The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
A Report from the Conservative Movement’s Dustbin
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Great+Purge+Cover These first years of the twenty-first century have been a sorry time for Americans who favor national sovereignty, demographic stability, restraint in government, traditional culture, and the rule of law.

For eight years the federal apparatus was in the hands of neoconservatives, and so distinguished itself by instituting massive new welfare programs ,waging futile missionary wars, and waving in millions of unskilled workers and their dependents (to become ourdependents) across wide-open borders.

The U.S.A. then elected its first affirmative-action president, a law-school nonentity with no executive experience and nothing in his head but 1980s college-radical sociobabble and the endless rancor of the blacks. His administration plastered further layers of folly, irresponsibility, and idiot idealism onto neocon policies, with new bursts of welfare gigantism, the toppling of tame, useful dictators who did not meet faculty-lounge standards of “human rights,” and the de facto annulment of immigration laws on behalf of the Mexican and Central American underclasses.

Offered the opportunity to replace this neo-neocon administration with one headed by a worthy but timid and unglamorous (which is to say, white male) contender from the original neocon mold—one who actually had been a missionary in his youth!—the nation declined. Instead they re-elected the guy with the exotic name, who by this point had stopped even pretending to be interested in administering the federal government and had given over most of his calendar to golf, vacations, second-guessing law enforcement, and making vapid speeches at party fund-raisers.

Today the bureaucratic leviathan rumbles on, directed by delusional world-savers and ethnic lobbyists, staffed by middle-aged white graduates of student Trotskyism and out-of-their-depth minority quota hires. Congressional constituencies are ever more finely gerrymandered to assure perpetual incumbency. Washington, D.C. has become a glittering Xanadu of wealth and power, its surrounding dormitory counties regularly ranking at the top of lists logging median household income. Protestants have been purged from the U.S. Supreme Court lest they should assert the interests of our founding population; eleven million Americans are taking federal disability benefits; foreign gangsters loot Medicare; cynical bankers game the system in confident knowledge that the government, terrified of political consequences from a “financial crisis,” will bail them out at last.

As the great meat-grinder wars of the middle twentieth century recede into the fading memories of octogenarians, we maintain 40,000 troops in Germany, 11,000 in Italy, 51,000 in Japan and 21,000 in Korea. A full generation after the U.S.S.R. disintegrated, we continue to support NATO—and even seek to expand it—antagonizing Russia, our natural ally against Muslim fanaticism, Third World demographic pressure, Chinese young-superpower irresponsibility, and North Korean insanity. Ill-considered WW2 socioeconomic quick fixes—employer-linked health benefits, big-city rent control—have become permanent, unquestionable features of the sociopolitical landscape.

Our culture has continued to slide giggling into the pit. It is now thirty years since you last heard anyone hum a tune from a current popular song. Concerts of serious music rarely include anything less than half a century old. Very few of us could name a living painter or architect. Entire years pass when no American outside the academy spontaneously quotes a line of verse written by any American poet younger than Elizabeth Bishop (b. 1911), or a British poet younger than Philip Larkin (b. 1922). The middlebrow novel is slipping into extinction. Movies are an extension of the comic-book industry; only TV drama shows occasional flashes of brilliance. The churches are branch offices of Globalist Multiculturalism, Inc.: the Episcopal church in my sleepy, 360-year-old Long Island town advertises Misa en Español.

Forbidden by Supreme Court decree to test job applicants for ability, employers demand college degrees as proxies, obliging parents either to beggar themselves or to see their children loaded with debt after four prime young-adult years learning nothing much. The colleges themselves are hotbeds of Cultural Marxism, padding out their prospectuses with intellectually worthless Grievance Studies courses, awarding degrees to illiterate black athletes, and writhing in frenzies of agonized self-abasement when someone is seen wearing a hood on campus.Police and Fire Departments, to avoid diversity lawsuits, allow black female cadets to walk through their test fitness runs. Other working- and lower-middle-class employments are sold off to low-bidding H-1B visa holders or illegal aliens. Homosexuals can pretend to be “married,” and if you peaceably express disapproval you will be hounded from your job. Submarine crews are co-ed.

Has there been any push-back from the conservative movement against all this? Not so as you’d notice. It is difficult to name anything that the conservative movement has conserved … although to be sure, the English language is still spoken, or at least understood, in most precincts.

*

The second year of Obama’s first term did see a little gusher of populist conservatism. The Tea Party movement, however, was easily and swiftly co-opted by institutional Republicanism, as the Gingrich revolution had been in the second year of Bill Clinton’s first term. (Concerning that earlier gusher, neocon authors James Bennett and Michael Lotus pass the following remark in their recent book America 3.0: Rebooting American Prosperity in the 21st Century: “The Republican Congresses, after a decade, lost any connection to the reforming Congress of 1994 and had slumped into oligarchic favor-trading.”)

The Tea Party survives as an independent entity today only in leftist mythology: as a sinister Klan-without-hoods boogie-man used by Cultural Marxists to frighten their children. Among themselves, the leftists refer to the movement by a disgusting slang expression drawn from the louche subculture of homosexuality. They still, after four years, think it the height of avant-garde wit to do so, and utterance of the expression in those circles is still an occasion for thigh-slapping and side-holding. Don’t look to Red Guards for a sophisticated sense of humor.

ORDER IT NOW

Hopes for reform through populist conservatism have bubbled up at intervals of a decade or two ever since the Cultural Revolution began fifty years ago. The Tea Partiers were only the latest manifestation of what sociologist Donald Warren, an early observer of the phenomenon, called “Middle American Radicals.” That was in 1976.

I offered my own pessimistic—and of course correct—take on prospects for the Tea Party in a 2010 column for The American Conservative, when the movement was first attracting attention:

Perhaps it is just as simple as this: a meritocratic elite is, by definition, smarter than the rest of us. It can always “control the discourse,” planting shame and doubt in the minds of those who seek to challenge it, manipulating their sensibilities, feeding them a steady diet of soma through media and educational outlets, bewildering and outfoxing them with bogus appeals to the higher emotions. Perhaps it is all an unequal contest.

If there is nothing to be hoped for from populist conservatism, what of the more intellectual variety?

*

Here a distinction needs to be made between what Peter Brimelow calls “Conservatism, Inc.”—the people who staff the major conservative magazines and think tanks—and the ragged, shoeless, mostly-unsalaried battalions of what I refer to as the Dissident Right.

Conservatism, Inc. has been no more effectual against the civilizational rot than have the populists. Its commanding heights—those magazines and think-tanks—have long since been captured by neocon careerists, dependent for their funding on un-intellectual businessmen and political lobbyists steeped in the Cultural Marxist miasma and terrified of heterodoxy for its impact on sales.

As I told a roomful of National Review cruise passengers three years ago: You can forget about standing athwart History crying “Stop!” The modern style of career conservatism prefers to run along panting behind the juggernaut squeaking: “Would you mind perhaps just slowing down a teeny bit?”

