From the Wall Street Journal (behind paywall):
Dismay with the same-sex marriage decision doesn’t warrant a retreat from culture and politics.
The full text, by David Skeel:
Even a few months ago, most theologically conservative Christians had never heard of the Benedict Option, a call by writer Rod Dreherfor Christians to stage a “strategic retreat” from the culture. The idea has prompted much online discussion; given the widening chasm between traditional Christian ethics and American culture, many are now seriously considering it.
Continue reading Now Isn’t the Time to Flee the Public Square
From the Wall Street Journal (behind paywall), by David Lehman:
‘The Second Coming’ outlines William Butler Yeats’s fearful vision of the future based on the moral anarchy of the present.
The text (the last paragraph raises a chilling question):
If our age is apocalyptic in mood—and rife with doomsday scenarios, nuclear nightmares, religious fanatics and suicidal terrorists—there may be no more chilling statement of our condition than William Butler Yeats’s poem “The Second Coming.” Written in 1919, in the immediate aftermath of the epoch-ending disaster that was World War I, “The Second Coming” extrapolates a fearful vision from the moral anarchy of the present. The poem also, almost incidentally, serves as an introduction to the great Irish poet’s complex conception of history, which is cyclical, not linear. Things happen twice, the first time as sublime, the second time as horrifying, so that, instead of the “second coming” of the savior, Jesus Christ, Yeats envisages a monstrosity, a “rough beast” threatening violence commensurate with the human capacity for bloodletting.
Here is the entire poem:
Continue reading A Poet’s Apocalyptic Vision
It comes down to this: In the capitalist view, poor people aren’t liabilities to be managed by government; the are human beings with untapped potential.
From the July 11-12, 2015 Wall Street Journal (behind paywall), an interview titled “Playing the Music of Capitalism” with Albert Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, by William McGurn.
This is old (2008), but timely—found at Isegoria:
- Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
- Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.
- The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.
John Derbyshire adds this:
Of the Second Law, Conquest gave the Church of England and Amnesty International as examples. Of the Third, he noted that a bureaucracy sometimes actually is controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies — e.g. the postwar British secret service.
John Moore thinks the third law is almost right; it should read “assume that it is controlled by a cabal of the enemies of the stated purpose of that bureaucracy.”
Continue reading Robert Conquest’s Three Laws of Politics
From The Guardian, a history lesson by Michael White:
Greece’s very existence owes more to tyranny than philosophy – no wonder its people reject its creditors’ severity – but Germany has its own baggage too.
Yes, living within your means is so hard when you’ve seldom done it.
From Psychology Today on, wait for it… July 2, 2009:
Only July 4, the United States will be celebrating Independence Day, the birth of our nation. Unfortunately, the greatest freedom provided us by this new democracy has been dying and few people seem to be aware of it or care about it. And many others are even cheering it on.
The democratic world has made “tolerance” its number one social goal. Nevertheless, this goal has been elusive, as victimized groups continue to lobby for laws that remove the stigmas against them, and educators, social scientists and parents continue to proclaim the horrors of bullying. Despite decades of diversity education, members of the various races congregate largely with their own kind in our schools and neighborhoods.
The truly ironic thing is that the most essential element of a tolerant society has been with us for the past two centuries, as it is also the central element of democracy, but we are slowly but surely killing it. That element is in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is called Freedom of Speech. We need to be allowed to say what we want, as long as our words don’t cause tangible harm to people’s bodies or property, or society will stagnate and we will be prisoners in our own skulls, only permitted to say things that the authorities approve of. Without Freedom of Speech, we would never solve problems that require abandonment of current ways of thinking. Without Freedom of Speech, the government could be as despotic as it wishes, killing off any protestors without impunity. Where the concept of Freedom of Speech is absent, people believe they are entitled to kill others who say things they find offensive. Without Freedom of Speech, we would literally be living in the Dark Ages.
Continue reading The Tragic Death of Freedom of Speech and the Growth of Intolerance
Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2015 James Ament
From The Daily Beast:
Liberal Harvard professor Robert Putnam and self-described “Grinch” Charles Murray may be ideological opposites, but both agree it’s time to invest more in helping poor kids succeed.“I’m a libertarian, I don’t do solutions,” Murray said, partly for laughs, at a noontime discussion held at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. But he agrees with Putnam that that extracurricular activities should be free in public schools, that poor kids who do dumb things should get the benefit of the doubt like their affluent peers, and that pre-school is a good way to take poor kids out of a punishing environment even when, in his view, the outcome 20 years down the road doesn’t justify the expenditure.
Harvard’s Robert Putnam and The Bell Curve author Charles Murray insist it’s time to save the American underclass.
“Government has a lot worse ways of spending my money,” he said.
Continue reading Inequality: Where Right and Left Agree
From brain pickings, an interesting take on segregating the important from the unimportant:
To understand the Dalai Lama…perhaps it’s most useful to see him as a doctor of the soul.
From Reason (Hat tip, Instapundit):
Growing up as “a gender nonconforming entity” in Eisenhower’s America wasn’t easy for cultural critic and best-selling author Camille Paglia. Her adolescence in small-town upstate New York was marked by rejection, rebellion, and cross-dressing, all in reaction to the stultifying social norms of the 1950s and early ’60s. She would go on to become one of America’s most famous academics and cultural critics, an “anti-feminist feminist” and an incendiary atheist who once wrote that “God is man’s greatest idea.” From her perch at Philadelphia’s University of the Arts, Paglia has befuddled orthodox partisans and ideologues for decades.
So what does this tireless provocateur think of contemporary culture, with its openness to a wide variety of ever-proliferating gender, racial, and sexual identities? Not so much. Whether the subject is feminism or the fate of Western civilization, Paglia is no Pollyanna. In this wide-ranging discussion, she says decadence is upon us, higher education is going to hell, LSD destroyed the baby boomers, millennials are myopic, contemporary criticism has croaked, and Hillary Clinton might singlehandedly destroy the universe. Even Madonna, once Paglia’s ideal of sex-positive feminism, seems to have lost her way.
Does the celebrated author of Sexual Personae (1990) and Break Blow Burn (2005) have any reason to get out of bed in the morning? Does she have any hope at all? Reason TV’s Nick Gillespie sat down with Paglia in March to find out.
Read the whole interview at the above link.
From OZY, by Meghan Walsh:
Why you should care? Because this guy could change the way we think about evolution — and faith.
On a sunny afternoon, at a bustling cafe less than a mile from Stanford University’s Palo Alto campus and more than 5,000 miles from his home, an assistant professor from MIT is telling me about science. Very advanced science. His name is Jeremy England, and at 33, he’s already being called the next Charles Darwin.
Continue reading Jeremy England, the Man Who May One-Up Darwin