An opportunity to find out for yourself what passes for modern thought

There is an article of mine in the latest Quadrant which has been put up online. It is a review of Roger Scruton’s latest book, Fools, Frauds and Firebrands: Thinkers of the New Left. It is as good a book as you are likely to read on political theory in the modern age. How good? This good, taken from a review in The Guardian:

This polemic adopts the abusive and paranoid style it decries in its leftwing opponents.

Abusive, absolutely. It’s a short book and has to cover much territory by cutting to the chase. Paranoid, if this book doesn’t scare you, you must already be on the left. I, on the other hand, describe the book like this:

The book has a specific purpose. It is to provide a way of escape to students who are caught up in various versions of a modern humanities course, where they are fed an endless mind-numbing postmodernist gruel. The book goes through the various manifestations of the modern Left to explain their idiocies and unravel the Newspeak in which they are encoded. But the book does more. It opens up to those of us who are only vaguely aware of the ways in which the humanities are now taught, our own entry into the depths of a problem most of us are, at best, only dimly aware of. . . .

Scruton explains why everything you know, believe and understand about the world can be instantly dismissed by these people through the revolutionary perspective of Grand Theory. And here we are discussing nearly every one of the major philosophical thinkers of the modern age: Hobsbawm, Thompson, Dworkin, Sartre, Foucault, Habermas, Althusser, Lacan, Deleuze, Gramsci, Said, Badiou, Žižek and many others still who do not make it into chapter titles.

Unless you are a specialist in postmodernist philosophy, you will know next to nothing about most of them. Yet these are not just the major authors who people the reading lists of courses in Cultural Studies, but it is their views that underpin the content of the media and political discourse across the West. These people may be as loopy as it is possible to be, and their works near-unreadable nonsense, but they inform our debates and are the essence of politically correct discourse. You cannot avoid any of it. What Scruton offers in Fools, Frauds and Firebrands is an opportunity to find out for yourself what passes for modern thought, provided in a way that you will understand not just their content, not just their dangers, but also their incredible idiocy. This is where one of the most crucially important battles of our time is being fought, and unless you understand what is taking place, you will be unable to do a thing. That is why you should read this book. If nothing else, you will understand the nature of the icebergs that have ripped through the hull of the cultural ship of the West and why it may soon sink into oblivion.

The aim of this post is to get you to read the review. The aim of the review is to get you to read the book. But all of it is to get you to understand the intellectual world in which we live and the dangers we collectively face. Roger Scruton is one of the very few who can explain the depths of these problems in a way you can understand. But he can only do that if you read what he has written which is what you should do.

Progressive institutionalism and the National Review

An article that lays out the retreat from conservatism, as exemplified by the National Review.

The central question of our time is not who is or what is conservative. The real question is the National Question. And Donald Trump has risen to that challenge better than any candidate since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The truth is that Donald Trump has filled an enormous political vacuum—one that National Review has refused to acknowledge even though they helped to create it in the first place.

Contains a video of Robert Welch from 1958 who I had never seen speak before.

About those nonadmitted foreign workers and farmers

Ludwig von Mises, in his The Clash of Group Interests published in 1945, looks at open borders as if the only issue revolved around economic returns. It is over the question of open borders that the left and right completely coalesce. It is where grand theory utterly obliterates reality and common sense. Australia and New Zealand, in the passage below, are mere examples, the best he could find at the time. Today it is the United States and Europe, to the extent that anything is left of their original structures, that are specifically under assault by such thoughts.

The root causes of present-day group antagonisms must be seen in the fact that we are on the point of going back to a system of rigid castes. Australia and New Zealand are democratic countries. If we overlook the fact that their domestic policies are breeding domestic pressure groups fighting one another, we could say that they have built up homogeneous societies with equality under the law. But under their immigration laws, barring access not only to colored but no less to white immigrants, they have integrated their whole citizenry into a privileged caste. Their citizens are in a position to work under conditions safeguarding a higher productivity of the individual’s work and thereby higher wages. The nonadmitted foreign workers and farmers are excluded from enjoyment of such opportunities.

I don’t know what can any longer be done about such stupidity other than to recognise that there it is, and take the appropriate actions to save what you can while you can.

We have reached peak insanity. Repeat: peak insanity

refugees in greece

Refugees break down a gate on the Greek-Macedonia border.

Here is The Guardian Subhead that goes with the picture and its caption:

I can insist this is an image of heroic, defiant, brave refugees, trying to make us live up to our liberal values. But to terrified European eyes they are the other, the enemy

It comes via Five Feet of Fury who calls the post We have reached Peak Guardian. Repeat: Peak Guardian. I am generally at a loss anyway observing the judgements of others about politics, but is it really that hard to accept that maybe, just maybe, those of us who worry about border protection might have a point?

The hand of God

And it’s not just the hand: Scientific paper which says the human hand was designed by a ‘Creator’ sparks controversy:

It says human hand coordination “should indicate the mystery of the Creator’s invention,” and concludes by again claiming the mechanical architecture of the hand is the result of “proper design by the Creator.”

