The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Gottfried Archive
Dark Thoughts on the Passing of MODERN AGE Editor Peter Lawler
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
PeterLawler

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Although I generally agree with the Latin adage “de mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est,” sometimes the death of someone leads one to reflect on the gushing eulogies that are showered on the deceased. The recent premature passing at the age of sixty-five of Peter Lawler, a professor of political studies at Berry College in Georgia and the Editor of Modern Age, is a case in point. Although from all accounts a decent person and a genuine devotee of Southern literature, Lawler provided, perhaps unwittingly, the textbook case of how a “conservative” academic can keep his professional standing without becoming, to use John Derbyshire’s phrase, the new “Emmanuel Goldstein” in our emerging 1984 society.

Lawler’s passing set off an explosion of praise in the authorized “conservative” press. National Review devoted a glowing eulogy to Lawler [Peter Lawler, RIP, by Peter Spiliakos May 23, 2017] The Federalist and Weekly Standard spoke about him even more extravagantly. [In Fond Memory Of Peter Augustine Lawler Upon His Sudden Death, By Yuval Levin, Federalist, May 24, 2017] And there were many others.

Leo Strauss and the Conservative Movement in AmericaFrom these eulogies, it is possible to infer that Lawler was a faithful Catholic, but one with a sense of humor; he was also a devotee of Leo Strauss (on whom I’ve written an unmentionable book) and was on exceedingly friendly terms with Strauss’s disciples. Above all, he was a “thoughtful” conservative, who was polite about Bernie Sanders, described the notorious John (“Civil Rights icon”)Lewis, as heroic, and was offended by the bullying behavior of Donald Trump. [Lewis Baits and Trumps Trump, by Peter Augustine Lawler, NRO, January 17, 2017]

On the few times I met Lawler, it seemed that he was a low-key kind of person, who liked to talk in a non-threatening way about “values.” Both of us wrote at one time for ISI’s Modern Age, and I noticed that Lawler’s views, unlike mine, were safely conventional. It’s not that Lawler ever landed up in a really cushy job at a distinguished university. But he remained in good standing with Conservatism, Inc. by not taking on what the late Sam Francis once called in conversation with me “the hard issues.”

Let me explain what these hard issues are by providing illustrations of the opposite, starting with those positions taken by “cultural conservatives” that couldn’t hurt their careers because most Leftists don’t give a damn about them. Favoring the wider use of the Latin Mass, proposing more concentration in public education on classical languages, deploring the lack of “values” in the contemporary West, and mixing in the phrase “permanent things” during cocktail conversation all exemplify “soft” stands. These are the stands taken by intellectuals who are trying to navigate through life without Tsuris (go look it up).

Although one can certainly take some of these positions out of genuine conviction, they also provide an easy way out for someone who wants to be known as a genteel “conservative” but who doesn’t want to catch flak as a journalist or academic.

In the political sphere, one can easily recognize the advocates of soft positions, because they abound in Republican think-tanks and throughout Establishment Conservative journalism. They lament the racism of Democrats who refuse to pay for the charter schools attended by blacks (although for some reason blacks don’t seem to mind this outrage and vote overwhelmingly for the “racists” who won’t pay for their charter schools.) Then there’s the one-note “moderate feminists” whom I see on Fox News warning women who wish to be liberated not to vote for the Dems. The Republicans, we are told by these blond-haired adolescent deep thinkers, will do more for “moderate feminists.”

Another soft or safe position for “conservatives” to embrace: supporting the right of the Israeli government to build settlements on the West Bank until this area is made to look like a replica of Long Island. Indeed, being for the right of any Israeli Right to do anything it wants will not likely hurt any budding “conservative” career. Nor will denouncing Islamicist oppression, directed against women, gays, Jews and (oh yes!) Christians.

Another soft position mentioned by John Derbyshire: inviting Leftist professors on to “conservative” talk shows and weeping with them about how badly their more demonstratively Leftist colleagues have been treating them lately.

But why should someone on the real Right even care if one’s enemies start hacking each other apart? The more mayhem the better!

One final example of a “conservative” position, which probably does wonders in helping to raise money from neocon donors: beating up on the Germans. I’ve no idea why anyone would imagine this is a conservative thing to do, but reading the plethora of anti-German rants in National Review and the Weekly Standard leaves one with the impression that loathing Krauts is essential to a proper conservative identity. Of course, Victor Davis Hanson’s expression of his revulsion for Germans [The Old German Problem, NRO, June 1, 2017] in “conservative” publications is also echoed in Leftist sources, including German-language ones.

And certainly Max Boot’s tribute to Mayor Mitchell Landrieu for his “rhetorical masterpiece” when he defended the removal of Confederate monuments in New Orleans is unlikely to make Boot or Commentary a target for the SPLC. [The Military Must Break from the Past, by Max Boot, Commentary, May 31, 2017] As a member in good standing of Conservatism Inc., Boot also called for the renaming of military bases(Fort Benning, Fort Bragg, Fort Hood, and Fort Polk ) honoring Confederate soldiers and/or slave owners. (I presume Washington and Jefferson be next on Max Boot’s list).