A landmark event in the recent history of Conservatism, Inc. was the cashiering of analyst Jason Richwine by the Heritage Foundation in May of 2013 for facts Richwine had included, with full supporting references, in his Harvard Ph.D. thesis! As I pointed out at the time in an article commenting on the affair, this was a case of the cultural commissars “killing a chicken to scare the monkeys.” Richwine was merely the chicken; Heritage were the monkeys, and they were duly scared.

A lesser purge along the same lines had occurred a year previously in April 2012 when political scientist Bob Weissberg and myself were simultaneously—though for separate offenses—dropped from the contributor lists of National Review at the behest of leftist watchdogs.

Prof. Weissberg’s offense was to have addressed the annual conference of American Renaissance. The editors of National Review confidently described his address in print as “noxious” even though the conference organizers did not issue DVDs of the event until some weeks after Weissberg’s dismissal and no transcript was available until I made one from Bob’s notes five months after that .

In fact the Weissberg address argued against white nationalism, so that one of the following things must be true: either (a) the decision-makers at National Review were both clairvoyant and sympathetic to white nationalism, or else (b) they jumped reflexively at the crack of the leftist whip—chicken and monkeys again—and justified themselves by pretending to know what Weissberg had said.

My own dismissal caused more fuss because it occurred in, and was related to, one of what historian Paul Johnson, in Modern Times, called those “spasms of self-righteous political emotion” to which “America seems peculiarly prone.”

The occasion of hysteria here was the February 2012 encounter between black ne’er-do-well Trayvon Martin and neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida. There was an altercation that ended with Martin kneeling astride Zimmerman and smashing his head against the sidewalk. Zimmerman managed to pull out a licensed handgun and shot Martin with it; Martin died on the spot.

When the facts of the case were tested to courtroom standards of evidence a year later, Zimmerman was swiftly acquitted of second-degree homicide. In April 2012, however, public hysteria over the incident was at fever pitch, whipped up by leftist mainstream journalists—excuse the pleonasm—with the assistance, most disgracefully, of the President himself. An innocent baby-faced black teenager has been stalked and murdered by a white vigilante! (Martin was 17; Zimmerman is actually of mixed German, Peruvian-Indio, and black African ancestry.)

The editor of National Review himself had signed on to the Left narrative in a column expressing his concord on the matter with the views of black supremacist scofflaw Al Sharpton—a column the editor must surely have come to regret but which, to his credit, he allowed to remain on the magazine’s website.

At the time I spotted an interesting sub-category of contributions to the general hysteria. Black journalists were publishing columns lamenting that they had to take their children aside and give them The Talk: earnest instructions and warnings about the danger posed to them by the ever-present malice of whites, who because of their privileged position in a racist society need not fear justice.

This of course is nonsense. On Department of Justice statistics—including the National Crime Victimization Survey, where citizens record crimes whether or not the police and courts were involved—blacks are far more dangerous to whites than whites are to blacks. It is therefore much more appropriate for nonblack citizens to warn their children of the danger from feral blacks, as of course most of us do.

Flagrant contradictions of that kind are grist to the mill of opinion journalism. I published a corrective column at one of my other outlets, with thirty-odd hyperlinks to supporting facts and statistics. The Left got hold of the column, the whip was cracked, the monkeys squealed in fright, and the chicken was slain. My column was described by the editor of National Review as “nasty” and I was dropped.

(Following our simultaneous cashierings, Bob Weissberg and I have acquired the habit, when we meet, of hailing each other with: “Well, well—Mr. Noxious!” … “Ah, Mr. Nasty!” …)

ORDER IT NOW

National Review was guilty of cowardice, no doubt, but there are mitigating, or at least qualifying, factors. Most prominently: That year was divisible by four, and in early April it seemed that Mitt Romney had a good chance of winning the presidency. A president needs word people: speechwriters, press secretaries, and such. He also needs lawyers: Attorney General, Solicitor General, White House Counsel. At least one National Review staffer had had a creditable prior career as a government lawyer. Visions of sugar-plums were dancing in heads at 215 Lexington Avenue.

Never having been afflicted with political ambition myself, I am indulgent of it in others. Without ambition there would, after all, be no politics, and then where should we be? A president as unimaginative and as thoroughly infused by the Kultursmog as Romney obviously is might indeed be reluctant to hire in persons from a magazine tainted, however remotely, and from however far out on the Left, by accusations of—gasp!—racism. Thus the cowardice had a reasonably self-interested side to it … as cowardice usually does.

And then, I was an easy discard for the magazine, not being a salaried employee (they paid me on piecework rates). Irreligious and not much interested in party politics, I was not actually a very good fit for the place, though I tried my best to not flaunt my indifference to “life” issues, to stay awake through long discussions about Medical Savings Accounts, to feign interest in the latest shyster congressreptile posing as a standard-bearer of family values in breaks from porking his secretary, and to clap along with the collective pretense that George W. Bush had a conservative bone somewhere in his body.

There were, too, particular personal animosities of the kind that will inevitably arise during fourteen years of close confinement with a dozen or more opinionated intellectuals.

One of the first to unsheath his stiletto in the April 2012 business, for example, was senior editor Ramesh Ponnuru, in whom high intelligence, ready wit, and a wonkish mastery of political detail are combined with a feline talent for intrigue and a patience in revenge that would have elevated him to the highest levels in the court of an Oriental despot.

I had earned Ponnuru’s enmity some years before with a critical though not unkind review of his 2006 right-to-life book Party of Death. It was, I suppose, injudicious of me to give a less-than-favorable review to a colleague’s book; but a column was due, I had no topic at hand, and had read the book. Sometimes you just want to knock out some copy and get to bed.

On that earlier occasion Ponnuru and at least one other member of the more strongly Roman Catholic element at National Review had urged the magazine to drop me, but they had been overruled by Bill Buckley. By 2012, though, Buckley was in his grave. As the Chinese proverb says: When the lips are gone, the teeth are cold.

(You will not read much that is positive about Buckley from presses like this one. I only knew the man in the last decade of his life, so I cannot speak to the criticisms in general. Possibly some of the negativity is apt. The maxim current in Northamptonshire during my upbringing, however, was: “Speak as you find.” I never experienced anything but courtesy, kindness, generosity, appreciation and support from Bill Buckley, and I was very sorry when he died.)

These purgings, though petty and inconsequential in themselves, illustrate key facts about Conservatism, Inc. It is timid and pusillanimous in the face of criticism from the Left. Its younger members have absorbed some of the vapors of Cultural Marxism into their body tissues, however unwillingly and unknowingly. At key points in the electoral cycle, ambition becomes a dominating factor.

Worst of all, Conservatism, Inc. is not very intellectual. It was unusual to hear an interesting or original idea around the National Review editorial table; and when any such thing was heard, it usually came from an older staffer. With the settling-in of Cultural Marxism as our state ideology, there has come a flattening and dulling of thought, affecting any American less than fifty, but especially the thirtysomethings. The Overton Window of acceptable opinions is narrow, the notion of peering around it to heterodox ideas outrageously shameful.

Again there are qualifications to be made. From where we stand, out on the Dissident Right, Conservatism, Inc. looks like a power center, owning the ears (if no other organs) of cable TV personalities and congressional panjandrums.

