Category Archives: Argument

UPDATED (9/26/022): Giorgia Meloni Has A Philosophy Of Liberty; GOP Candidates Have Positions, Talking Points, Bereft of Philosophy

Argument, Europe, Family, Individual Rights, Liberty, Nationalism, Nationhood, Political Philosophy, Republicans

‘The GOP has to stick to positions, talking points, because the Republicans don’t hold a philosophy, much less one that can support concepts like nationalism, nation-state and national sovereignty’

Unlike most of our GOP candidates, who promote positions, as opposed to a philosophy of liberty (even the very nice ones such as Kari Lake)—Giorgia Meloni, prime minister elect of Italy and leader of Brothers Of Italy, bases her opinions on a systematic philosophy which is central to her core beliefs.

Liberty to Meloni is not the party’s talking points—positions and political plank—as it is for the GOP—“God, Groceries, Gas,” as one hack summed it up on Hannity. Rather, Meloni holds a philosophy of liberty which she grasps. Thus she quotes GK Chesterton not for the meaty words, but to shore up a philosophy. Coming from her, Chesterton doesn’t ring hollow.

What do I mean? Example: Meloni talks about “the nation state” and a “political sovereignty that belongs to the citizens of that state.”

The GOP confines itself to noodling against open borders, but for legal immigration (they love it) and against illegal immigration. The GOP has to stick to positions, talking points, because the Republicans don’t hold a philosophy, much less one that can support concepts like nationalism, nation-state and national sovereignty.

Meloni knows that individual rights are not deracinated, free-floating entitlements that attach naturally to every person who can then show up on the West’s doorstep demanding these abstracted rights be defended and optimized. No, this position is that of the Republicans and Democrats. Their positions justify open borders to varying degrees and an adventurous foreign policy to varying degrees.

A party that holds positions bereft of philosophy will never restore the nation. Why, the concept of a nation (not nation-state) Republicans reach for only to promote and project Lincoln-like visions of political might and can-do optimism.

On the other hand, Meloni, an Italian nationalist, will want to slow immigration to a halt because she believes that everything that is good in Italy comes from its Italian essence.

Suffice it to say that, in her references, the Italian prime minister elect evinces erudition and knowledge.

Alas, as I’ve been told, Meloni is wishy-washy on the vaccine and I note that she suffer the Ukraine euphoria, although is about Italy First.

https://gettr.com/post/p1s9u5762ab

* Screen capture image via NYT

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.