Get PJ Media on your Apple

Works and Days

Are the Orcs Winning?

September 7th, 2014 - 6:43 pm
orcs_vdh_9-7-14-2

Fantasy versus reality.

J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings was sometimes faulted by literary critics for caricaturing the evil orcs as uniformly bad.  All of them were as unpleasant to look as they were deadly to encounter. There is not a single good orc or even a reformed orc in the trilogy. The apparent one-dimensional assumption of men, hobbits, dwarves, and elves is that the only good orc is a dead orc. So the absolutist Tolkien tried to teach us about the enduring nature of absolute good and evil. Apparently he did not think that anything from his contemporary experience might allow him to imagine reforming or rehabilitating such fictive folk.

Tolkien’s literary purpose with orcs was not to explore the many shades of evil or the struggle within oneself to avoid the dark side; he did that well enough in dozens of once good but weak characters who went bad such as the turncoat Saruman the wizard, his sidekick Wormtongue, a few of the hobbits who had ruined the Shire, and, best of all, the multifaceted Gollum. Orcs, on the other hand, are unredeemable. Orcs, goblins, and trolls exist as the tools of the even more sinister in proud towers to destroy civilization, and know nothing other than killing and destruction. Their reward is to feed on the crumbs of what they have ruined.

In the 21st century we are often lectured that such simplistic, one-dimensional evil is long gone. A ubiquitous civilization has so permeated the globe that even the worst sorts must absorb some mitigating popular culture from the Internet, Twitter, and Facebook, as if the sheer speed of transmitting thoughts ensures their moral improvement.

Even where democracy is absent, the “world community” and a “global consciousness” are such that billions supposedly won’t let Attila, Tamerlane, and Genghis Khan reappear in our postmodern lives. To deal with a Major Hasan, Americans cannot cite his environment as the cause, at least not poverty, racism, religious bigotry, nativism, xenophobia, or any of the more popular –isms and-ologies in our politically correct tool box that we customarily use to excuse and contextualize evil behavior. So exasperated, we shrug and call his murdering “workplace violence” — an apparent understandable psychological condition attributable to the boredom and monotony of the bleak, postmodern office.

But then suddenly along comes the limb-lopping, child-snatching, and mutilating Nigerian-based Boko Haram. What conceivable Dark Age atrocity have they omitted? Not suicide bombing, mass murder, or random torture. They are absolutely unapologetic for their barbarity. They are ready to convert or kill preteens as their mood determines for the crime of being Christian. In response, the Nigerian government is powerless, while the United States is reduced to our first lady holding up Twitter hashtags, begging for the release of the latest batch of girls.

Is the Somalia-based Al-Shabaab worse? It likes the idea that it is premodern. In addition to the usual radical Islamic horrors of beheadings, rape, and mutilation, Al-Shabaab even kills protected elephants, perhaps thousands of them, to saw off tusks and fund their killing spree. They seem to make the medieval Taliban look tame in comparison.

Now we are glued on ISIS, the Mesopotamian killers who are beheading on video streams American journalists, as they murder, rape, and mutilate their way from Syria to central Iraq. One of the beheaders, Jihadi John, has a British accent, and seems to enjoy shocking Westerners with the fact that he is more familiarly savage than his fellow Arabic-speaking masochists. Apparently his family immigrated from the Muslim world to the affluence and freedom of the United Kingdom for a more civilized life so that their pampered son could one day leave it to seek to destroy all that had enabled him — and thereby find “meaning.”

If a British politician demanded to strip Jihadi John and those like him of their passports or an American senator demanded that we not let in any more Tsarnaev-like jihadists, the outcry would be such that the crimes of beheading and blowing up people at a marathon might pale in comparison. Cutting off somebody’s head or blowing off a leg is one thing, but casting aspersions on the Other is quite another.

All of the above might once have been lumped under al-Qaeda affiliates, but now Osama’s remnants apparently find monsters like ISIS too “brutal.” In contrast, Hamas only drives Christians out of Gaza rather than beheads them. It also executes unarmed Palestinians deemed insufficiently loyal. It maims those of rival Palestinian political groups. And it positions girls and boys as shields in places where their well-off elite commanders may well be targeted, rather than kidnap and take them out into the bush.

Although most of the savage violence that is plaguing the world today is the dividend of radical Islamists in Africa, Northern Africa, the Middle East, and, yes, Europe, state players are not immune. Bashar Assad has used the government apparatus of Syria to kill tens of thousands — some, in the manner of his old neighbor Saddam Hussein, through the agency of poison gas. He, too, is immune from an accounting — unless the even more evil ISIS catches up with him.

