Here is John Zmirak, who once ridiculously claimed that “Amnesty Equals Abortion” (meaning “Have no pity for those brown kids on our soil because if you do, they will grow up to vote Democrat”), who passionately defended Lying for Jesus on the theory “Let us do evil that good may come of it”, who idiotically declared that Hillary Clinton was Diocletian in 2016 and that Trump was all that stood between Catholics and death camps, now continues the complete inversion of values for which MAGA antichrist religion stands by falling down in blubbering pity for the literal Richest Man on Earth.
There’s a veritable smorgasbord of idiotic self-pity and self-regard in this stupid, stupid piece, but before I get to it, I want to make something clear: I really don’t care one way or the other about Musk’s purchase of Twitter except insofar as it affects me personally, by which I mean, “If he starts charging a subscription fee, I’m gone.” I think of him seldom and he strikes me in much the way Henry Ford struck me, a guy with a knack for engineering and a moral idiot who thinks himself a pan-galactic genius because he has a bunch of money.
But for a Reactionary Catholic like Zmirak, with his instinctive regard for the custodians of money and power, Musk is seen as a quasi-sacral figure, like a Byzantine emperor. Zmirak instinctively and reflexively raises him to the dignity of a saint and martyr, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, a victim hounded by the very forces of hell for his righteousness, all because of a business deal in which (as Zmirak hopes) he will emerge as the Avenging Angel of all his spiteful desires against those Zmirak hates.
I mean, get a load of this bushwah:
I’m as excited as any other fan of the First Amendment to see Elon Musk take over Twitter. But then I was really pumped when Donald Trump won the election in 2016. Since then, I’ve learned that victories don’t mean much. Not when your enemies are as ruthless, entrenched, vindictive and sociopathic as ours.
We win battle after battle, then somehow lose the war. We play by the Marquess of Queensbury rules and knock our opponent out cold. But the ref revives him after a count of 20 or 30. He hands the guy a switchblade, so he can stab us in the gut. Then the ref awards him the match on points, disqualifies us for cheating, and tries to send us to prison. That’s American Civics 101, circa 2022.
The Game Isn’t Rigged. It Isn’t Even a Game Anymore
That’s how things went for the Solidarity movement when it took on Poland’s Communist regime. And it’s how things work now in the West. The game isn’t rigged. It’s not even a game, but a ritualized humiliation ceremony, carefully scripted and ruthlessly directed by sadists.
Please set aside 10 minutes and go read the comments of the indispensable Revolver News on why our Oligarchy will pull out every stop, twist every law, weaponize every resource it has from leftist judges to unfireable bureaucrats to stop Musk from succeeding. As Revolver writes:
[I]f Musk opts for the path of boldness and glory, he should be prepared for historic backlash from the regime. The entire system would mobilize against Twitter reflecting the same cancellation strategies the Regime systematically employs to control politicians, websites, major businesses, and even countries. Twitter would get the “George Floyd” treatment on steroids. The Regime would employ the “George Floyd” tool recently used to “cancel” Russia, but directed with laser-like focus on a single company and its lone brilliant, iconoclast leader.
It takes an extraordinary amount of chutzpah to move from charging those you hate with being knife-wielding butchers of your sinless, irenic self to mocking the murder of George Floyd and celebrating Putin’s vast act of mass murder, but this is all in a day’s work for the antichrist religion Zmirak champions. This is, after all, somebody who can lie to himself and all the world that “Trump was too sweet and naive” as he disappeared children into the maw of his prisons for refugees, protected Saudis who sawed a man to death, mocked the disabled and POWs, bragged about sexual assault and failed to overthrow an election only due to the stupidity of himself and his mob, not for lack of trying.
As is characteristic of his cult of People of the Lie, Zmirak concludes with a good solid act of projection, using accusation as confession, and declares that those who think Musk’s takeover of Twitter means “America Betrayed Them” when, in fact, his own evil cult has believed that America betrayed them on Election Day 2020 and have been scheming ever since then to make sure that no free and fair election is ever held again if they can help it.
Musk may or may not assist them in their dreams of vengeance on an America that they believe needs a firm fascist hand at the wheel. Personally, I suspect he is going to disappoint them, not because he is decent but because he doesn’t care about them (particularly if he destroys bot access to Twitter, thereby destroying a huge vehicle of MAGA (and Russian) disinformation. But the core thing here, from my perspective as somebody who cares about the Catholic faith and opposes, from my marrow the cult of lies and antichrist religion that articles like Zmirak’s represents, is that Jesus is very clear in pronouncing a blessing on the poor and vulnerable (whom Zmirak hates) and who says, without any qualification whatsoever, “Woe to you who are rich”. It is one of the weird ironies of our time that Mammon-worshippers in the MAGA Cult keep invoking Chesterton as some kind of patron when he was extremely clear in his total skepticism of one of the greatest gods in their pantheon of idols:
Only the Christian Church can offer any rational objection to a complete confidence in the rich. For she has maintained from the beginning that the danger was not in man’s environment, but in man. Further, she has maintained that if we come to talk of a dangerous environment, the most dangerous environment of all is the commodious environment. I know that the most modern manufacture has been really occupied in trying to produce an abnormally large needle. I know that the most recent biologists have been chiefly anxious to discover a very small camel. But if we diminish the camel to his smallest, or open the eye of the needle to its largest — if, in short, we assume the words of Christ to have meant the very least that they could mean, His words must at the very least mean this — that rich men are not very likely to be morally trustworthy. Christianity even when watered down is hot enough to boil all modern society to rags. The mere minimum of the Church would be a deadly ultimatum to the world. For the whole modern world is absolutely based on the assumption, not that the rich are necessary (which is tenable), but that the rich are trustworthy, which (for a Christian) is not tenable. You will hear everlastingly, in all discussions about newspapers, companies, aristocracies, or party politics, this argument that the rich man cannot be bribed. The fact is, of course, that the rich man is bribed; he has been bribed already. That is why he is a rich man. The whole case for Christianity is that a man who is dependent upon the luxuries of this life is a corrupt man, spiritually corrupt, politically corrupt, financially corrupt. There is one thing that Christ and all the Christian saints have said with a sort of savage monotony. They have said simply that to be rich is to be in peculiar danger of moral wreck. It is not demonstrably un-Christian to kill the rich as violators of definable justice. It is not demonstrably un-Christian to crown the rich as convenient rulers of society. It is not certainly un-Christian to rebel against the rich or to submit to the rich. But it is quite certainly un-Christian to trust the rich, to regard the rich as more morally safe than the poor.