From within Conservatism, Inc., however, things seem different. Staffers at those magazines and think tanks see themselves in fancy as a beleaguered minority, struggling to make their voices heard against the roar of a statist majority. It’s understandable, even if you have only the merest smidgen of heterodoxy in your soul. Turn on your TV; pick up a newspaper; stroll around a campus. The Narrative is mighty; we live under strong ideological control; as timid and ineffectual as they are, career conservatives stand in partial, feeble, occasional opposition to it.

*

If the populist conservatism of Fox News, Dinesh D’Souza, and the Tea Party is a mere “beggars’ democracy” in the fashion of Frederick the Great’s Prussia (“My people say what they please, and I do what I please”), and Conservatism, Inc. is a mere disgruntled subsidiary of gigantist, world-saving managerial bureaucracy, what hope is there of a return to traditional American notions of individual self-support, governmental restraint, judicial modesty, noninterference in other nations’ squabbles, and realism about human nature?

If there is any hope it lies with the scattered voices of the Dissident Right. How invigorating it is to turn from the latest bellicose editorial at The Weekly Standardcalling for war against Yemen, or the latest puff piece from National Review for some bought-and-sold GOP senator, or the latest call to missionary endeavor from Dinesh D’Souza, to the calm sanity , data-rich statistical inquiries, and genuine intellectual curiosity of Dissident Right websites! (And still a tiny number of print outlets. Chronicles magazine deserves an honorable mention here.)

ORDER IT NOW

And there is hope. We have on our side the most potent agent of intellectual advance in the modern age: science. As official ideology has drifted so relentlessly leftward this past few decades, an undercurrent of improved understandings from the human sciences has flowed in the opposite direction, and risen ever closer to the surface. We now know enough about population genetics, paleoanthropology, and neuroscience to make happy talk about “the psychic unity of mankind” untenable, fatally undermining the Narrative.

At some points the Narrative is already near collapse, at least among well-informed mainstream observers. Key Cultural Marxist slogans—“Strength in diversity!” “Close the gaps!” “The new civil rights issue!” “Nation of immigrants!” “Glass ceiling!” “Human rights!”—already get a roll of the eyes or a shake of the head from a surprising number of thoughtful middle-class Americans, including human-science academics and—most encouragingly—many young people. The surge of welfare moochers and teenage gangsters across our southern border in 2014 met widespread public hostility. Enrollment in lesser colleges is falling; the spread of online education will advance the healthy rot.

The traditionalist-conservative view of human nature is true; the Cultural Marxist view is false. The truth will take a while to work its way up to the surface of public discourse, but it will get there at last. There will be a new Narrative: not necessarily perfect or infallible, but in closer accord with nature—with reality—than the present one. “We told you so” is not a very satisfactory response in the aftermath of cultural disaster, but it will sound better than guilty silence.

John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjectsfor all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. His most recent book, published by VDARE.com com is FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle).His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Conservative Movement, Neocons, William Buckley 
Hide 67 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Tom_R says:

    TRUTH AND COMMON-SENSE ALWAYS RAISE THEIR UGLY HEAD.

    Thanks for the excellent article, Sir. Great job!

    Conservatism is just truth and common-sense based on the virtue of self-preservation.

    The whole world does not use the word “conservative” to describe themselves, but they believe in these many things that are considered “conservative” automatically, because it is common-sense. For example:

    1. No immigration. Most non-white countries do not let foreigners come into the country and “immigrate”, just like they do not open their house doors and let strangers come in. Immigration (I mean granting citizenship to aliens, not mere tourism) is rare is most of the non-white world.

    2. No affirmative action. Opportunities first go to the citizens and those who are most qualified; foreigners are not given jobs that the natives can do. This is just common sense.

    3. Disgust for homosexuals: There is no such thing as “gay rights” or “gay marriage” in most of the world. The idea that a man would sodomize another man is enough to make most people disgusted.

    Love for family, your own race and culture and keeping outsiders out is just common-sense.

    So American (and European) “liberalism” is anti-culturalism, anti-common-sense, and foisted on the people, by force, by the govt. and constant media brainwashing.

    Who IMPOSED liberalism on the American and European people? Who controls the media and FORCES the people to accept liberalism and denigrates the common sense of conservatives?

    See:

    http://ihr.org/other/biden_jewish_role

    No matter how many lies the lib-barbarians tell, let us just keep maintain the truth and commonsense of conservatism.

    Truth and common sense are on our side.

  2. Wyrd says:

    I say, Master Derbyshire, our regular weekend lion shootings have become tedious. Next time, let’s bring down an elephant. I hear Master Trump is game for such an outing.

  3. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:

    “only TV drama shows occasional flashes of brilliance”

    No, not that series about some bald-headed fool.

    “Movies are an extension of the comic-book industry”

    2013 was one of the best yrs for movies.

    Sure, the big productions get the attention, but there are indie gems like Kings of Summer.

  4. Chuck says:

    On top of all that horny, sentimental, muddle-headed travelers are knocking up foreign gold diggers and bringing them home to taint our gene pool!

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    , @Hibernian
    , @Ace
  5. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:

    No mention of oohs.

    Oohs are the ‘left’.

  6. Romanian says:

    A very enjoyable read! I find that I learn a great deal from your articles and that of others in this Dissident Right. And a lifetime of “impecunious idling” has left you with a very solid ability to turn a phrase the right way to also turn reading you into somewhat of an aesthetic experience.

    • Agree: Jeff77450
  7. For eight years the federal apparatus was in the hands of neoconservatives,

    The fingerprints of the NeoCons can be seen on the “New World Order” during the reign of Bush the First. They have infested every presidential administration since.

  8. DH says:

    Its younger members have absorbed some of the vapors of Cultural Marxism into their body tissues, however unwillingly and unknowingly.

    And you Sir have absorbed the vapors of darwinian atheism. And that is the reason you will never really get it and will be always dissapointed and incomplete when trying to understand this world, and the next one.
    Otherwise a good succing summary of the failure of Conservatism Inc and the collapse of western civilization.

    • Replies: @philhellenic
  9. @Chuck

    Hey, I resent that unless you’re talking about Derb, but Mrs. Derb must’ve thought she was headed to England, so no gold-digging there.

    Are you pure Finnish stock? If not, don’t speak to us of tainting!

  10. “…a column the editor must surely have come to regret but which, to his credit, he allowed to remain on the magazine’s website.”

    Alas, Lowry has once more demonstrated his moral and political cowardice. The article is not on the website. There really are no mitigating circumstances for Lowry. He’s simply a callow youth with little, or no, moral character worth speaking of.

    The idea that the leftist narrative is about to collapse, while true, will have little effect on the political atmosphere in western civ. It took nearly 40 years after the collapse of the death of Stalin, and the death of the Soviet narrative, before the Soviet Union collapsed. Western civ will collapse first as the problem is a sickness at the core of our civilization that will not be recognized until it is too late.

  11. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    An entertaining rant, missing only the customary injunction regarding turf.