Europe and the United States are baffled by Vladimir Putin. He was supposed to be “reset” a long time ago. Or he should have at least reread Norman Angell’s The Great Illusion years ago, and learned that in an interconnected financial world, starting a war (like World War I) would be so suicidal a business as to prevent its occurrence. Instead, Putin is following the path of Joseph Stalin in the 1930s, gobbling up borderlands, but for the idea of the greater glory of Mother Russia rather than the Soviet commune. His modus operandi is as predictable as our Western weepy responses. He eyes some new territory. He cites long historical affinities. He points to oppressed Russian speakers. He sends in paramilitaries. And then he talks of annexing only part of some previous Russian land. Obama compares him to a cutup in the back of the classroom or dismisses his actions as macho “shtick.” Putin counters with talk about his nuclear arsenal or taking Kiev. If a journalist smarts off, Putin warns him of castration. If Putin wishes to let off a nuke, he might well do it — if only for the hell of it.

We can stop the roll call of global orcs here, with the assumption that we all know the nature of the lunatic North Korea nuclear regime, what the Iranians are planning for the children of the Holocaust, or who the sinister sort who run Pakistani military intelligence and fund terrorists in Afghanistan are. As state powers, they all have ways of incinerating tens of thousands rather than beheading hundreds.

Evil is ancient, unchanging, and with us always. The more postmodern the West becomes — affluent, leisured, nursed on moral equivalence, utopian pacifism, and multicultural relativism — the more premodern the evil among us seems to arise in nihilistic response, whether it is from the primordial Tsarnaev brothers or Jihadi John.  We have invented dozens of new ways to explain away our indifference, our enemies hundreds of new ways of reminding us of our impotence. I suppose we who enjoy the good life don’t want to lose any of it for anything — and will understandably do any amount of appeasing, explaining, and contextualizing to avoid an existential war against the beheaders and mutilators, a fact well-known to our enemies.

The Europeans are shrugging that Ukraine is lost and will soon sigh that the Baltic states are a far-off place not worth risking the coffee shops of Amsterdam to defend. Westerners lament beheadings but then privately mutter that journalists know just what they are getting into when they visit the Middle East. Murdering and abusing a U.S. ambassador on video is not such a big deal anymore and is worth only a second or so mention on Google News.

So we wait behind our suburban Maginot Lines, arguing over our quarter- and half-measure responses, refighting Iraq and Afghanistan as if they were the Somme and Verdun, assured that we can distract ourselves from the horrors abroad with psychodramas about Ferguson, the president’s golfing, his lectures on fairness, and which naked celebrity photo was hacked on the Internet.

Meanwhile the orcs are busy and growing and nearing the ramparts…

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
"Radical Islamist"? They are Muslims following the Koran and all Muslim's "Perfect Man" Mohammad's commands.

There is nothing that ISIS and the others have done that is not totally in accordance with Islam and the teachings of all Muslims' "Perfect Man", Mohammad, and the examples that he personally and repeatedly set. ISIS and the others are just the latest of a long history of Islamic outbreaks.

Islam itself is the greatest continuing crime against humanity the world has ever known. If one does not understand that, one understands nothing.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
And yet even this column resorts to the redundancy of "radical Islamists". Till we can call a spade a spade, no wonder the country is apathetic. How about we trash the the cowardly delusion that this is somehow "the religion of peace" and recognize it is the religion of pieces.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
Preteen rapes, beheadings, religious mass murder, blowing up innocents...these are merely oppressed people misunderstood whose "root causes" need to be salved and soothed.

The REAL enemy are people who want small government and protected borders. Now THAT is a dangerous group that needs to be eradicated. To Obama, Orcs are bitter clingers. ISIS are just gangbangers who need some community organizing.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (153)
All Comments   (153)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Most excellent article!

An interesting point in the Orcs/radical Islam parallel is that, like ISIS and its brethren, the Orcs created nothing (except crude weapons). They only existed to destroy that which others created and to pick over the ruins for things to eat. And so, like civilization, the ISIS may eventually fall victim to its own success. Of course, by the time it does so, Western civilization must have fallen and the bones picked clean. So, in a nutshell, ISIS & ilk will fail, but whether it be in consuming fire or starving once they have pulled down the West, remains to be seen.

If the voter of America are to decide the issue, then look for your own Helm's Deep.