The “hard positions” that only the bold or foolhardy would dare to take are professionally harmful and, in the case of someone like Richard Spencer, may be physically dangerous as well. Allow me to cite examples of these positions in ascending order of toxicity for those who take them.

ORDER IT NOW

Let’s start with the once-harmless declaration that any government that claims to be derived from the popular will should not be allowed to flood its territory with a foreign population without the express consent of its citizens. Those who enter the country illegally should be forced to leave. Moreover, rights that are constitutionally accorded to citizens are not meant to be universally applied, and especially not to those who have broken the law by crossing the country’s border.

Let’s get on to something that may be even more perilous to say (although contributors to VDARE.com do say it quite frequently): native cognitive abilities vary for individuals—which some on the Left are willing to concede—but just as importantly these abilities seem to vary on average for ethnic groups. For simply entertaining the possibility that this might be true, I and others have been driven out of “conservative” organizations (yes I am using scare quotes again) like Lawler’s ISI.

It will also hurt the speaker if he brings up the high crime rate in the disintegrating black community, especially if he attributes this problem to genetics. Personally, I don’t think this is necessarily a prudent position for us on the Right to take because we land up excusing or palliating what is morally reprehensible. We do have a duty to demand the same standards of social conduct from all residents in this country and are fully justified in punishing those who grossly violate them, whatever their race. But this doesn’t mean that those who think differently on this issue should be professionally ruined and subject to physical attack.

Nevertheless, this is what is now happening. And Conservatism, Inc. seems to be more anxious about the fate of Leftist academics who are being isolated by other Leftist academics than about some thug punching a member of the Alt Right in the ear or about the same person being kicked out of a gym where he was minding his own business.

But I doubt this double standard is maintained simply because Conservatism Inc. doesn’t want to offend its donor base or be excluded from certain social functions. These may be factors but they’re not the only ones.

The plain fact is that Conservatism Inc, functionaries are now socially and culturally much closer to the rest of the political journalistic Establishment than they are to the real Right. They and their Leftist debating partners attended the same educational institutions, live in the same gentrified urban neighborhoods and frequent the same restaurants.

The Left, with an assist from Conservatism Inc. careerist apparatchiks has created exactly the “harmless persuasion” that it wants: a sock puppet Right that won’t venture outside an ever-more narrowly restricted circle of themes.

Thus I wonder, after reading for at least a week in the “conservative” New York Post about “New York’s Gay Pride parade in all its glory” together with digs at Eastern European countries that don’t encourage such displays, might it be appropriate to ask whether the Heritage Foundation would have kicked out Jason Richwine if he had posed half-naked in a Gay Pride Parade instead of pointing out that different ethnic groups have different median IQs?

I extend my condolences to Peter Lawler’s loved ones. And I do regret that his passing has occasioned such dark thoughts.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 26 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Johann says:

    This is very similar to the European Union where the choice is between the CenterLeft and the CenterRight which are basically the same thing and this prevents any real opposition government and any who oppose government policies are simply declared “extremists”. It was obvious in the last American election where the Republican Right and the Democrat Left ganged up on Donald Trump and are still zealously working hard to Undo the electoral vote.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /pgottfried/dark-thoughts-on-the-passing-of-modern-age-editor-peter-lawler/#comment-1932068
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. The plain fact is that Conservatism Inc, functionaries are now socially and culturally much closer to the rest of the political journalistic Establishment than they are to the real Right. They and their Leftist debating partners attended the same educational institutions, live in the same gentrified urban neighborhoods and frequent the same restaurants.

    Perhaps I, never having been a conservative, am beginning to understand who the “cucks” are. Conservatism Inc., although Republican, is united with what is today called the left in their opposition to Donald Trump. Conservatism Inc. and the Clinton machine would be our Centrists. Centrists have no ideology. They are mere opportunists. In it for the money.

    Give me the real Right and the real Left and honest elections. Let the chips fall where they may.

    Oh. And thanks for this helpful article.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Although from all accounts a decent person and a genuine devotee of Southern literature, Lawler provided, perhaps unwittingly, the textbook case of how a “conservative” academic can keep his professional standing without becoming, to use John Derbyshire’s phrase, the new “Emmanuel Goldstein” in our emerging 1984 society.

    Very useful for Con Inc. wanna-be’s.

    Rule of Lawler.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Dan Hayes says:

    Prof Gottfried,

    Unfortunately, “such dark thoughts” as yours are necessary to be said.

    And your thoughts never entered into the realm of impropriety.

    Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. I do not begrudge Prof Gottfried’s ” dark thoughts. ” In a sane America, someone of his erudition would have been a professor of a major university and his books well-known and praised. In unAmerica, his audience is largely eSamizdat users like us. Like Brimelow, Derbyshire and Buchanan, his career has been blighted by his adherence to the truth.
    Peter Lawler was by all accounts a decent man, but needless to say he preserved his career by never putting his head above the parapet. If you want Southern Traditionalism, then I recommend Brad Griffin, aka Hunter Wallace. Strangely, Prof Gottfied failed to mention him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. ANON says: • Disclaimer

    Anyone who doesn’t loathe and despise John Lewis is beneath contempt. These conservatives who worship MLK are beneath contempt. Conservatives who approve of ‘educated, skilled” immigrants are beneath contempt. I hope that if they need serious medical attention they will not be able to find a White American male doctor and die from the inability of women and minority drs to diagnose.