  12. AnAnon says:

    If everything has to run to failure then it will, though I do think that there are some reasons to have a little bit of hope that this won’t happen.

  13. Qasim says:

    And there is hope. We have on our side the most potent agent of intellectual advance in the modern age: science.

    Having had my fair share of debates with Cultural Marxists, the belief that science will provide incontrovertible evidence against their worldview strikes me as wishful thinking. There is no scientific finding that Cultural Marxism can not accommodate and twist to maintain its narrative.

    If you point out the macro differences in intellectual abilities between races or classes in adults, they just say these are the results of racism/classism. If you point out these differences are noted at a very young age, they talk about babies not getting talked to enough or high lead levels or whatever. If differences are found at birth, then they can talk about how the pernicious effects of race and class lead to less snuggly wombs. And if genetic differences are found, they say “correlation does not imply causation” or start talking about epigenetics and how racism/classism leads to deleterious methylation of DNA!

    And when one considers that the human genome and human brain are among the most complex things in the known universe, these sorts of games will be able to be played for centuries, if not indefinitely.

    I mean, having a penis, testicles, a Y chromosome, fathering 6 kids, and winning the decathlon in the Olympics isn’t even enough evidence that a person is a man these days!

    I don’t doubt that Cultural Marxism will end up in the intellectual dustbin of history one day, but I doubt that science can provide the airtight refutation that many people are hoping for.

    • Replies: @Dutch Boy
    , @silviosilver
  14. manton says:

    “combined with a feline talent for intrigue and a patience in revenge that would have elevated him to the highest levels in the court of an Oriental despot.”

    That’s good stuff right there.

    Up there with this 2×4 to David Brooks’ nose from Chris Caldwell:

    “the passage that made David Brooks so mad that he nearly interrupted his thank-you letter to Coates”

    • Replies: @p s c
  15. Dutch Boy says:
    @Qasim

    The cultural Marxists will be just as comfortable with the latest-and greatest version of Darwinism as their non-cultural Marxist predecessors were with the original model.

  16. iffen says:

    Sir, your Talk is a classic. I think that you put everything that you had left into that article.
    I have not read any of your books. They might be as good as your Talk. Your articles here are worse than worthless. Anyone who uses the words cultural Marxists does not need to have any attention whatsoever paid to them and you use those words frequently.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  17. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:

    John

    Llyod Neck…Cold Spring Harbor…home of the Wall Street Wheeler Dealers who own the Politicians who inflicted Huntington Station on the White Working Class Stiffs of Huntington.

    Huntington Station wasn’t always a MS-13 gangland shooting gallery. Use to be a safe White Working Class area.

    Saint John’s is just taking its lead from Saint Hughes in Huntington Station and Saint Patricks next door. The Saint John’s Pastor and the jibbering jabbering fucking retard(name rhymes with Smiles)-WASP Blue Blood inbreeding genetic issues?- can often be seen at Misa over at Saint Patricks.

    The White Church across from CSHL is the Protestant Church where Kevin Klien’s homo character was married to his husband.

  18. Bob Weissberg and I have acquired the habit, when we meet, of hailing each other with: “Well, well—Mr. Noxious!” … “Ah, Mr. Nasty!” …)

    Reminds me of these children’s books

  19. @Qasim

    It’s less about convincing cultural Marxists themselves – their position, after all, is rooted in emotion, not reason – and more about weakening their hold on the minds of others – conservatives, independents, apolitical types and so on.

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
  20. Art R. says:

    The ‘Derb’s columns are getting really stale. His recurrent theme is his firing from the National Review. Fuhgeddaboudit already! What’s past is not always prologue.

    I stopped reading that mag a long time ago. And why doesn’t he ever mention free trade and the ongoing destruction of the U.S. industrial base? This reminds me of the National Review of 40 or more years ago. In just about every issue back then, a full page ad from Warner and Swasey graced the inside front cover or the back cover. Never heard of the company? It was a major manufacturer of machine tools, precision instruments and large telescopes. Now it’s gone like so many of our other premier industrial companies in the globalist push to turn the USA into an “advanced service economy.”

  21. Hibernian says:
    @Chuck

    Do you have evidence that Mr. and Mrs. Derbyshire’s was a shotgun marriage?

  22. pyrrhus says:

    Outstanding piece, Derb, and depressingly accurate. I have personally adopted a sniping attitude toward the low IQ insanity that constitutes western society, and otherwise I will “enjoy the collapse.”

  23. pyrrhus says:
    @silviosilver

    Yes, piecemeal sniping is the best–I recommend Twitter.

  24. @iffen

    Can you post a link to something that describes why the term should be avoided? I read the link Derb uses to explain “cultural Marxism”, and it seems reasonable to me. However, I have found Gottfried making a factually incorrect assertion before that he did not acknowledge, so…

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @animalogic
  25. p s c says:
    @manton

    I’m with you, the “feline talent for intrigue …” description was outstanding.

  26. I thought this article was gold. The links were great. I spent more time reading articles that were linked from this one than I spent on the main article.

  27. Sorry but:

    Ike spent a long time on the golf course too.

    Wilson was as much of a ‘world saver’ as anyone today.

    The US has had lots of non-entity Presidents. At least a quarter of them.

    Protestants haven’t been purged form the Court-there just aren’t that many non-Southern Baptist Protestants around today-not that it would matter (Souter et al).

    Homosexuals can pretend to be married but few do. (In the past lesbians had ‘Boston marriages’)

    Submarines like all manned (or personned) military vessels will become extinct so what does it matter what people do on them now?

    If you don’t like living among any group ‘x’ its easier than ever to move.

    This is not 1970. If you’re fired its easier than ever to start your own online anything (of course whether not anyone will read it…)

    Its not at all hard for someone to get a bachelor degree without going into horrendous debt-yes lots of people do.

    Movies have become an extension of the comic book industry? As opposed to an extension of the dime detective or boy western book industries like before.

    Can’t name an architect? Gehry

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Reg Cæsar
  28. Is rent control really a permanent, unquestionable legacy of WW2 era programs, outside of New York City? Most rent controlled cities in the US are in California, due to Proposition 13 in the late 1970s, and most of those are wealthy white suburbs which use rent control as a means to keep out nonwhites and the poor, something Derbyshire probably approves of. Rent control has been abolished in a number of cities, and probably will be abolished in San Francisco soon as that city’s politics move to the center.

    ” Very few of us could name a living painter or architect. Entire years pass when no American outside the academy spontaneously quotes a line of verse written by any American poet younger than Elizabeth Bishop (b. 1911),”

    Few know the names of living painters, but Frank Gehry’s well known. Bukowski was not much younger than Elizabeth Bishop, but he’s much more widely quoted.

    “what hope is there of a return to traditional American notions of individual self-support, governmental restraint, judicial modesty, noninterference in other nations’ squabbles, and realism about human nature?”

    All the more reason to support Rand Paul, who supports all those things. If you are not voting for Dr. Paul you are part of the problem.