22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Roman Catholic church is the last fortress of Truth existing in the West.
Our legal cosseting of the slaughter of 60,000,000 of our children for pleasure & convenience (like ancient Pagan sacrifice to Moloch) has stripped-US of moral authority and rectitude. Our public culture is a mockery and slander of our founding judaeo/Christiian ethos and principles. Our judiciary was foretold by Dostoyevsky in "The Grand Inquisitor": "we will allow them to SIn with our permission; and they will crawl, weeping, and worship us..." God is not mocked, His wrath ... now upon this most blest & prosperous Nation in history is condign and overt. Yet there is still hope, we have abandoned Him, he has not abandoned us. Recall: II CHRONICLES 7-14...
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
Correct, Wart7! Catholic doctrine is the last moral referent left in the West. The men inside the Church are not different from the first followers of Jesus. There are cowards and traitors but also there are great saints. Of course our Protestant brothers will accuse the Church to be pagan, denying everything on some flimsy reasoning or other. They are sincere and they love Christ but the cloud of Modernism obscures their view. Obviously 30,000+ "churches" teaching all kinds of contradictory things cannot go very far. No one has time to listen to all of them even once. The fact that it was Luther who started Liberalism escapes them. Of course Liberals consider themselves "liberated" from this: the paternity of God and the authority of the Church. The sequence is obvious for a good reader of History: Luther lead the spiritual division of the West, then came the rest: Rousseau, Voltaire, Marx, Darwin, Freud, Lenin, & al.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
I agree with what you wrote about America, but this is also true for the rest of the world. China much worse and japan the cradle of porn movies.

I take issue with your statement the Catholic Church is the last fortress of Truth. There is nothing and I mean nothing in the Bible to support the Pope is G-d's man on earth, Mary worship, infant baptism, or that the bread and wine symbolic of Christ's sacrifice turns into real flesh and blood. The Universal Church brought paganism into the true Church of Christ.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
Moon... It is not my intention to start a long thread here so I will respond to your statements only as an honest witness and then you can think about it all you want. There are many disagreements outside the Catholic Church on the correct interpretation of Matthew 16,13-20. We must reflect upon the rich tapestry of meaning contained in those brief verses of Matthew 16, 13-20.

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi he put this question to his disciples, 'Who do people say the Son of man is?' And they said, 'Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.' 'But you,' he said, 'who do you say I am?' Then Simon Peter spoke up and said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' Jesus replied, 'Simon son of Jonah, you are a blessed man! Because it was no human agency that revealed this to you but my Father in heaven. So I now say to you: You are Peter *[Aramaic: Kepha] and on this rock I will build my community. And the gates of the underworld can never overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven: whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.' Then he gave the disciples strict orders not to say to anyone that he was the Christ. (16, 13-20)

It would take time and space to consider the numerous non-catholic interpretations of this passage. However catholic commentary and exegesis has always interpreted these verses the same way: this was the key moment when Israel was transformed into a Church with a universal (catholic) mission. The day announced in ages past had arrived. It was time for the Messiah to begin the conquest of the world. In reading his Gospel, I have noticed that the author builds a crescendo that leads us to the revelation of Jesus as the Messiah, the institution of the Eucharist and the Sacrifice at Calvary.

I present this analysis of the first verses of the Gospel to show some of the characteristics of Matthew's style. We can see that he always assumes that the reader has a good knowledge of the Hebrew

Matthew builds up momentum in his narrative before that moment in which Jesus reveals himself to the twelve as the Messiah. To understand where the evangelist is leading us we must examine briefly that moment in Caesarea Philippi when the Messiah reveals his true identity.

It is important to try to observe with Jewish eyes the circumstances surrounding this moment. So, looking at the image depicted by Matthew we observe the twelve apostles around Jesus Christ. That brings to mind the twelve sons of Jacob, the patriarchs o the tribes of Israel.

Simon (Peter) is the one who is elected by God to declare for the first time the messianic role of Jesus. There are some details that surely would not go unnoticed for a Jewish observer: Jesus is the son of a man named Joseph and that Joseph is the son of a man named Jacob (as presented in the genealogy of Matthew). Here we have a coincidence pointing to the patriachal names: Jacob father of Joseph the savior of the original Israel. God speaks to both of these Josephs in dreams and both of them are exiled in Egypt (2,13; 2,19).

We find another coincidence in the original name of Peter: Simon Bar Jonah. Simon is also the name of the older brother of Levi and one of the four sons of Leah, the first wife of Jacob. Levi is the ancestral father of the priests of Israel and Simon is his older brother, the one Joseph chose to hold captive in Egypt in Genesis 42, 24.