The evidence of design is all around us. But if you think it is all just random chance you are welcome to your belief in the multiverse which has got to be the least probable outcome anyone has ever conceived.

Know thine enemy

There is now a battle for the soul of conservatism, whether our Western way of life can be maintained, or whether we are going to be swamped by ideologues and profiteers at the cost of how we have lived. I keep using the image of progressive internationalists as the enemy, you know, the one-world, open-borders, the-nation-as-a-bus-depot sort of people. and it is a shared vision of both sides of politics, the Democrats more openly, with the Republicans the ones who shout, whatever you do, don’t throw us into the briar patch. Which is why we find How the GOP Insiders Plan to Steal the Nod from Trump.

Despite a growing string of victories in the Republican primaries, the DC-Wall Street cabal that has dominated the GOP since 1988 has no intention of letting the billionaire real estate mogul be nominated. None other than Karl Rove has insisted the stop-Trump effort is not too late and can succeed.

A new superPAC has dumped $10 million dollars into blistering negative TV ads against Trump in the last three days. The Koch brothers and their associates deny funding the effort but they denials are questionable at best. The New York Times reported Sunday that the Rubio and Kasich campaigns are now openly planning on a ‘brokered convention” to stop Trump in the back rooms in Cleveland. The New York Daily News reported that Barbara Bush has vowed revenge against Trump for ending the “low energy” campaign of her son Jeb, the anointed one and that the Bush clan is all-in in the effort to stop Trump. The News reported that Jeb may transfer the $25 to $30 million in SuperPAC funds he has left to an anti-Trump effort.

Trump thus not only must campaign against the Democrats, he will have to campaign against many in “his own” party who do not seem to be interested in backing someone who really could win it all in a big way. There is a realignment of politics happening, as many of us are finally waking up to the fact that the water has continually been heating and is almost on the boil.

UPDATE: If you are interested in a true understanding of Donald Trump, read The Donald Trump Playboy interview from 25 years ago. Long but brilliant. You will learn a lot, and not just about him. Here is a sample, but you owe it to yourself to read it all.

Sometimes you sound like a Presidential candidate stirring up the voters.

I don’t want the Presidency. I’m going to help a lot of people with my foundation-and for me, the grass isn’t always greener.

But if the grass ever did look greener, which political party do you think you’d be more comfortable with?

Well, if I ever ran for office, I’d do better as a Democrat than as a Republican-and that’s not because I’d be more Republican-and that’s not because I’d be more liberal, because I’m conservative. But the working guy would elect me. He likes me. When I walk down the street, those cabbies start yelling out their windows.

He wasn’t running for a thing but described himself as a conservative. What more could anyone want?

Irony may not be his strongest suit

From The Oz, Subsgate: Malcolm Turnbull fires shot across Tony Abbott’s bow. It begins:

Malcolm Turnbull has fired a warning shot at Tony Abbott over the growing disunity within government ranks, calling in the federal police to investigate a ­security leak as MPs worry about the political damage from the former leader’s actions.

Despite Mr Abbott’s denying he leaked classified documents, his colleagues criticised him for lending weight to a report in The Australian yesterday that highlighted delays in the development of a new submarine fleet.

Liberals warned that the “sniping” from the former leader had turned into a “full-frontal ­attack” that could lead to the ­destruction of the Turnbull government if it continued into an election campaign.

“This is not about a return to power, as with Kevin Rudd, this is a full-frontal attack,” said one MP, who believed Mr Abbott was intent on “blowing the place up” even if that meant the polit­ical death of his colleagues.

The thing is, these are issues people such as myself look on as high priority. And while you cannot entirely trust the author of the leaked story to be telling the truth, maybe he is:

The author of the report, The Australian’s foreign editor Greg Sheridan, told Sky News Mr ­Abbott was not his source.

“I can say this much to you … the source wasn’t Tony Abbott,’’ Sheridan said. “I went to Tony Abbott with my information and interviewed him on the record and, as he says, what he says is on the record.”

It is possible that the community does prefer an extra $10 a week than a stronger national defence, or maybe it doesn’t. But whichever it is, there is no percentage in hiding the debate until the election. What is clear, of course, is that the delay in building our submarine fleet is not universally popular, which is why there are those who would prefer to avoid the entire issue altogether.

“Sometimes it’s nice to be told what to do”

Someone forwarded me an article from The Wall Street Journal he thought I might like, and he was definitely right about that. It is titled, Could You Pass Sixth Grade Economics? but for all that is a quite sinister description of a supposedly innovative way to teach the dismal science. They divide the class up into different groups and have them trade with each other using some kind of barter system. These are the final two paras with no comment by the author who, for all we know, even agrees with Ms Chase about how economies ought to be run:

In Ms. Higgins’ classroom, the lesson shifted to different types of economic models. It turns out the city states of Babylon were once run as a command economy, where production and prices of goods and peoples’ incomes are decided centrally by the government. The students concede that while the market economy has made them wealthier, trading for the good life is exhausting.