    Victor Davis Hanson? He writes excellent articles about the Mexican indio transformation of California, but his family and all farmers, farm vendors, and the entire food industry is responsible for the mass of indio food workers. He’s a third generation California and his family has been using indio labor for 100 years. so he is responsible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I was about to quibble after a very satisfactory experience in a private hospital to undergo a specialised procedure. 75 per cent of the professional or skilled quasi professional attention was from immigrants but I think all of them were educated/trained in Australia. If you want to see a doctor with a thick Indian accent you probably have to go well away from the major centres of our highly urbanised society. (More than a third of Australians live in Melbourne and Sydney.)
    , @Patrick Harris
    What evidence do you know of that female physicians produce inferior diagnoses?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Let’s start with the once-harmless declaration that any government that claims to be derived from the popular will should not be allowed to flood its territory with a foreign population without the express consent of its citizens.

    One reason why non-white nations suck so bad is because the people there tend to be servile and accepting of authoritarianism. Non-whites were more servile than Europeans. And among whites, the more mixed Spanish and Latins were more servile than Anglos and others.

    So, the population was more accepting of corruption, abuse of power, and just did whatever to get a piece of the pie. It’s like how things worked in Sicily.

    Sure, Italians and Latinos have that swagger thing, but it’s mostly style. And it’s about the balls of thugs, not courage of heroes. Latin social orders are about those with power and those who suck up to power. On occasion, there are those with ‘balls’, like Tony Montana. But it only leads to more crookery.

    [MORE]

    Most Latin types are like Ernie.

    They are toady-bullies. They toady up to power and bully those below. This is why Italians(esp southern ones) and Greeks suck so bad. They are toady-bullies.
    And their passion isn’t about moral courage for reform but childish tantrums to dodge responsibility, like with Fellini movie characters. It’s no wonder communism gained such foothold in such parts. Lacking individual conscience and courage, they settled for collective obedience before the new god of stalinist ‘justice’.

    Many non-white cultures are like this, especially India. Hindus are among the biggest toady-bullies. They suck up to power and shi* on those below them. They are like higher IQ’ed gypsies.
    And East Asians have had 1000s of yrs of toady-bullyism. Sucking up to masters, bosses, and elders and kicking those below.

    Now, these non-white types may seem rebellious, courageous, and reformist in the Current West because they are making so much noise about victimhood. But they are just playing toady to the prevailing narrative, like with that kid who wrote BLM 100 times to get into Stanford. Since PC is king, they just toady up to PC.

    In the past, when whites had firm grip on America, these newcomers seemed so patriotic, loyal, and appreciative. Why? Because US was ruled by whites and education/politics was patriotic(even among Liberals). So, immigrants from toady-bully cultures were eager to win approval from American Power back then.
    So, Japanese-Americans, despite bitterness, wanted to prove themselves as credit to their race by fighting in the US military in WWII even though their families were in camps.

    But now, the ruling ideology of the US is globalism and anti-white-ism. So, these toady-minded non-whites come to America, and the first thing they do is obey the reigning dogma of PC that says ‘whitey sucks’.
    But this has nothing to do with thought, morality, or conscience. It’s just toadies going with the flow, like red guards sucking up to Mao by waving the little red book.

    To be sure, there are differences in style. East Asians are earnest in their toady servility. Hindus are savvy & cunning in theirs. And Latinos are craven and lowdown in their sucking up to power or ruling ideology. It’s like that white Puerto Rican freak who gave us HAMILTON. It’s disgusting how these Latin whites pose as champions of ‘people of color’.

    White nations, especially northern European ones, made the most progress because the people were most courageous and individualistic in conscience and moral courage. Also, elites were responsive to these demands and used power to spread good ideas and values.

    But today, white elites(infected with PC) are most responsive to freaks, degenerates, and POC toady-bullies while totally ignoring the only white people with moral courage left: the nationalists… who get no hearing at all.

    When white nations silence whites with moral courage, favor non-whites with toady mentality, and choose elites that cuck out to globalism, that is recipe for disaster.

    Lawrence could write his own destiny. Muslims believe everything is written.
    Now, nationalist pens are banned while non-whites forge signature as ‘new Europeans’, toadies to Sorosites of the world.

    The difference between Anglos and Mexers was Anglos did so much more on every front because they had agency and moral courage. They had economic agency and developed more industry and cities. They had intellectual, cultural, and moral agency and wrote more books, did more science, made more technology, pushed more reforms and progress(the real kind, not stuff about 50 genders).

    Anglo vs Mexer:

    In contrast, Mexers were always in follow-mode. Sure, once in awhile a bold leader like Zapata came along, but he was less a model than new boss. Instead of every Mexican trying to be a Zapata, they just wanted to serve him as new master.
    Among Anglos, Wyatt Earp was the model for every white man. Among Mexers, it was always ‘meet the new boss, serve him like the old boss’. So, even when Mexers got rid of a boss, they needed a new boss to boss over them.

