G.K. Chesterton, NAILED IT!

Admittedly, I’ve picked up works from Chesterton and put them down nearly in the same breath just to stifle the yawn. I did not lack the intelligence, I simply lacked the formation and the perception necessary to appreciate how insightful his words are. In the past few weeks, I’ve taken up the hobby of reading the news and I’m not a dummy; I’ve been sure to fact check. My years long bias against all things media was set aside by the 1984’esque controls put on my husband’s access to equal news coverage overseas. He fully expected to come home and find his hobbies replaced with pro-choice signs, abortionists knocking at the door, and having to kindly shake hands with muggers and pedophiles as we walked to church to save on five dollar a gallon gas. Reassuring him was exhausting, considering how much information I noticed was missing from the reports. I ended up going to the sources of the “facts” and discovering so much more than I bargained for. My final conclusion was much like my initial assumption. Money is paramount, and the cattle love it!

All that has led to making this blog to vent my frustration at the seemingly blind adherence to a social plan that will only offer to stifle the masses and contribute to the decay of our society. I know I am not alone. My friends are smart people and likely knew this way before I did. In fact, I dare say a few will read this and reflect fondly on what a naive little cow I was to know it was there and think it was as simple as voting it away. Moo. I’m finally applying my education and skills to something I can share with others; and for a moment I thought I’d articulated something meaningful. Then I stumbled upon an excerpt from GK Chesterton’s “Superstition of Divorce”. It was missing something so I searched for the full text and began reading. Then, I get to this one part. I all but jump up celebrating as though my team had scored the winning goal. “THIS IS WHAT I’VE BEEN TRYING TO SAY!!!” I copy it and keep reading but the point of the article about divorce is stifled by that excited voice in my head going, “Share that and find skittles, it’s late! Skittles and Chesterton are goooooood!” So, without further ado, he’s the excerpt. I’m going to bed before I really consider going to buy skittles.

“A far different fate has awaited the other fashion; the other somewhat dismal form of freedom. If divorce is a disease, it is no longer to be a fashionable disease like appendicitis; it is to be made an epidemic like small-pox. As we have already seen papers and public men to-day make a vast parade of the necessity of setting the poor man free to get a divorce. Now why are they so mortally anxious that he should be free to get a divorce, and not in the least anxious that he should be free to get anything else? Why are the same people happy, nay almost hilarious, when he gets a divorce, who are horrified when he gets a drink? What becomes of his money, what becomes of his children, where he works, when he ceases to work, are less and less under his personal control. Labour Exchanges, Insurance Cards, Welfare Work, and a hundred forms of police inspection and supervision have combined for good or evil to fix him more and more strictly to a certain place in society. He is less and less allowed to go to look for a new job; why is he allowed to go to look for a new wife? He is more and more compelled to recognize a Moslem code about liquor; why is it made so easy for him to escape from his old Christian code about sex? What is the meaning of this mysterious immunity, this special permit for adultery; and why is running away with his neighbour’s wife to be the only exhilaration still left open to him? Why must he love as he pleases; when he may not even live as he pleases?

The answer is, I regret to say, that this social campaign, in most though by no means all of its most prominent campaigners, relies in this matter on a very smug and pestilent piece of cant. There are some advocates of democratic divorce who are really advocates of general democratic freedom; but they are the exceptions; I might say, with all respect, that they are the dupes. The omnipresence of the thing in the press and in political society is due to a motive precisely opposite to the motive professed. The modern rulers, who are simply the rich men, are really quite consistent in their attitude to the poor man. It is the same spirit which takes away his children under the pretense of order, which takes away his wife under the pretense of liberty. That which wishes, in the words of the comic song, to break up the happy home, is primarily anxious not to break up the much more unhappy factory. Capitalism, of course, is at war with the family, for the same reason which has led to its being at war with the Trade Union.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s