“To be honest I like the exercises that center on a command economy,” says 11-year‐old Mairead Chase of city state Eshnunna. “I like authority. I like to have a goal,” she shrugs and smiles. “Sometimes it’s nice to be told what to do.”

So much for the free market. You begin to see the attraction Bernie Sanders has for the young if this is what they end up believing.

[My thanks to Ivan R. for sending the link along.]

Super Wednesday

As it will appear to us who live just this side of the dateline – Tuesday in the US is already Wednesday here. This is the lay of the land:

CNN: TRUMP AT 49%…
Finds Ally in Delegate Selection System…
Small Biz Owners Say Donald Top Choice…
VIDEO: Reporter Grabs Secret Service Agent Throat at Trump Rally…
ICE Union On Gang of Eight: ‘It’s as if criminals wrote it themselves’…
Rubio Doesn’t Realize Energy Policy He Supports Already Been Enacted…
INGRAHAM: The GOP Establishment Suicide…
Republican Senator Believes More Candidates Will Enter…

And for those who are wondering what Hillary is up to:

Clinton Rape Accuser Thanks Lady Gaga For ‘Overwhelming Performance’…
WASH POST LEAD TUES: Hillary prepares to take on Trump in general election…
NYT PAGE ONE: Plan to Defeat Him…
HILLARY HEADACHE: AIDES IN CROSSHAIRS AFTER LAST DOC DUMP…
Cheryl Mills still has top-secret status despite FBI probe…
GOVT WITHHOLDS MORE EMAILS, INCLUDING OBAMA CORRESPONDENCE…
1,800 Reasons Why Controversy Is Far From Over…
STILL IGNORING TRAVELING PRESS…
What if Hill is indicted?
BEGALA: Enthusiasm gap ‘keeps me up at night’…

And what amazes me more than anything else are the number of people supposedly on the right who would vote for Hillary ahead of Trump. And for added interest, there is this Why they hate Trump written by someone who doesn’t much seem to like Trump either. But he does include this which is much to the point about a lot of things:

BLITZER: You said this about the ongoing conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians – I’m quoting you now: ‘Let me be sort of a neutral guy. I don’t want to say whose fault it is, I don’t think it helps.’

“TRUMP: Right.

“BLITZER: Here’s the question. How do you remain neutral when the U.S. considers Israel to be America’s closest ally in the Middle East?

“TRUMP: Well, first of all, I don’t think they do under President Obama because I think he’s treated Israel horribly, all right? I think he’s treated Israel horribly. I was the grand marshall down 5th Avenue a number of years ago for the Israeli Day Parade, I have very close ties to Israel. I’ve received the Tree of Life Award and many of the greatest awards given by Israel.

“As president, however, there’s nothing that I would rather do to bring peace to Israel and its neighbors generally. And I think it serves no purpose to say that you have a good guy and a bad guy.

“Now, I may not be successful in doing it. It’s probably the toughest negotiation anywhere in the world of any kind. OK? But it doesn’t help if I start saying, “I am very pro-Israel, very pro, more than anybody on this stage.” But it doesn’t do any good to start demeaning the neighbors, because I would love to do something with regard to negotiating peace, finally, for Israel and for their neighbors.

“And I can’t do that as well – as a negotiator, I cannot do that as well if I’m taking … sides.”

Whatever it is, it is not anti-Israel and does sound like someone who might know a thing or to about negotiation. But the last word will go to Steve Hayward at Powerline, Apologia Pro Vita Trump. He really is sorry that it has come to this, but this is what it has come to:

I’m sure lots of voters don’t think Trump has what it takes to be a great president. But he is the ideal person to disrupt a political class that deserves a hard smash in the mouth. This is why Trump is going to win.

And then, of course, there are others who do think he has what it takes to be a great president indeed. I can only hope we are going to find out for ourselves over the next eight years.

[My great thanks to Autumn Baroque for pointing me at so many of these articles.]

The party of closed borders will win the election

First there’s what Glenn Reynolds wrote and he would know:

The GOP establishment has an almost-religious attachment to open immigration. It appears to be their only firm principle. It’s what led to Trump’s rise.

And then there are the three top rated comments. First:

“It appears to be their only firm principle.”
GOP principles:
1. Have contempt for conservative voters.
2. Go after conservative members of Congress ruthlessly, but treat Democrats with respect.
3. Do whatever it takes to win the love of the main stream media.
4. Always believe in more government.
5. Immigration, immigration, immigration.

Second:

Get replaced by a foreigner brought in to do your job and see how you feel. You expect people to vote to give their jobs to cheaper immigrants?

And third:

I dislike Trump, and I distrust whatever his politics are. That said, I believe him on the immigration issue, which as we are seeing in Europe, is existential.

That’s it. Says it all. The party of closed borders will win the election but if it weren’t for Trump, no such party would exist.