    It’s like the difference of national character we see in Wild Bunch and Treasure of Sierra Madre.

    Even as bandits, Mexicans are servers than seekers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @K
    You have such a pathological mind, talking bad every single ethnic group except except your own (i am guessing now you are mix of east asian and white), thats why you spoke bad about everybody else and not much about these two groups.

    You really are a frog in a well. You dont know much about the world and other ethnic groups. You think you know the bad qualities of them, but you dont know their good qualities. Every ethnicity (including your own) has good and bad qualities. But you focus only on the bad qualities (real and imagined) of other ethnicities and focus only on the good (real and imagined) of your own.

    Before judging somebody....know them fully.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. K says:
    @Priss Factor
    Let’s start with the once-harmless declaration that any government that claims to be derived from the popular will should not be allowed to flood its territory with a foreign population without the express consent of its citizens.

    One reason why non-white nations suck so bad is because the people there tend to be servile and accepting of authoritarianism. Non-whites were more servile than Europeans. And among whites, the more mixed Spanish and Latins were more servile than Anglos and others.

    So, the population was more accepting of corruption, abuse of power, and just did whatever to get a piece of the pie. It's like how things worked in Sicily.

    Sure, Italians and Latinos have that swagger thing, but it's mostly style. And it's about the balls of thugs, not courage of heroes. Latin social orders are about those with power and those who suck up to power. On occasion, there are those with 'balls', like Tony Montana. But it only leads to more crookery.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL9aJZ4SqAc

    Most Latin types are like Ernie.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZAsU-3JENc

    They are toady-bullies. They toady up to power and bully those below. This is why Italians(esp southern ones) and Greeks suck so bad. They are toady-bullies.
    And their passion isn't about moral courage for reform but childish tantrums to dodge responsibility, like with Fellini movie characters. It's no wonder communism gained such foothold in such parts. Lacking individual conscience and courage, they settled for collective obedience before the new god of stalinist 'justice'.

    Many non-white cultures are like this, especially India. Hindus are among the biggest toady-bullies. They suck up to power and shi* on those below them. They are like higher IQ'ed gypsies.
    And East Asians have had 1000s of yrs of toady-bullyism. Sucking up to masters, bosses, and elders and kicking those below.

    Now, these non-white types may seem rebellious, courageous, and reformist in the Current West because they are making so much noise about victimhood. But they are just playing toady to the prevailing narrative, like with that kid who wrote BLM 100 times to get into Stanford. Since PC is king, they just toady up to PC.

    In the past, when whites had firm grip on America, these newcomers seemed so patriotic, loyal, and appreciative. Why? Because US was ruled by whites and education/politics was patriotic(even among Liberals). So, immigrants from toady-bully cultures were eager to win approval from American Power back then.
    So, Japanese-Americans, despite bitterness, wanted to prove themselves as credit to their race by fighting in the US military in WWII even though their families were in camps.

    But now, the ruling ideology of the US is globalism and anti-white-ism. So, these toady-minded non-whites come to America, and the first thing they do is obey the reigning dogma of PC that says 'whitey sucks'.
    But this has nothing to do with thought, morality, or conscience. It's just toadies going with the flow, like red guards sucking up to Mao by waving the little red book.

    To be sure, there are differences in style. East Asians are earnest in their toady servility. Hindus are savvy & cunning in theirs. And Latinos are craven and lowdown in their sucking up to power or ruling ideology. It's like that white Puerto Rican freak who gave us HAMILTON. It's disgusting how these Latin whites pose as champions of 'people of color'.

    White nations, especially northern European ones, made the most progress because the people were most courageous and individualistic in conscience and moral courage. Also, elites were responsive to these demands and used power to spread good ideas and values.

    But today, white elites(infected with PC) are most responsive to freaks, degenerates, and POC toady-bullies while totally ignoring the only white people with moral courage left: the nationalists... who get no hearing at all.

    When white nations silence whites with moral courage, favor non-whites with toady mentality, and choose elites that cuck out to globalism, that is recipe for disaster.

    Lawrence could write his own destiny. Muslims believe everything is written.
    Now, nationalist pens are banned while non-whites forge signature as 'new Europeans', toadies to Sorosites of the world.

    The difference between Anglos and Mexers was Anglos did so much more on every front because they had agency and moral courage. They had economic agency and developed more industry and cities. They had intellectual, cultural, and moral agency and wrote more books, did more science, made more technology, pushed more reforms and progress(the real kind, not stuff about 50 genders).

    Anglo vs Mexer:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwqOYWnLxBo

    In contrast, Mexers were always in follow-mode. Sure, once in awhile a bold leader like Zapata came along, but he was less a model than new boss. Instead of every Mexican trying to be a Zapata, they just wanted to serve him as new master.
    Among Anglos, Wyatt Earp was the model for every white man. Among Mexers, it was always 'meet the new boss, serve him like the old boss'. So, even when Mexers got rid of a boss, they needed a new boss to boss over them.