    “Enrollment in lesser colleges is falling”

    The problem isn’t in the lesser colleges ; the problem is in the Ivies and other prestigious schools. PC is the work of elites. If you want to diminish it, diminish the elite institutions.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  29. iffen says:
    @Chrisnonymous

    I just use it as a shortcut. The more times a writer or commenter uses the term the less useful will be the writing. It is a bin into which people of a certain political and ideological stance place most of the ideas and political positions with which they disagree. It is a little flag that is waved so that everyone on “that side” will know that the writer is on “their side.” Derbyshire and Gottfried are political propagandists; they are not in the business of giving you facts so you can make up your own mind; they are in the business of molding your thinking. The funny thing here is that the real Marxists wrote the modern book on this type of writing. Both these men have been pushed from positions of influence on the right side of the political spectrum. They maintain that they are the true believers while the ones that now exert most of the control on the right are apostates. It is an ancient and repeating trope.

    Yes, Gottfried displayed some intellectual dishonesty when he joined in with all the other Johnny Rebs come lately last month. However, he has a first rate mind. His debate article cannot be improved upon. I read his articles here. You just have to remember that for him the ends justify the means.

    • Replies: @Ace
  30. @Hare Krishna

    Is rent control really a permanent, unquestionable legacy of WW2 era programs, outside of New York City? Most rent controlled cities in the US are in California, due to Proposition 13 in the late 1970s, and most of those are wealthy white suburbs which use rent control as a means to keep out nonwhites and the poor, something Derbyshire probably approves of. Rent control has been abolished in a number of cities, and probably will be abolished in San Francisco soon as that city’s politics move to the center.

    You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

    Here are the cities in California with rent control. They are not in suburbia. They are either major cities in the state (Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose, etc.) or part of the urban conglomerations closely surrounding the major cities of the state (Santa Monica, Berkeley, Hayward, etc.).

    As for your silliness about believing Proposition 13 was behind rent control in California, stop reading Wikipedia. Their own source claims it was the high inflation of the late seventies that caused WW2 rent control laws to be strengthened and broadened.

    And, no, San Francisco is not about to abolish rent control. Far from it. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors just passed an ordinance which limits the rights of landlords from renting their homes to tourists for short-term rentals.

  31. Leftist conservative [AKA "leftistconservative"] says: • Website

    If there is any hope it lies with the scattered voices of the Dissident Right.

    I would think that the radical centrist movement would be the more likely source of a grassroots revolution. The subculture of the Dissident Right is infused with a bizarre hatred of liberals and jews and other crackpot ideologies. Yes, blacks are obviously different from whites. But blacks are intelligent enough to do most jobs in america. You don’t have to be a genius to be a bartender or waiter. The real problem with blacks is that the media/academia/hollywood manipulates them in order to induce behaviors that further the interests of the media and its corporate advertisers.

    As for radical centrism, it propelled Perot in the 90s and is probably the only way trump can win. Yes, the dissident right is probably more responsible for trump’s current rise in the polls. But if trump gets to the white house, it will be on the back of a resurgent radical centrist movement.

    I agree with you that anti-white multiculturalism has worn thin with many whites–its days are numbered. Something new will take its place. But what will CorpGovMedia come up with?

    Enrollment in lesser colleges is falling; the spread of online education will advance the healthy rot.

    Interesting digression on your part here–an implication from you that higher education is at the center of multiculturalist propaganda. That is certainly true. And perhaps obvious. But it is necessary to come right out and say it. Education is in great part propaganda. And it is propaganda that has created our culture.

    American culture is tabula rasa. Our real past is gone. Our real culture and traditions, wiped out by educational propaganda. Realizing fully the motive forces in play is crucial.

  32. Mr. Anon says:

    I suspect our present regime will collapse at that same stage as the soviet regime did – when it is incapable of providing toilet paper for its citizens.

  33. Mr. Anon says:
    @anony-mouse

    “Submarines like all manned (or personned) military vessels will become extinct so what does it matter what people do on them now?”

    You are evidently an idiot (I base that on the sum total of your postings, not just this one). Submarines are the basis of our nuclear deterrent. They are the only things that prevent us from being rolled by anyone with nuclear weapons and the will to use them.

    “Movies have become an extension of the comic book industry? As opposed to an extension of the dime detective or boy western book industries like before.”

    Comic books are crap. And they have made movies crap too. It used to be fairly common to make big, popular movies based on books, and not just genre books but even middle-brow literature. When was the last such movie made?

  34. @anony-mouse

    Can’t name an architect? Gehry

    Ha! Citing Gehry and Bukowski just proves the pessimists’ point!

    Now, if you’d mentioned Norman Foster or Cesar Pelli, whose work can still be distinguished from candy wrapper litter…

  35. stats says:

    Well that was just a breathtaking and unapologetically brutal summation of Western and American woes. Absolutely brilliant!

  36. @Chrisnonymous

    By “cultural maxism” the writer means “post modernism” : a degenerate academic meme, with as much relevance to genuine maxism as Stalinism or National Socialism.
    The writer is clever on symtoms of decline…..sadly he is useless on the diagnosis of the desease. Yes, let’s attack “political correctness” on the left, on the right. What a HARD TARGET !
    The writer appears simply incapable of analysing the material historical predicament we find ourselves in. Where did he relate “political correctness” to the radical economic changes of the last 40 years?
    Dear readers, this writer is engaged in a form of mutual masturbation: wanking in Plato’s cave is still to be lost in shadows.

  37. @DH

    your comment is mostly incohert, DH. Why did you quote JD’s comment on cultural marxism? do you or do you not agree with it? you don’t say. you just use it as a segue to call JD a “darwinian atheist”. so what of it?

    you go on: “that is the reason you will never get it…” get what? i don’t get it either.

    and on:…”will be always disappointed and incomplete in trying to understand this world and the next one”. logical fallacies galore. only the nondarwinian non secular can hope to understand this world and the next?

  38. Blobby5 says:

    Wow! Derb keeps getting better (am presently reading ‘Seeing Calvin….). I think more will come to their senses after the currency crisis…or perhaps not, we are pretty dumbed down and a demagogue might fit the bill.

  39. annamaria says:
    @Quartermaster

    Lowry is no youth. His lack of shame after his heavy-duty attempts at aggrandizing Sarah Palin shows Lowry a man without principles. Though he is still far behind the slimy and openly manipulative Kristol of Israel-first fame.

  40. Political borders do not really matter concerning the problems the USA and other countries are facing. At least the core western countries (USA, western and central Europe) are in the same position. Ferguson as a discourse trope is in Berlin nearly as strong as in NYC. As Mr. Derbyshire says: science might have key impact. When in the next decades there will be proofs of inherent behavioural differences between different populations the most holy dogma of the current ruling ideology could fall. Then the whole ideology could fall like a house of cards.
    This would not work of the theory of some HBD-fans like me is true that everybody knows about HBD anyway, and antiracism is not about denying racial differences but reacting to known racial differences. Following this theory everybody knows that blacks are on average far more aggressive but most people do not dislike them for that but rather admire them. They want blacks to get rewarded for their aggression. And they help them to get rewarded by weakening anything which stands in the way of black aggression.