Simon Peter is also the son of a Jonah and that connects us to the resurrection as one of the foundations of the Church. This resurrection is one of the signs promised by Jesus who compared his returning from death to the return of the prophet Jonah from the belly of a big fish. Adding to that, Simon Peter is also a fisherman (Matthew 16,4; Jonah 2,1-11)

Considering the names involved, this scene is highly suggestive. The picture evokes the patriarchal beginnings of Israel with much force. At the same time there are two references to salvation when we are reminded of the Old Testament stories of Joseph and Jonah. It brings to mind the image of the sons of Israel surrounding Joseph, the Great Vizier of Egypt (their lost brother whom they cannot recognize).

Both Joseph the Vizier and Jesus have a secret identity that they must reveal; Joseph to the twelve patriarchs of Israel and Jesus to his twelve apostles. Furthermore, just as Joseph's brothers must go to Egypt in search of bread, so the apostles are to receive from Jesus the bread from Heaven in the Eucharist of the Church to come.

Jesus uses the image of Isaiah 22 to name Simon as the steward of the new royal house of Israel (Isaiah 22, 15-25). In this manner he indicates that he is the King of Israel forever (Matthew 16, 37) and Peter is the royal steward or vizier of the royal house that is restored to Israel from that moment onward.

I admit that all of these parallels are sometimes overwh
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
That doesn't make Simon Peter Pope. It makes Simon Peter the example of how people are to understand Christ that spread to Rome and the world. Simon Peter was not given the power to make Mary co-regent in Heaven with Christ etc...

The first Pope took over Caesar's role after the destruction of the Empire. A worldly figure. Those that brought the Babylonian traditions into what had been a religion following the disciples.

What the disciples preached was the true religion of following Christ. Not the Universal Church's paganism. Sorry if that hurt Catino. I am writing about the Universal Church, not individuals like you.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
You are thick my friend.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
... And with that insult, you've just lost any chance you had of persuading me, and no doubt many other people reading this discussion. That's not what you intended, I'm sure, but that's what you achieved.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
[continues here ... sorry about the long comment]

I admit that all of these parallels are sometimes overwhelming and that a certain dexterity in the handling of sacred history is needed to make sense of them all. Our minds fail to grasp the ultimate sense of this puzzle, trained as we are in the discipline of western thought. In contrast, this abundance of meaningful coincidences is the very reason why the oriental mind feels attracted to contemplate these words. For them the mystical complexity of the passage is also a sign of its transcendental importance.

The enigma is one that at the same time conceals and reveals. It attracts the reader and begs to be deciphered! The divine mystery presented here is the destiny of Israel that must be transformed into a universal Kingdom-Church by means of Jesus its new King-Priest.

There are many other interesting counterpoints that we can examine. One of them is not readily apparent to those not familiar with the Aramaic language used by Jesus and his disciples. Please pay attention to the name that Jesus gives to Simon Peter: Kepha (meaning a rock, large stone, or a rocky elevation, or promontory). Besides being a very original name, Kepha is also very suggestive. Only God Himself and Abraham (Isaiah 51:1) are compared to a rock in the Old Testament. Moreover, the name chosen for Peter by Jesus seems to contrast with the name of Kaiaphas, the High Priest of that year (John 11, 51).

Kaiaphas was not a High Priest selected according to the Levitical tradition. He had been appointed by the Romans to replace the real High Priest (his father-in-law Annas). This political appointment of the High Priest was forced upon the Jews by the Romans. The Romans and the Hasmonean kings did not like a permanent High Priest appointed for life (it could work against their political interests). The Romans picked a male from the family of Annas to serve as High Priest for a year at a time. At the time of Jesus' death it was Kaiaphas' turn to serve as High Priest.

While the Romans in control of Jerusalem had appointed Kaiaphas as High Priest, Jesus in Caesarea Philippi appoints Kepha as High Priest of the nascent Church.

Is this a coincidence that Jesus chose to invest Peter with the High Piesthood in the area named after the Roman Caesars?

Later the Romans destroy the Temple of Jerusalem, but the Church that Christ sends into the world remains in Rome while the Roman Empire of Caesar disappears from history. The contrast is very obvious.

We can also add that the names are symmetrically opposed: Kepha means a rock or rocky promontory. Kaiaphas means a valley, dell or a depression of the ground. The two names sound very similar to each other yet have perfectly opposite meanings. The imagery seems to intimate that the Church lead by Kepha will rise and be firmly established in contrast with that of Kaiaphas which will be lessened in importance (compare to the replacement of the unfaithful steward in Isaiah 22, 15-25).

