>"Problem with Parochialism?" What problem? Are you referring to my literary style, or to something
> else?

I pointed out a very common problem with parochialism from my observations of how its inherent subjectivism among homosexual militants and their occultist apologists have morally destroyed San Francisco. And you agreed with me. I wasn't talking about "literary style," but about how people who are intoxicated on subjectivist symbolism become impaired in their ability to reason to the point that they become fanatically antagonistic toward reason, and even literally demonize it by arbitrarily associating it with evil forces. Independent thought is a thought crime among both the homosexual militants as well as among the "religious right." The parochialism on both sides of the coin is still part of the same coin. It's part of the collective schizophrenia in which the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing

I'm sure that you might like for the homosexual militants in San Francisco to get rid of their parochialism, but the problem won't go away until the religious right gets rid of its parochialism. Society would be better off without the extremes of both sides telling the public, "Heads, I win, tails you lose."

You write about the "subversion of language," but you fail to demonstrate how this is a detriment to
Parochialist theory, or how it somehow >invalidates any point.

As an odd coincidence, the subversion of language was the subject of my very first >professional essay,
written about 13 years ago. As it turned >out, that was the very first step on a long path that has led me to
> elucidating Parochialist Theory. You might >find that first step auspicious, in that the essay has not
> tarnished with time.

It might be argued that the confusion of >language is exactly what makes Parochialism a >necessary
outcome. "Diversity" is destroying any >common ground we might share with our neighbors, because the
deviation between our perspectives has >grown extreme. One man's hero is another man's villain. We hide
> our deepest thoughts, opinions, prejudices and desires because we suspect that the majority of our
> neighbors will find our beliefs >objectionable. Speaking too freely can cost you your job. I know, because
> it has happened to me repeatedly. I have >also seen it happen to others, while who have avoided
> retaliation by not speaking out, have >often confided in me their fears.

> Parochialism is a logical outcome of all >of this confusion: it can be a form of self-segregation, where like
gathers unto like, or it can be a >melting-pot that cooks all the better because it >holds a smaller batch.
> Those who wish to integrate should find it >easier to amalgamate within a small community >than across the
> whole world.

Face in the Crowd