    • Replies: @Ace
  41. George123 says:

    Science can never defeat the narrative, because it isn’t a basis for values.

    What people crave, and what the narrative supplies, is values. Indeed, science got us into this mess to begin with.

    Science, by hollow ing out religion and values, left the door open for Cultural Marxism.

    As the old adage has it, when you don’t believe in religion you don’t believe nothing, you believe ANYTHING.

    To look to science to supply a fix for the mess it created is to misunderstand the nature of our predicament.

    Even if science can prove that Mexicans, say, are improvident and criminal minded, it cannot tell us to not to let them in. Maybe we gave a moral duty to help them anyways.

    Maybe we HAVE a moral duty to self destruct?

    Science can say nothing on the matter.

    In fact, derb has an unquestioned moral system that isn’t based on science, tjat he is unconsciously applying. He thinks we DONT have a moral duty to self destruct.

    The ancient world once before suffered a collapse of values through an excess of rationalism. Christianity, by offering values, swiftly conquered this world.

    What will undermine cultural Marxism eventually is another value system, not science. Science does not address the spiritual concerns that CM does.

    In fact, science itself is based on spiritual assumptions (that truth exists, is better than error, that questions that cannot be answered through science aren’t worth asking when for most of history people thought the opposite) that are faintly echoed in derb’s belief in science as a savior.

    But the spiritual values science is based on have themselves ceased to be compelling, with the advent of relativity theory and quantum theory and their assault on a sacred truth that is knowable.

    Cultural Marxism as a value system, before it can decline, has to first achieve total victory, then cease to motivate or compel, either eroded through an excess of rationality or some other reason, and only then will some new value system replace it.

    It probably won’t be the dissident right, which is a moribund value system which is essentially negative. Plus, it is far too hostile and tribalistic, containing too little love and universalism to form a great religuon. It is a throwback to early 20th century nationalism, which was itself a temporary expedient to fill a vacuum after the collapse of religion and multi-ethnic empires.

    Most likely some of form of buddhism or buddhist inspired attitudes, perhaps with taoistic elements, will become the value system of Western elites.

    • Disagree: Ozymandias
    • Replies: @Jean Cocteausten
    , @Rurik
  42. The diversity scheme is the main problem of the US.

    Diversity is bolshevism, class supremacy of the victim-protected classes.

    Both the US and Israel are dominated by the diversity bolshevik scheme.

    The diversity scheme counts all these categories of people as victim-protected classes:

    women
    jewish
    afros
    queers
    latinos
    asians
    veterans
    disabled
    muslims
    native americans

    Collectively, victim-protected class people are over 85% of the US and Israeli voting population.

    Victim-protected class people are conditioned to trade their votes for undue privileges offered by a totalitarian democratic government.

    The universal enemy of victim-protected class people is the so-called white supremacist.

    Alternatively, jewish people refer to the white supremacist as a Nazi.

    The leaders of diversity are jewish and queer bolsheviks.

    The same people who invented communism invented diversity.

    Diversity bolsheviks substitute the victim-protected classes for the proletariat, and substitute the white supremacist-nazi for the bourgeoise.

    In Israel, jewish diversity people enjoy over 30 privileges by law versus Israeli gentiles.

  43. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Although hidden in the recesses of my back office, I am presently throwing rose petals in the direction of my modem as tears slip from tired eyes.
    Thank You Derbyshire; on occasion you bring to bear that in which you shine.

  44. Jane Eisner, ed, Jewish daily Forward

    “We Jews have transitioned from a victimized minority to a group with extraordinary wealth, social status and political power . . . Along with the unprecedented challenge of power — to use it well, we have the opportunity to bring our values and our faith commitment into the public square.”

    tell us, John Derbyshire — and Jane, How’s it shaping up so far with the Jane Eisners in charge of the ‘public square’?

  45. guest says:

    “Without ambition there would, after all, be no politics, and then where should we be?”

    I’ve never been an anarchist, but part of me wonders whether we wouldn’t just be free.

    • Replies: @OutWest
    , @No Second Israel
  46. OutWest says:
    @guest

    Peaceful anarchy would seem to be most desirable if a bit of an immiscible concept. The meek inherit the world and don’t get stomped. The Arab Spring wouldn’t unleash the psychopathic elements. Marx’s endgame.

    After consideration, Edmund Burke decided, while true freedom had its attractions, he’d stick with royalty.

    • Replies: @guest
  47. norm741 says:

    This group was destroyed by national review
    http://www.jbs.org/
    In its place are the war mongering Neo Cons

  48. @guest

    Anarchy is another trick of Zionist Jews. They control majority of the political movements, left and right, and workers unions. They pose as ‘progressive’ but all of them support Zionist entity one way or another.
    The Zionists have designed ‘world government’ and are pushing for it ‘electing’ their stooges into the office to implement their agenda, including Obama.
    Anarchy = World Government

    Why 9/11 designed to kill thousands of people at the trade center where building 7 was not even toughed by a FLY? How building 7 can go down like it was a demolition process? Why did they invade Iraq and killed millions of innocent people including children? Why did they loot Iraq libraries and museums? Why they killed over 1100 of Iraqis scientists? Why a dumb American military person calls for partitioning of Iraq to erect a second Israel ‘kurdistan’. The Kurds are spying for Israel and US for the last 60 years. Do you think people of the region are made of apples and onions? We are the civilized people and you are petty colonists. Why Kissinger, a Zionist Jew is calling for Iraq and Syria to be partitioned? Why a Zionist terrorist, Bernard Henri Levy, like Hillary Clinton – pushed for Libya bombs and massacre of Libyans, with Obama and NATO blessing, to kill 50000 persons and bring Libya under occupation with soft partitioning. Why the Zionist Jews and their puppet, Bill Clinton, bombed Sudan to destabilize the country and to partition Sudan using campaign of lies and deception “Child Slavery in Sudan” a propaganda campaign run by a Zionist Jew, Charles Jacobs, and ‘save Darfur’, a Jewish organization to partition South Sudan away from Sudan, the largest country in the continent, now a FAIL STATE run by Israeli gangsters where people still are killing each other on a daily based, but Israel benefits tremendously. Can anyone tell me South Sudan is a better place compare to a time when it WAS NOT partitioned? All these disasters are designed based on Oded Yinon strategy?
    When the Zionist Jews are talking about their wealth and power, they should also say how it was obtained.
    These wars are designed based on “a clean break” and “Oded Yinon strategy” to kill people, create chaos and destabilization the region, and to divide them into small state in order to change the map of the Middle East for ‘greater Israel’. This is a dumb strategy coming out of Zionist stooges’ mouth. Do you think the civilized people of the region would allow that? Only a dumb person falls for it. The Zionist jews want anarchy which means “WORLD GOVERNMENT”, meaning every country should put their resources and territories in the service of zionist jews and their puppets. They have killed millions either by themselves or their puppets, including Obama, using and cashing on their fake victimhood. We are determined to destroy their dream and expose every single of them
    We are the real victims of zionist mass murderers.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  49. There is HOPE boys and girls!