    It's like the difference of national character we see in Wild Bunch and Treasure of Sierra Madre.

    Even as bandits, Mexicans are servers than seekers.

    You have such a pathological mind, talking bad every single ethnic group except except your own (i am guessing now you are mix of east asian and white), thats why you spoke bad about everybody else and not much about these two groups.

    You really are a frog in a well. You dont know much about the world and other ethnic groups. You think you know the bad qualities of them, but you dont know their good qualities. Every ethnicity (including your own) has good and bad qualities. But you focus only on the bad qualities (real and imagined) of other ethnicities and focus only on the good (real and imagined) of your own.

    Before judging somebody….know them fully.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Sean says:

    Given that Strauss’s inner teaching leads his followers to covertly consider themselves a type (philosophers) at the highest eminence of a human hierarchy, one wonders how they can keep a straight face when Charles Murray is being taken to the woodshed. He may have thought of them as friends but it’s more than a little dubious that Lawler was accepted by Straussians as one of them.

    Settlement building on the West Bank makes it impossible for Israel to go along with the official bipartisan US policy of a two state solution. I suspect US diplomats console themselves with the thought of Israel being destined to implode under the stress of having to choose between complete withdrawal and becoming a pariah after expulsion of the West Bank Palestinians

    Conservatism Inc functionaries are part of a distinct knowledge class with liberal-leftists, and it is to that class’s advantage to believe what they do; group cognitive dissonance explains it most simply. The more intelligent someone is the more they see hereditarianism as something it does not pay to believe in.

    I think Germany also believes what it pays it to believe in (matching means to ends a la Clausewitz). If Germany had really believed the Soviets might have invaded, they would have bestirred and matched Soviet conventional superiority at whatever cost. Now they take a different tack by encouraging mass non-Europe immigration– a big sacrifice–but look at what it has brought them. Merkel is becoming recognized as the leader of the free world, yet she leads a country deindustialising the EU single currency/market area (an export promotion program for German business) secure within a cocooning alliance on all borders.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong

    The more intelligent someone is the more they see hereditarianism as something it does not pay to believe in.
     
    This I cannot agree with. Neoconservatives love hereditary descent, that's how Kristol, Podhoretz, Kagan, et al. got their positions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. JackOH says:

    Thanks very much, Prof. Gottfried. Your distinction between soft, genteel positions and hard positions seems to me right on the money.

    Years ago I dipped my toe into the waters of civic activism. Dinner parties, meetings, that sort of deal. I met, I suppose, the local equivalent of an intelligentsia, people with decent clothes and thoughts about things. Schoolteachers, profs at our local state university, retired types of various stripes. Well, as I noted in a comment elsewhere, these people were possessed of mostly a sort of routine leftist disposition with a strong admixture of small-town snobbery. Decent enough people, I suppose, but they were definitely inclined to self-serving genteelism and virtue-signaling. (I recall an embarrassing evening listening to a guitarist, who seemed to be our host’s gay lover, doing 1960s protest songs.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. fnn says:

    “Another soft position mentioned by John Derbyshire: inviting Leftist professors on to “conservative” talk shows and weeping with them about how badly their more demonstratively Leftist colleagues have been treating them lately.”

    But Tucker recently did a good job eviscerating Ralph Peters and Max Boot.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. @ANON
    Anyone who doesn't loathe and despise John Lewis is beneath contempt. These conservatives who worship MLK are beneath contempt. Conservatives who approve of 'educated, skilled" immigrants are beneath contempt. I hope that if they need serious medical attention they will not be able to find a White American male doctor and die from the inability of women and minority drs to diagnose.

    Victor Davis Hanson? He writes excellent articles about the Mexican indio transformation of California, but his family and all farmers, farm vendors, and the entire food industry is responsible for the mass of indio food workers. He's a third generation California and his family has been using indio labor for 100 years. so he is responsible.

    I was about to quibble after a very satisfactory experience in a private hospital to undergo a specialised procedure. 75 per cent of the professional or skilled quasi professional attention was from immigrants but I think all of them were educated/trained in Australia. If you want to see a doctor with a thick Indian accent you probably have to go well away from the major centres of our highly urbanised society. (More than a third of Australians live in Melbourne and Sydney.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. “It will also hurt the speaker if he brings up the high crime rate in the disintegrating black community, especially if he attributes this problem to genetics. Personally, I don’t think this is necessarily a prudent position for us on the Right to take because we land up excusing or palliating what is morally reprehensible. We do have a duty to demand the same standards of social conduct from all residents in this country and are fully justified in punishing those who grossly violate them, whatever their race. But this doesn’t mean that those who think differently on this issue should be professionally ruined and subject to physical attack.”

    I think youre wrong that its imprudent for the right to take the position that races vary in more than intelligence for several reasons. First because its demonstrably true and the right should always be the party of reality and truth.But i also think you fail to see a third conclusion to be drawn from facing this squarely but that the left and cuckserves see. Blacks are less civilized and yet from the slavery colonial and jim crow eras we know can still be held to higher standards than we do today. It simply takes apply different methods to enforce civilized behavior. This is being danced around for instance in the current school discipline and stop and frisk debates. Oh certainly faced squarely one comes to realize these modified methods have never been sustainable, and that leads one to the conclusion a multicultural civilization is simply an oxymoron. This is the real reason neither side can go there there entire civilization is build on mud.

