Posts

Goldberg Explains the Divide

Jonah Goldberg:

One of the great intellectual and philosophical divides — a chasm really — is between those who believe in the “perfectibility of man” and those who side with Kant’s observation that “out of the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made.” The perfectibility of man comes with a lot of associated intellectual baggage. It tends to rely on the idea that we are “blank slates.” How could it be otherwise? If we come preloaded with software that cannot be erased, we cannot be perfected. Rousseau, one of the great advocates of the perfectibility of man, got around this by arguing that, in our natural state, we were perfect: “noble savages,” as John Dryden put it. According to this theory, what makes us sinful isn’t our nature but the oppressiveness of our civilization. “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains” is the way that Rousseau put it, arguing that civilization was unnatural and soul-warping.

But, since we couldn’t go back to our b…

D Hawthorne Series at American Greatness

My buddy and former blogging colleague Don Hawthorne has a series up at American Greatness offering his perspective concerning these times in which we live.  We don't necessarily agree, Don's a smart guy and worth the read.

Part 1: Weaponizing the Government for Leftist Political War

Part 2: Rogue Ruling Class Grabs Power, Removes the People’s Sovereignty

Part 3: An Imminent Counterattack Begins the Fight of Our Lives


Harassing Pigs

So far, it looks like the only way to keep your job once it's discovered you've sexually harassed/assaulted someone is to be a politician. Journalists, entertainers, executives...all have gone down. So what does that say about the whole "power dynamic" in our society? What makes politicians so special? In a world where politics has increasingly become part of peoples' identity (or even a near-religion) we have seen a sort of "political morality" - with politicians as the "high priests" - displace what would be considered common decency. This relativistic political morality can be defined as needed so long as it serves the purpose of maintaining power - particularly power over your ideological opponents. And the vessels for that power are our ideological representatives in government. Politicians. George Orwell was correct: "Some pigs are more equal than others." Unless their constituents hold them accountable. I'm not holding my…

"Uncivil" May not be "Unbiased"

Jefferson and Confederates - a difference

Via Jason Lee Steorts at NR


Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens: The prevailing ideas entertained by [Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. . . .
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. Source

Williamson: The Politics of "The War on Statuary"

Anti-Southern sentiment among Democrats has grown, predictably, with the migration of Southern voters to the Republican party, a very long process that began in the early days of the New Deal and was confirmed only toward the end of the 20th century. (Mississippi had one Republican governor in all the 20th century.) As the country moved politically in a more conservative direction, and as the locus of conservative power moved south, anti-Southern invective became more common among progressives who a generation or two before had been all too happy to do business with a William Fulbright or a Woodrow Wilson. National panics over Confederate revanchism, like New York Times crusades against homelessness, tend to coincide with Republican presidencies. That is not coincidence.
The war on statuary serves two purposes: The first is to humiliate Southerners in retribution for their support of Republican politicians and conservative causes, particularly religious and social causes…

Lee didn't want Confederate Monuments

Sender: Robert E. Lee
Recipient: Thoms L. Rosser Lexington VA 13 Dec - r 1866 My dear GenlI have considered the questions in your letter of the 8th Inst: & am unable to advise as to the efficacy of the scheme proposed for the accomplishment of the object in view. That can be better determined by those more conversant with similar plans than I am.
As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated; my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the Country, would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment; & of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour. All I think that can now be done, is to aid our noble & generous women in their efforts to protect the graves & mark the last resting places of those who have fallen, & wait for better times.
I am very glad to hear of your comfortabl…