    Not hopie-changie hope but the real deal hope:

    Richard Perle has slipped his strait jacket and found refuge on the Board of Directors of <a href = "https://americanmediainstitute.com&quot; American Media Institute (at least he’s institutionalized somewhere where he can be kept track of).

    You’ll never guess what breathless and damning documents Perle’s propagandists have purveyed.

    An ISIS document that is the Islamic equivalent of Mein Kampf.

    [MORE]

    What a scoop.

    And scary as all get-out.

    AMI swine have cast this before Perle:

    ISIS ‘MEIN KAMPF’ BLAMES ISRAEL FOR GLOBAL TERRORISM [sic]

    “Experts pouring over secret Islamic State dossier found in Pakistan’s tribal badlands; Arutz Sheva gains an exclusive look.
    Intelligence officials are comparing a newly discovered secret Islamic State document to Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” as it blames Israel for the rise of the Islamic State and crowns U.S. President Barack Obama as the “Mule of the Jews.”

    Which one does the fellating?
    A “cultural breakthrough” is Sullivan’s description of the Saturday Night Live skit
    in which Senator John McCain challenges Chuck Hagel to agree to fellate a donkey on the orders of Benjamin Netanyahu for the security of Israel

    “UPDATE: ADL (The Anti-Defamation League), pro-Israel censorship group/gatekeeper on the Israel-Palestine issue, attacks SNL for parodying the confirmation hearings of Senator Chuck Hagel.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles&#8230;
    SNL parodies the recent confirmation hearings for Senator Chuck Hagel.
    http://www.salon.com/2013/02/10/unair&#8230;
    This sketch was cut from the final show.”

    ooops. no vid for you: “This video contains content from NBC Universal, who has blocked it on copyright grounds.
    Sorry about that.

    Back to Perle’s swine-find:

    Found in Pakistan’s remote tribal region by American Media Institute (AMI), the 32-page Urdu language document promotes an “end of the world” battle as a final solution. It argues that the Islamic leader should be recognized as the sole ruler of the world’s 1 billion Muslims, under a religious empire called a “caliphate.”

    “It reads like the caliphate’s own Mein Kampf,” said a U.S. intelligence official, who reviewed the document. “While the world is watching videos of beheadings and crucifixions in Iraq and Syria the Islamic State is moving into North Africa the Middle East, and now we see it has a strategy in South Asia. It’s a magician’s trick, watch this hand and you’ll never see what the other is doing.”

    Retired U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency Director Gen. Michael Flynn and other U.S. intelligence officials confirmed the authenticity of the document based on its unique markings, specific language used to describe leaders and the writing style and religious wording that matched other Islamic State records.

    Is Perle certifiable or what?

    Does he realize he has just opened up the door to a complete and total debunking of the entire holocaust hoax?

    This means war on the Jewish holocaust.
    Let ’em have it.

    Attack ’em with the truth:

    Justice for Germans:

    German Jews wrote this letter (& others) Pleading with (primarily American) Jewish organizations to cease anti-German atrocity propaganda

    “The Central Association of German Citizens of the Jewish Faith, which is the largest organization of the 565,000 German Jews on patriotic German soil, makes the following statement regarding the events of the last days:

    Following press reports in German papers, which were then disseminated by various foreign newspapers, which claimed that mutilated Jewish corpses were found at the entrance to the Jewish cemetery Berlin-Weißensee, and that Jewish girls in public places had been forcibly rounded up, and that hundreds of German Jews had arrived in Geneva, including many children, nine tenths of which were severely abused. All such claims are completely fictitious. The Central Association emphatically states that for such irresponsible distortions, which we strongly condemn, German Judaism cannot be held responsible.

    For weeks now, the German people finds itself in a political reversal of epic proportions. This has resulted in instances of political acts of revenge and has also led to violence against Jews. The Government of the Reich, as the state governments, have striven successfully, and as quickly as possible, to restore calm and order. The command of the Reichs-Chancellor, to refrain from individual actions, has been effective.

    Hands Off Iran

    Anglo-zionists out of Syria

    Justice for Palestine

  50. guest says:
    @OutWest

    “Peaceful anarchy would seem to be most desirable”

    I didn’t say it’d be peaceful, but rather merely free. Freedom isn’t synonymous with peace, far from it.

    “The meek inherit the world and don’t get stomped. The Arab Spring wouldn’t unleash the psychopathic elements. Marx’s endgame.”

    Marx foresees us going through a dictatorship, we know what’s come of various springs, and if the stomping of the meek is ever regularized that’d be a sort of politics, too. What we were talking about is a world without politics, without the ambition of proles to rule over capital and the powerful over the meek and this Arab over that. Not that politics would or ever could go away, but Mr. Derbyshire seemed to imply that impossibility wouldn’t be good. And maybe it would be bad. I imagine almost everything about true freedom is bad, except the most important things.

  51. @George123

    What you’re talking about is scientism, not science. Not all scientists are like Dawkins.

    • Replies: @George123
  52. Rurik says:

    “Speak as you find.” I never experienced anything but courtesy, kindness, generosity, appreciation and support from Bill Buckley, and I was very sorry when he died.)

    what about Joe?

  53. George123 says:
    @Jean Cocteausten

    Scientism is part of the faith of most western elites, unfortunately. Science began as a great way to answer certain specific questions, but we ended up pretending that those questions science can’t answer aren’t important, or worse yet, dont exist.

    Yet most of our most important questions cannot be answered by science. It may be that any culture that wholly embraces science inevitably becomes scientistic. I don’t mean science as merely evidence and freedom from superstition. In that sense, buddhism and chuang tzu are perfectly scientific. I mean a culture that embraces science as a source of values will eventually end up nihilistic. Japan, for instance, has embraced science as a method and for its products, but rejected it as a world view.

    Moreover, the belief in truth that has sustained science is no longer credible. We now know science can only give us useful approximations of an unknowable reality that at best, gives us some ability to control nature.

    The west is the only culture that has embraced science as more than just a method, but as a world view and source of meaning. This is why only the west has been scientifically creative, but also why only the west has become nihilistic.

    The two distinctive features of the modern west are science as world view and nihilism. The’s two unusual phenomena cannot be unrelated. Technologically advanced Asian countries that have adopted only the fruits of science have not become nihilistic.

  54. Ace says:
    @Chuck

    That truly is an amazing comment.

  55. Rurik says:
    @George123

    As the old adage has it, when you don’t believe in religion you don’t believe nothing, you believe ANYTHING.

    complete balderdash

    It’s those who believe in religions like Christianity that will believe anything. In fact that’s the very foundation of Christianity, that you’re willing to believe anything based on faith, IOW based on NOTHING. The more willing you are to believe something without any evidence whatsoever, is the degree to which you’re a ‘good’ Christian. Because you have ‘faith’.

    Science doesn’t give us all the answers, but it has answered some important questions. What are we? Where did we come from? Why are we here?