    “Thus I wonder, after reading for at least a week in the “conservative” New York Post” come on the post hasnt even pretended to be conservative for a decade. Its most conservative stance in the last decade was against the ban on large cups of soda. It never fails in every single story to pay huge props to any leftist cause tangentially connected to said story. Its extremely feminist, gay rights, pro immigration, you name it its solidly leftist. Its astounding NYC doesnt have a conservative (even by NYC standards) paper. Whats worse is its actually more liberal than most american liberal papers because it routinely inserts stories from its british branch reflecting european left thought.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. Mr. Anon says:

    Another soft position mentioned by John Derbyshire: inviting Leftist professors on to “conservative” talk shows and weeping with them about how badly their more demonstratively Leftist colleagues have been treating them lately.

    It may be a soft position, but it is also a useful one. A lot of Tucker Carlson’s viewers are people with pre-teen or teen-aged kids who will soon be going to college. I think a lot of people are just not aware of the depths of left-wing insanity to which the modern university has sunk. The progression is almost exponential, with every decade being far worse than the decade before.

    If you went to college even just 15 years ago, you might not be aware of what it is truly like today. People send their kids off to college not realizing that they will be in the hands of dedicated leftist idealogues who have turned a college education into a four-year long struggle-session, the purpose of which is to turn the kids against their own family, people, and civilization. This is something that everyone who reads blogs like this is aware of, but the public at large is not aware of it.

    Pointing it out, often and emphatically as Carlson is doing, is a public service.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Tucker Carlson has exposed the neocons Boot and Peters, I see little reason to be criticizing him. He's also the one responsible for hiring Scott Greer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @ANON
    Anyone who doesn't loathe and despise John Lewis is beneath contempt. These conservatives who worship MLK are beneath contempt. Conservatives who approve of 'educated, skilled" immigrants are beneath contempt. I hope that if they need serious medical attention they will not be able to find a White American male doctor and die from the inability of women and minority drs to diagnose.

    Victor Davis Hanson? He writes excellent articles about the Mexican indio transformation of California, but his family and all farmers, farm vendors, and the entire food industry is responsible for the mass of indio food workers. He's a third generation California and his family has been using indio labor for 100 years. so he is responsible.

    What evidence do you know of that female physicians produce inferior diagnoses?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I can't speak for ANON, but my own personal experiences across the 49 years I have been kicking around the third stone from the sun, have led me to believe NAMs and women are, on average, less qualified physicians. It also makes sense, given they have an easier time getting into, and getting funded for, college and medical school, that on average, they will be less qualified than the average white male physician. Also, as a white male patient, you may receive worse treatment if they care less. Many harbor irrational hatred of you simply for being a white man.

    No, this doesn't mean all NAMs or women doctors will be worse. Nor does it mean all white male doctors will excel. But, on average, if you are going to see a new doctor, you're better off rolling the dice with a white man than a NAM. Or a woman. And better being seen by a physician with a track record in the field than being seen by a resident.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Disliking Kraut militarism has a solid basis. You don’t have to despise Germans for World War II to understand their fanatical militarism in World War I was an awful mistake. Millions of innocent people were forced into the trenches to die because of German militarism, and a whole string of conservative governments toppled all over Eastern Europe because of it. Many white Europeans who had been living quiet, peaceful, traditional lives in traditional cultures had their lives ruined by death, starvation and economic chaos after World War I, and their unstable countries fell prey to coups by fanatical communists afterwards. The latter imprisoned their people inside horrific tolitalitian systems for decades. These regimes were so awful they made the monarchies that came before them look like picnics. Yes, Kraut militarism was a massive historical mistake, and it destroyed the traditional cultures and values that the Krauts themselves had cherished.

    After the first half of the 20th century was over, so many ordinary citizens of Western European countries had been so maltreated that support for socialism rose up in a great wave that turned most of Europe hard left, and thus created the support necessary for putting together the European Union. This Union, led by pig-headed ideological elites, is currently letting in a flood of brown and black immigrants who are destroying European culture, peoples, laws, and religion, and these invaders cannot be dislodged. If no European Union had ever existed, individual countries would have had the legal means to fend off this wave of invaders. Most Americans are not aware that top EU officials are not elected by anyone. They are appointed by elites, yet these EU officials have the power to write laws and force them onto the ordinary European citizens without any legal means of fighting off these oppressive laws.

    If Russia hadn’t been dragged into World War I, it’s likely their country would have slowly moderized in a normal way without the mass murder of the Stalinist-Leninist years. Even before World War I, Bismarck and German militarism tricked the French into the Franco-Prussian war and wrought havoc on France, which caused the seige of Paris and the rise of the leftist commune.

