One of my favorite bad thinkers never tires of reminding his readers and listeners that a negative identity is not a strong position to be in.\u00a0 In other words, if you define your identity by what you are against then you lack a basis for defining what you are for.\u00a0 This is the charge he lays at the feet of Conservative Inc.\u00a0 By defining themselves as only against progressivism they are constantly addressing whatever new outrage the Left cooks up but they fail to define what they themselves do stand for.\u00a0 If you\u2019re always on the defensive you never have a chance to advocate for the things you actually want to see implemented.<\/p>\n
Far better is to look at what you do believe in and formulate it into a clear and coherent statement.\u00a0 That way when someone asks your stance on this or that example or scenario you have a rational basis for your answer.\u00a0 And also, it gives you a logical basis for formulating an agenda of actions for the future, a plan.\u00a0 Now my identity is relatively innocuous since at heart I\u2019m just a garden variety civic nationalist.\u00a0 What I would want is a return to normal American society with plenty of allowance for individual differences in background and culture.\u00a0 Plenty of room for normal people who want to raise their kids as good American citizens.<\/p>\n
So, that all sounds reasonable but when you look at our present situation it becomes much more complicated.\u00a0 For instance, the Boy Scouts of America was an organization with the specific mission of providing boys with a fraternal organization to help them become physically fit, mentally awake and morally straight.\u00a0 And because of that mission it was hounded by homosexuals and feminists until now it isn\u2019t for boys and soon, I\u2019m sure they\u2019ll have to remove the word straight for fear of offending the delicate.<\/p>\n
My example is meant to show that trying to define a positive identity makes you a target for those who hate what you are.\u00a0 They will see what you stand for and try to destroy it.\u00a0 The same thing has been done to almost all other social organizations.\u00a0 The US government has forced women into every fraternal organization with the sole exception of religious organizations.\u00a0 And of course, many of these have surrendered too.\u00a0 One of the only exceptions I know of is the Knights of Columbus which is a Roman Catholic fraternal organization which excludes women as anything but auxiliaries.<\/p>\n
Well if that is the only exception then that will have to be the path forward.\u00a0 It\u2019ll have to be a religious fraternal society.\u00a0 The organization must utilize the Freedom of Religion under the First Amendment to protect it from the invasive forces of the federal government and may need to restrict itself to states that do not regularly harass conservative organizations.\u00a0 The mission of the organization can be loosely grounded in the usual fraternal agenda.\u00a0 Service to the community, family activities and religious or ethical training are all things that fall under the purview of a religious fraternal organization.\u00a0 The thing that has to be carefully defined is the religious requirements that define the organization such that you can avoid all the latest abnormal behavior.\u00a0 Luckily the Christian Bible (at least the one used up until the 1950s) has scriptural authority for avoiding the whole LGBTQ agenda in one fell swoop.\u00a0 The only thing I\u2019m not sure of is whether it can be structured so that any member from one of the remaining traditionalist sects is eligible or whether a separate religion will need to be founded in order to give it legitimacy.\u00a0 In other words, is it enough for me to be the Grand Exalted Master or do I also have to be the Pope?<\/p>\n