The new priesthood will take the good news of the kingdom to the nations of the world and most significantly it will preside over that expansion from the very city of Caesar: Rome.

It is impossible to ignore the power and symmetry of this image. It is also impossible to reconcile it with the Protestant image of the restoration of the Church by Luther. It is also incompatible with the notion of an 'invisible church' whose true members are known only to God.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
We have an ignorant,narcissistic coward affecting to be president. Today he admitted to be an inveterate Liar("I'm being honest now). Those who voted for this boy, anti-christian/ anti-american racist the second time(out of envy and hatred of their homeland) condignly deserve the poena damni of Dante's 9th Circle for TRAITORS to kin and country and rebuke of ultimate SHAME for personal mendacity and cowardice. Recall~ One become like that which he beholds, yet amazing in power & strength, Or: howling in dread & pain...
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
I find it hard to beat the Viet Cong, who used babies as triggers for IUD's, so when the merciful American soldiers picked them up, they would explode. I do not know whether the babies were previously alive, or whether the Viet Cong terrorist (that is what they were) involved was the mother.

The is a video out there of Hamas killing a bridegroom because there was singing at his wedding. And it was men singing, by the way.

BTW, is anything ISIS did as bad as what Saddam Hussein and his sons did? I smell hypocrisy (not referring here to VDH).

On the other hand, if you want an institution that is completely and irredeemably evil, then you have to look at the UNWRA.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
The error started under Bush with the war on terror. We need to define the enemy, not empower it as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan (Sharia is in both constitutions), Syria, Libya, Crimea, Ukraine, etc. Hard to know if Obama is sympathetic to the Muslim cause or just so passive that he can't muster the energy to oppose it. Tolkien wrote from the perspective of WWII; I hate to think of what inspiration is being provided to this generation of writers.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
This isn't what I want to write, but I am fearful of what the Islamic threat (Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, Boko Haram..etc., etc.) will accomplish in the next decade. We must not kid ourselves. If we don't see pure evil for what it is, and react accordingly, we will have not learned anything from the last century in which millions of people were starved, executed and incinerated because of their faith.

I think I want to see the US deliver several pre-emptive EMP devices to crush the ability of these evil-doers, murders, to coordinate their activities. Send in boots on the ground to annihilate them...it's time to take our power to the cowardly masked murderers.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
Tought to enter no text!
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
I believe Dr. Hanson is correct. Orcs are completely evil and totally beyond the capability of anyone to bring them to a more "moderate" position regarding the other inhabitants of Middle Earth. Islamists are the same; they kill, rape, mutilate and destroy because that is what they do. It is a mistake to think Islamists can be convinced to do otherwise as I fear is what is going to happen to Israel if they sign a "peace" agreement with Hamas. As usual, Dr. Hanson is spot on.
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
And if we sign one with the PA it will be better? Anyone know that Fatah, the core of the PA, declared war on Israel? Not there is any chance of Abbas agreeing to anything reasonable - he's trying to get his state without dropping the claim on Israel itself. Or has anyone noticed?
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
There are points of comparison between Obama and Saruman.

'Suddenly another voice spoke, low and melodious, its very sound an enchantment. Those who listened unwarily to that voice could seldom report the words that they heard; and if they did, they wondered for little power remained in them. [Obama's "racism" speech] Mostly they remembered only that it was a delight to hear the voice speaking, all that it said seemed wise and reasonable, and desire awoke in them by swift agreement to seem wise themselves. When others spoke they seemed harsh and uncouth by contrast; and if they gainsaid the voice, anger was kindled in the hearts of those under the spell [...] But none were unmoved; none rejected its pleas and its commands without an effort of mind and will, so long as its master had control of it.' --"The Two Towers", "The Voice of Saruman"

Similar to Saruman, Obama has lost almost “all power, save his voice that can still daunt you and deceive you if you let it.” (Gandalf, "Return of the King", "The Scouring of the Shire")

"I have already done much that you will find it hard to mend or undo in your lives. And it will be pleasant to think of that and set it against my injuries." --Saruman, "Return of the King", "The Scouring of the Shire".
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
Islam and cancer are very similar. If the therapy for cancer is ever weakened then the cancer will come back stronger than ever. If the resistance to the horrors of Islam is not maintained with defiance and resolve it will rebound stronger than before. Like cancer, Islam can lie dormant or stable for long periods of time and can appear nonthreatening. But when conditions are favorable for it they both will return with a vengeance. Their stated goal is world domination. How much clearer can they be?
22 weeks ago
22 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 5 Next View All

35 Trackbacks to “Are the Orcs Winning?”