    All in all, if you look at the damage caused by ‘Kraut militarism,’ it has killed more white Europeans in the last 150 years than from any other cause, all of it unnecessary, and the hard swing left that resulted from Kraut militarism has unleashed a wave of invading hordes that Europe is still having to battle against. Anyone with half a brain can figure out that the social catastrophe caused by countless backward immigrants will go on for many generations.

    Yes, German militarism has caused a LOT of crap. They don’t get a pass from me, and they shouldn’t from any sensible person with a shred of intellectual honesty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Anglo policy since 1588 has been the refusal to accept a hegemon on the Continent. For good or ill, this explains nearly every single war up to the present including Brexit and the rampant "Russian interference" claims.

    Germany was outcompeting Britain economically prior to 1914, the British ruling class despised them as noveau riche. Germany made two errrors, ending the Three Emperors Alliance, and embarking on a naval arms race they could not win (The UK maintained a minimal Army). Germany could have instead become the first mechanized army, as they started the auto industry, not Detroit. The 1914 invasion of France failed due to logistics failures, trucks would have solved this.

    The EU is not a hard-left project, witness their insistence on privatization of state owned industries. When Greece elected a hard left government, the EU turned the screws. "Free movement of peoples" is not an inherently left/right issue. It is a globalist/nationalist issue. The USSR, and the PRC today, have something called "internal passports".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Maj. Kong says:
    @Sean
    Given that Strauss's inner teaching leads his followers to covertly consider themselves a type (philosophers) at the highest eminence of a human hierarchy, one wonders how they can keep a straight face when Charles Murray is being taken to the woodshed. He may have thought of them as friends but it's more than a little dubious that Lawler was accepted by Straussians as one of them.

    Settlement building on the West Bank makes it impossible for Israel to go along with the official bipartisan US policy of a two state solution. I suspect US diplomats console themselves with the thought of Israel being destined to implode under the stress of having to choose between complete withdrawal and becoming a pariah after expulsion of the West Bank Palestinians

    Conservatism Inc functionaries are part of a distinct knowledge class with liberal-leftists, and it is to that class's advantage to believe what they do; group cognitive dissonance explains it most simply. The more intelligent someone is the more they see hereditarianism as something it does not pay to believe in.

    I think Germany also believes what it pays it to believe in (matching means to ends a la Clausewitz). If Germany had really believed the Soviets might have invaded, they would have bestirred and matched Soviet conventional superiority at whatever cost. Now they take a different tack by encouraging mass non-Europe immigration-- a big sacrifice--but look at what it has brought them. Merkel is becoming recognized as the leader of the free world, yet she leads a country deindustialising the EU single currency/market area (an export promotion program for German business) secure within a cocooning alliance on all borders.

    The more intelligent someone is the more they see hereditarianism as something it does not pay to believe in.

    This I cannot agree with. Neoconservatives love hereditary descent, that’s how Kristol, Podhoretz, Kagan, et al. got their positions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Maj. Kong says:
    @Anon
    Disliking Kraut militarism has a solid basis. You don't have to despise Germans for World War II to understand their fanatical militarism in World War I was an awful mistake. Millions of innocent people were forced into the trenches to die because of German militarism, and a whole string of conservative governments toppled all over Eastern Europe because of it. Many white Europeans who had been living quiet, peaceful, traditional lives in traditional cultures had their lives ruined by death, starvation and economic chaos after World War I, and their unstable countries fell prey to coups by fanatical communists afterwards. The latter imprisoned their people inside horrific tolitalitian systems for decades. These regimes were so awful they made the monarchies that came before them look like picnics. Yes, Kraut militarism was a massive historical mistake, and it destroyed the traditional cultures and values that the Krauts themselves had cherished.

    After the first half of the 20th century was over, so many ordinary citizens of Western European countries had been so maltreated that support for socialism rose up in a great wave that turned most of Europe hard left, and thus created the support necessary for putting together the European Union. This Union, led by pig-headed ideological elites, is currently letting in a flood of brown and black immigrants who are destroying European culture, peoples, laws, and religion, and these invaders cannot be dislodged. If no European Union had ever existed, individual countries would have had the legal means to fend off this wave of invaders. Most Americans are not aware that top EU officials are not elected by anyone. They are appointed by elites, yet these EU officials have the power to write laws and force them onto the ordinary European citizens without any legal means of fighting off these oppressive laws.

    If Russia hadn't been dragged into World War I, it's likely their country would have slowly moderized in a normal way without the mass murder of the Stalinist-Leninist years. Even before World War I, Bismarck and German militarism tricked the French into the Franco-Prussian war and wrought havoc on France, which caused the seige of Paris and the rise of the leftist commune.

    All in all, if you look at the damage caused by 'Kraut militarism,' it has killed more white Europeans in the last 150 years than from any other cause, all of it unnecessary, and the hard swing left that resulted from Kraut militarism has unleashed a wave of invading hordes that Europe is still having to battle against. Anyone with half a brain can figure out that the social catastrophe caused by countless backward immigrants will go on for many generations.

    Yes, German militarism has caused a LOT of crap. They don't get a pass from me, and they shouldn't from any sensible person with a shred of intellectual honesty.

