Category Archives: Argument

NEW COLUMN: Republican Strategy for Winning: Defend the Enemy’s Embryos

Abortion, Argument, Conservatism, Economy, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Liberty, Republicans, Taxation

NEW COLUMN IS “Remember: Republicans Are An Arm Of The UniParty,” on WND.COM and The New American, alternatively called “Republican Strategy for Winning: Defend the Enemy’s Embryos” on The Unz Review.

To put it mildly, Republicans defending the enemy’s embryos is not a strategy for winning.

Also, since the UniParty = treason; our salvation lies in informal acts of secession—even if Victor Davis Hanson keeps mistakenly and appallingly calling this proposed political divorce a “succession”, as he condemns peaceful disunity (and piles on that tragic but great American hero, Joe McCarthy!)

I think it’s thematic. I think I brought all that together. If it’s more chaotic than thematic— you’ll tell me.

More here:

Remember: Republicans Are An Arm Of The UniParty” is on WND.COM, The New American, and The Unz Review.

Rufo’s Rule Will, One Day, Legitimize The Return Of Critical Race Theory To The Curricula

Argument, Classical Liberalism, Conservatism, Critical Race Theory, Critique, Democracy, Education, Race, Racism

It gives me no joy to rip apart Chris Rufo’s case for a fairer education system, made on the Rumble podcast of the talented Glenn Greenwald.

Education, Rufo says approximately 22 minutes into the June 29, 2022 broadcast, should reflect broadly the values of “the public, the voters, the parents,” as opposed to the mythical ideal of classical-liberal neutrality. At once, Rufo is revealed to be a crass, lower-case democrat. More crucially, a reductio ad absurdum of Rufo’s thinking is this:

When America becomes a majority-minority country—blacks and browns all indubitably piling on honky—this anti-white majority will, by Rufo’s reasoning, have a right to have its preferred values reflected in education.

Doesn’t that risk bringing it full-circle back to Critical Race Theory? I’m afraid so. The reductio ad absurdum of Rufo’s majoritarianism is that, when anti-white interests come to dominate, and they will, Rufo’s Rule will legitimize the placing of antiwhite interests in the dominant controlling position, locally and nationally.

It is Rufo’s majoritarianism that’ll be detrimental to freedom, not this writer’s traditional, conservative idea of canon and curriculum. The latter is what American schools followed in decades past.

Taking Rufo’s Rule even further than we have—one can reasonably deduce that what Mr. Rufo is keen to avoid in the course of battling CRT is an assertion of the immutable superiority of Western canon and curriculum, no matter who controls the locality. That’s why he tinkers, pussyfoots, on the margins.

NEW COLUMN: Conservation IS Conservative: BLM? Black-And-Yellow Lives Matter

Argument, Conservatism, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Reason

NEW COLUMN: “Conservation IS Conservative: BLM? Black-And-Yellow Lives Matter.” It’s a feature on WND.COM, The Unz Review and The New American.

Excerpt:

… For the Left, love of the environment amounts to an anti-intellectual, atavistic ritual, the kind performed by Homo species, say, when lightning struck. Primitive man would have looked to the heavens, and promised a sacrifice, to appease the particular god in control. In our times, the pagan pantheon has been replaced with the Almighty God of Climate Change.

What about conservatives? Conservation is conservative. At least it ought to be.  But are conservatives better custodians of nature than progressives?

Everywhere you look conservatives are rejoicing that the world population count broke 8 billion this month. Population explosion is to be celebrated! You can never have too many people, for people, in conservative thinking, are only ever a positive sum; never zero sum. Resources are endless—or, so conservatives seem to assume.

Animal life and habitat? Who cares? Kill the good-for-nothing critters. Deforestation? Bring it on. Forests are overrated. Ditto oxygen. Besides, we are on our way to being an anaerobic species. Ask Mr. AI (Artificial Intelligence). He was on “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” so he knows. (By the way, it’s beyond silly to believe in the autonomy of artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is nothing more than meta-programing by mega-programmers.)

And, of course, the most populated places on earth are also heaven on earth. Oh, for the glories of Calcutta, Cairo and Gaza, already upon your little American hamlet.

The conservative overpopulation enthusiast could easily borrow the utilitarian arguments advanced by the open-border crowd, when touting the advantages of high-population density. …

… READ THE REST. “Conservation IS Conservative: BLM? Black-And-Yellow Lives Matter” is a feature on WND.COM, The Unz Review and The New American.

 

 

 

Mental Maladies: Tucker And Mainstream Discover What Thomas Szasz Explained In 1960

Argument, Logic, Propaganda, Pseudoscience, Psychiatry, Psychology & Pop-Psychology, Science, The Therapuetic State

About the lack of empirical evidence for so-called organic nature of “mental disease,” Tucker Carlson said TODAY, , (well, almost) what this column wrote first in 2002 and countless times since, in titles archived under Psychiatry and The Therapeutic State category:

Cruise And The Psychiatric Shamans,” (2005) “EVIL, NOT ILL” (4/2007), “Conservatives For Abolishing The Fact Of Evil (2015),” “School Shootings: A Moral-Health, Not Mental-Health, Problem” (2018).

Tucker discovers what we wrote in “Broken Brains?” (January 16, 2002):

“… Consider also that there is no credible, scientific, peer-reviewed evidence for the organic basis of aberrant behavior, and you grasp the chicanery that surrounds the claim that strange or bad conduct is caused by ‘chemical imbalances’ in the brain. …”

The more rigorous and honest clinicians will concede that drawing causal relationships between “mental illness” and “chemical imbalances” is impossible. That prescription medication often helps misbehaved or unhappy individuals is no proof that strange behavior is an organic disease. One can chemically castrate a pedophile. But does this demonstrate that molesting kids is an organic disease? Never. It proves only that chemical castration can at times reduce recidivism in people who have chosen to victimize children.

Clear analytical thinking is at the root of solid science, it precedes empiricism.

Roughly 75 percent of the value of “antidepressant” drugs is due to the placebo effect. And talk therapies—cognitive-behavioral therapy in particular—can have equal or better results. Veracity permits only that we limit our causal conclusions to saying that assorted treatment modalities sometimes help people with behavioral problems, nothing more.

MORE.

My mentor, the great Dr. Thomas Szasz, wrote and proved all this analytically in the Myth of Mental illness, 1961. His books I studied at university, back when thought was taught. Both Tom Szasz and I lauded Tom Cruise when the actor attacked psychiatry so very cogently.

See “Cruise And The Psychiatric Shamans” (2005):

The psychiatric peanut gallery has blasted actor Tom Cruise for insisting correctly that there’s more voodoo to the profession than veracity. Cruise’s instincts are good: “Psychiatrists don’t have a test that can prove that a so-called mental illness is actually organic in origin, I wrote. Rigorous clinician —members of the Society for a Science of Clinical Psychology come to mind —concede that drawing causal connections between “mental illness” and “chemical imbalances” is impossible. That prescription medication often helps misbehaved or unhappy individuals is no proof that strange behavior is an organic disease —placebos or cognitive-behavioral therapy, for example, are as effective.

Tucker Carlson had summoned some limey, a quick-fix popularizer, to speak to these issues.