I couldn't disagree more. But before I state my reasons, let's read a little more of what he has to tell us:
"You know what it costs me? To have a blog and a website with my name on it? A Facebook page with my name on it? A Youtube channel with my name on it? A Twitter account with my name on it? And I'm not really all that radical. At least not as radical as I was a few years ago. Right? But you know what it costs me?
It means that when someone doesn't like what I said on my website, or they didn't like a video that I posted on Youtube, they call my pastor. They call the parish. They call the rectory. Talk to a priest. True story. That's what it means. It means that, of all the jobs that I've ever interviewed for, that have in any way been associated with the Catholic Church--in all of them, in either the first interview or the second, or somewhere down the line, early on, in the process of working there (I'm speaking of one job in particular, called The Academy)--it wasn't mentioned in the first interview, but it came up later after one of the other teachers told the administrator of what I wrote, and I was called into a meeting.
But in every interview, either my blog or my Youtube channel has come up. That's what it means to not be anonymous. It also means I don't get those jobs, either. In every one of those jobs, in which my blog or my Youtube videos came up in the interview process. I'm never getting those jobs. RCIA director, RCIA coordinator, high school theology teacher--hell, if I apply to be a janitor in a Catholic church, I'm assured my blog will come up in the interview. I mean, if they're dumb enough not to google me before they set up the interview, right?How brave. How fantastic for you. Clearly, you are at peace with the decisions that you are making, in spite of the various temporal penalties that you are willing to unnecessarily endure.
Pure malarkey, all of it. Steve Skojec chimes in for the second half of this audio hour, but Gray messed up Skojec's audio portion. So it's likely we'll never know what, exactly, Skojec had to say. But I am aware that Skojec was in agreement with Gray.
We are in a culture war. And if it's one thing our side is really really great at, it's throwing ourselves on our own swords, taking unnecessary blows, shooting each other in the back of the head. Team Red is really great at losing, and I'm amazed we haven't been thrown in camps yet, we are so ignorant.
War, I said. Culture war.
I'm not buying anything that David L. Gray has said. If you feel compelled to rush out there with your bayonet and stab as many of the enemy as you can, wearing no armor whatsoever, you go right ahead. I'll do my best to snipe the bastards that come at you up until your last gasp.
In the meantime, since we're in a war, how about we read a professional. Ever hear of Sun Tzu?
-The clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy’s will to be imposed on him.
-Hence that general is skillful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skillful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack.
-In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory. In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack – the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers. The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn. It is like moving in a circle – you never come to an end. Who can exhaust the possibilities of their combination?Our enemies are numerous, and we are a small force. If we have some shock troops who wanna go barreling into the fray naked, armed with only a spear, that's fine by me. It'll unnerve the opposition. But when you are a small force in war, it is your job to appear as a bigger force than you actually are. Sort of like how the Mongols would burn many campfires, so that their enemies thought that there were actually more of them than there actually were.
I defer to what Vox Day has to say on precisely this matter:
"But anonymity is an absolute necessity for every non-combatant who dares to stand in the way of the pinkshirts, which of course is why they are desperate to eliminate it in the belief that everyone will cower obediently before them once they are stripped naked and forced to choose between submission and being unable to make a living. They don't realize that there are millions who will embrace the ISIS model before submitting to them. Their triumphalism is not merely foolish, it is insanely suicidal."I will let God judge me as to whether or not I've acted heroic in this life. I am disinterested in winning the acclaim of David L. Gray for being a hero. This is a war of attrition for both Team Red and Team Blue, and there are many roles for many different types of fighters. If a handful of us choose to become cannon fodder, then great. Diversion tactics always help.
As for the rest of us bloggers, combox denizens, and forum lurkers, we'll be just fine, thank you very much. We remember how Old Hickory and his Dirty Shirts blew the formations of the Redcoats to living hell in the swamps of New Orleans in 1812. Andrew Jackson and his men weren't standing there, waiting for their enemy in a neat set of boxed rows, guns pointed and ready. No. The Battle of New Orleans was won by a ragtag team of militia men, frontiersmen, slaves, Indians and pirates.
We are at the stage in our cultural decline that such battles are the brand of the day. Our cultural "leaders" have sold out. Our priests and bishops are silent. The laity, the everyman--we are all that is left, now. And we will not pretend that the Geneva Convention applies to us when it never did for the liberals who attack us.
Our ideas will stand for themselves.
Toxic Trad, and Vile Faceless Minion