    Anglo policy since 1588 has been the refusal to accept a hegemon on the Continent. For good or ill, this explains nearly every single war up to the present including Brexit and the rampant “Russian interference” claims.

    Germany was outcompeting Britain economically prior to 1914, the British ruling class despised them as noveau riche. Germany made two errrors, ending the Three Emperors Alliance, and embarking on a naval arms race they could not win (The UK maintained a minimal Army). Germany could have instead become the first mechanized army, as they started the auto industry, not Detroit. The 1914 invasion of France failed due to logistics failures, trucks would have solved this.

    The EU is not a hard-left project, witness their insistence on privatization of state owned industries. When Greece elected a hard left government, the EU turned the screws. “Free movement of peoples” is not an inherently left/right issue. It is a globalist/nationalist issue. The USSR, and the PRC today, have something called “internal passports”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Maj. Kong says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Another soft position mentioned by John Derbyshire: inviting Leftist professors on to “conservative” talk shows and weeping with them about how badly their more demonstratively Leftist colleagues have been treating them lately.
     
    It may be a soft position, but it is also a useful one. A lot of Tucker Carlson's viewers are people with pre-teen or teen-aged kids who will soon be going to college. I think a lot of people are just not aware of the depths of left-wing insanity to which the modern university has sunk. The progression is almost exponential, with every decade being far worse than the decade before.

    If you went to college even just 15 years ago, you might not be aware of what it is truly like today. People send their kids off to college not realizing that they will be in the hands of dedicated leftist idealogues who have turned a college education into a four-year long struggle-session, the purpose of which is to turn the kids against their own family, people, and civilization. This is something that everyone who reads blogs like this is aware of, but the public at large is not aware of it.

    Pointing it out, often and emphatically as Carlson is doing, is a public service.

    Tucker Carlson has exposed the neocons Boot and Peters, I see little reason to be criticizing him. He’s also the one responsible for hiring Scott Greer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. I liked the tone of this article. Reminded me of Walker Percy (“The Moviegoer”).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. Ronnie says:

    Gottfried has recently declared that Vladimir Putin’s “aggressive behavior in Ukraine and Syria suggests the need for us in the West to be wary of his expansionist ambitions.” This nonsense makes me suspicious of everything he says. Spouting the usual neocon lines about Putin make me realize that he is irrational and deluded about American actions towards Russia like many other jews are conditioned to believe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Ronnie:

    I am unaware of the validity of the Gottfried quote. If true it means that Paul has been imbibing Fox News (which he has oftentimes previously belittled as a tool of NeoCon Central.

    Or maybe it's a quote out of context - or so I hope.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Dan Hayes says:
    @Ronnie
    Gottfried has recently declared that Vladimir Putin’s “aggressive behavior in Ukraine and Syria suggests the need for us in the West to be wary of his expansionist ambitions.” This nonsense makes me suspicious of everything he says. Spouting the usual neocon lines about Putin make me realize that he is irrational and deluded about American actions towards Russia like many other jews are conditioned to believe.

    Ronnie:

    I am unaware of the validity of the Gottfried quote. If true it means that Paul has been imbibing Fox News (which he has oftentimes previously belittled as a tool of NeoCon Central.

    Or maybe it’s a quote out of context – or so I hope.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. whoever says: • Website
    @Dan Hayes
    Ronnie:

    I am unaware of the validity of the Gottfried quote. If true it means that Paul has been imbibing Fox News (which he has oftentimes previously belittled as a tool of NeoCon Central.

    Or maybe it's a quote out of context - or so I hope.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Patrick Harris
    What evidence do you know of that female physicians produce inferior diagnoses?

    I can’t speak for ANON, but my own personal experiences across the 49 years I have been kicking around the third stone from the sun, have led me to believe NAMs and women are, on average, less qualified physicians. It also makes sense, given they have an easier time getting into, and getting funded for, college and medical school, that on average, they will be less qualified than the average white male physician. Also, as a white male patient, you may receive worse treatment if they care less. Many harbor irrational hatred of you simply for being a white man.

    No, this doesn’t mean all NAMs or women doctors will be worse. Nor does it mean all white male doctors will excel. But, on average, if you are going to see a new doctor, you’re better off rolling the dice with a white man than a NAM. Or a woman. And better being seen by a physician with a track record in the field than being seen by a resident.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. They lament the racism of Democrats who refuse to pay for the charter schools attended by blacks (although for some reason blacks don’t seem to mind this outrage and vote overwhelmingly for the “racists” who won’t pay for their charter schools.)

    What’s the significance of this? Presumably, Democrats don’t like charter schools, but unless Democrats are also refusing to pay for non-charter schools used by blacks, why are blacks meant to be so wedded to charter schools?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. Hillary Clinton’s flip-flopping on the issue of school choice in order to please her union backers caused a significant of black voters whose kids benefit from charters to stay home on election day. While few voted for Trump or the third party candidates, many stayed home. If the Dems had not been so anti-charter, turnout in Detroit, Flint, and Milwaukee would have been better, and Trump probably would not be president right now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Paul Gottfried Comments via RSS