm - March 19, 2018

  9. (in reality, we all judge people, as well we should, by their behavior)

    “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” – MLK,Jnr

    Today you get censured or placed on-leave for saying this.
    Must NOT ignore the victim-groups …and the microaggressed-against.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — March 19, 2018 @ 4:08 pm - March 19, 2018

  10. Whether the teacher’s account is recent or 20 years old, and whether it’s even true, isn’t “Who are we to judge?” the logical result of teaching moral relativism and multiculturalism?

    Comment by Conservative guy — March 19, 2018 @ 4:46 pm - March 19, 2018

  11. Our genetically closest relatives are bonobos… and chimpanzees. Progressives think the cunning, vicious chimp can be beat out of us, leaving only the free-loving, peaceful bonobo. They are mistaken. The chimpanzee can be silent, thoughtful, even caring, but explodes in displays of violence that echo the most brutal and vicious acts of violence that humans commit.

    Our inner chimpanzee is not an inner demon to be crushed. But it must be tamed and directed. There will always be part of us that will want to hunt, want to subjugate, want to consume, want to kill… Denying this reality only leads to high schoolers who coo over pictures of puppies while stoning their social inferiors to death.

    Comment by Sean L — March 19, 2018 @ 4:52 pm - March 19, 2018

  12. @ Sean L:

    And you’ve described why capitalism is the economic system most congruent with human nature.

    Even so, let us remember be the words of James T. Kirk:

    “I will not kill, today.”

    Comment by Blair Ivey — March 19, 2018 @ 7:42 pm - March 19, 2018

  13. Cas @ #7:

    I would point out that the blog post that came from Instapundit is just an old fashioned “bash the liberal pinata with anything, I mean anything because I am too lazy to actually look for something new…”

    Why? Because the article he (and you) quotes from comes from 1997–so, sure, it is the 1990s… in the article. Feel free to extrapolate of course to the modern day … but don’t you think you could find something a smidgen more up to date? It has to be way worse now–libruls must actually be doing human sacrifice on Berkeley Campus by now, I mean … come on! Progress!

    Progress! is the core mindlessness in Progressivism. Progressives worship it. It is their inarticulate expression of “better.” While change for the sake of change is the ideology of the cancer cell, for the Progressive it is a religion.

    The Declaration of Independence begins with these words:

    “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

    King George III of England was the power and might over the lives of the colonists in America. So the Founders had to cite an even higher power and they found it in the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God which gave them equal station with all humans. Additionally, they cited three Natural Rights in particular: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And ….

    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

    From this flowed the Constitution of the United States of America. That document marks the longest continuous form of government in the history of mankind.

    Along came the Progressives and Woodrow Wilson who wrote in 1913:

    Progress! Did you ever reflect that that word is almost a new one? No word comes more often or more naturally to the lips of modern man, as if the thing it stands for were almost synonymous with life itself, and yet men through many thousand years never talked or thought of progress. They thought in the other direction. (….)

    We think of the future, not the past, as the more glorious time in comparison with which the present is nothing. Progress, development,—those are modern words. The modern idea is to leave the past and press onward to something new.

    The political conservative in the 2018 USA is the same as the political liberal of 1787. We believe that the purpose of government is to protect our private rights, our rights to our property, to our conscience, to our liberty to speak and worship as we please. We believe in the rule of law and that we are a nation of laws promulgated by the consent the governed through the republican form of government.

    In 1916, Frank Goodnow (President of Johns Hopkins University) wrote in The American Conception of Liberty:

    Changed conditions, it has been thought, must bring in their train different conceptions of private rights if society is to be advantageously carried on. In other words, while insistence on individual rights may have been of great advantage at a time when the social organization was not highly developed, it may become a menace when social rather than individual efficiency is the necessary prerequisite of progress. For social efficiency probably owes more to the common realization of social duties than to the general insistence on privileges based on individual private rights.

    Government, for the Progressive, is the engine of change and its job is to organize and move “society” to a “better” place.

    The conceit and contradiction of Progressivism is that some amorphous entity can determine the “better” and that “right and wrong” are ambiguous and only meaningful in relation to the change which is Progress! For Progressives, there is no permanent standard of right and wrong. Progressives can always make things “better” with no blueprint of what is “better.” (Think Obamacare.) Who decides what is “better” and what separates it from what “we want?” And they contradict what they want. If there’s no standard outside their “wanting” to settle what the right thing is, then the strongest is going to prevail. It descends into the rule of force. The rule of force replaces the rule of law and the elites rule.

    Therefore, “change” is whatever is “wanted” and if and when it is realized, it is subject to change because ….. Progress! When the Progressive gets there, there is no there there because …. “status quo” and “change” and Progress!

    The symbol of Progressivism is a dog chasing his tail. Classical Liberalism, to the Progressive is a dog licking his balls.

    Comment by Heliotrope — March 19, 2018 @ 8:20 pm - March 19, 2018

  14. Heliotrope, are you hitched?

    Comment by TADFORD — March 19, 2018 @ 8:53 pm - March 19, 2018

  15. Progress! 🙂

    Comment by Cas — March 23, 2018 @ 1:22 pm - March 23, 2018

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.