    Those are some of the eternal questions man has pondered from the beginning of time, and until recently, done so without the benefit of science. That’s why he was forced to come up with his bizarre fairy tales, because he craved answers. Today we have answers to at least some of these questions. And those answers have been provided by science. Christianity is based on ignorance. Structured, imposed and rigidly policed ignorance. You ‘have’ to believe dogmas and outlandish absurdities in order to be a Christian in good standing. That is not a solid foundation to support a modern civilization. Quite the contrary.

    The ignorance based religions need t0 be tossed in the dust bin of history. Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Hinduism. Just look at what these religions have wrought in the centuries past and more to the point, what they’re doing today. It is America’s Christian Zionists who, more than any other block of blockheads, are foisting so much misery on the world today.

    I’m not sure what should replace them. Man has a fundamental need for spiritual ‘truths’ that include himself (especially individually) as a critical piece of God’s plan. It’s a kind of vanity as far as I can tell, but important to humans. We just need something that isn’t based on the ethnocentric tribal ranting’s of some stone-age Jews or the delusions of a power-crazed, seventh century Arab or cow worshipers. We need something for today~ when humans have nuclear weapons and catastrophic, devastating over-population. In short, what we need now more than ever is sanity and wisdom. We’re not going to find those in the big religions, IMHO.

    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    , @George123
  56. Rurik says:
    @No Second Israel

    When the Zionist Jews are talking about their wealth and power, they should also say how it was obtained.

    because pres. Wilson gave them a counterfeiting machine – so they could buy the Western world’s media and politicians and social institutions

    and nothing will ever change until we find a way to END THE FED

    if we don’t, then it will be Orwell’s boot, stamping on the face of your progeny, forever …

  57. @Rurik

    Science doesn’t give us all the answers, but it has answered some important questions. What are we? Where did we come from? Why are we here?

    Really? Science can actually answer the question as to why we are here? Well, what is the answer then?

    I’m not sure what should replace them. Man has a fundamental need for spiritual ‘truths’ that include himself (especially individually) as a critical piece of God’s plan. It’s a kind of vanity as far as I can tell, but important to humans.

    It looks to me like you’re kind of conceding George’s basic point: people will always need some belief system–be it religious or secular–so if Christianity ever dies, people will just adopt some new belief system(s) to fill the void. It is impossible to build an enduring civilization out of raw nihilism.

    • Agree: SPMoore8, E. Burke
    • Replies: @Rurik
  58. Rurik says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    Really? Science can actually answer the question as to why we are here? Well, what is the answer then?

    ah you saw that

    I was wondering if anyone was going to notice that I tossed that last one in there : )

    Why are we here

    OK, let me start by saying that science tells us why we’re not here, or at least points out the absurdity of believing that we are here to worship a God or Gods or some earthy representative dressed in a preposterous costume who tells us we were put us here to exalt His name(s) and serve Him. Science has enlightened us as to our beginnings, and therefor freed us from the slavery of our minds to the dogmas and imposed mental chains of organized religion.

    So for starters science tells us what we are not here to do- to live in ignorance and fear. Which is a nice start. But now what we need to do is add philosophy to the mix. But not just any philosophy, but one enlightened by the truths we now posses due to the scientific method. So, when we consider such philosophical questions like why we are here, one has to first consider what we are, and what we are is a species of animal. No more, and no less. It is the height of human arrogance to imagine that we are divinely different from all the other animals on earth because we can talk and walk on two legs and possess opposable thumbs. The differences between us humans and the rest of the animal kingdom is one of degree, and not one of kind.

    Once you understand this simple truth, you can divine our place in creation and extrapolate our purpose. The great ‘why’. Because that why is no different that the reason dolphins or turtles or amoebas exist. God did not create us to rule over the earth and he didn’t create the animal kingdom for us to exploit. We exploit it because that’s what animals do (we’re just really, really good at it). We eat and drink and sleep and copulate because that’s what animals do. I know of no thing that sets us humans so far apart from the rest of the animal kingdom that we have any reason whatsoever for deluding ourselves that some God or Gods put us here for a reason, unless that reason is to kill each other and pollute His creation. Because those are the things we do best. The Sistine Chapel is sublime and Newton’s The Principia is superlative, but neither are evidence of divinity. Both are however what I would consider the lesson of science as our purpose in this life. The why. Which is to live and thrive and strive. To immerse ourselves in our environment and each other, insofar as that makes us happy. It is a perfect environment because it is the matrix in which we evolved. Our purpose is to enjoy it. That is our ‘why’, if ever there was one. That is the lesson of science and philosophy and the enlightenment. To flourish and revel in this life that is a miracle and wonderment. Perhaps the most significant thing that sets us apart from most of the animal kingdom is our self-awareness. We are aware of our unlikelihood in the vastness of the universe. We are blessed with the ability of see ourselves as part of this wonderful existence. Our purpose and our why is to not waste that ineffably miraculous near impossibility. The fact that we exist and are aware of it.

    It is impossible to build an enduring civilization out of raw nihilism.

    I don’t speak of nihilism. The very concept is alien to me. Just because we’re faced with a life and a universe that doesn’t have a daddy figure in the sky to protect us and tell us what to do, doesn’t mean life is without purpose. Hardly. Just the opposite in fact. We’re free to explore and push boundaries. Erase boundaries in fact and reach for the stars. We’re limited only by our imaginations and the laws of nature.

    Does that mean we should go around killing each other and disrespecting each other? Of course not. There again, just the opposite. You see since the ‘others’ in the world are not evil sinners for not believing in the same Gods we do, there is no justification whatsoever for doing harm. Since we’re a moral animal, like all social animals, it serves us best to be the kind of people we’re proud to be, and that means living the kind of life you or I would be proud to say we lived. Honorable and decent. And religion has nothing whatsoever to do with that. Often quite the opposite.

    As for the fact that humans crave and need a spiritual connection and a religion that gives them that, I don’t know. I’m not a theologian and so I don’t really know of an existing religion that could serve humanity well. But it should be one that makes us happy and that teaches us all to respect one another and especially the rest of creation that has just as much right to be here as we humans do.

    >>><<<

    For the subject matter I probably should have given this a little more thought and worded it better, but I just winged instead. I hope at least that my perspective was worth reading and that I answered your questions to satisfaction.

    • Replies: @iffen
  59. Ace says:
    @iffen

    How else would you describe the widespread effort to destroy all religion, all custom, all tradition, the family, the schools, the military, tradition morality, objective intellectual standards, national sovereignty, the rule of law and free speech in aid of a communist revolution that could not be achieved by an armed uprising of the proletariat?

    Or is CM an otherwise shopworn, imprecise term misused by conservatives in the way that leftists use terms like capitalism or white privilege.

    • Replies: @iffen
  60. Ace says:
    @Erik Sieven

    >> but rather admire them. <<

    That's a stretch.

  61. iffen says:
    @Rurik

    why we are here

    We are here to choose up sides and fight. Which is also how we got here.

  62. George123 says:
    @Rurik

    Many religions don’t involve belief in god, and even god religions are more about a way of life than beliefs.

    The emphasis on beliefs in Christianity is a relic of Greek rationalism.

    Religions temper human vanity. Secular humanism makes humanity central.

    Science cannot supply sanity or wisdom. Science is a set of symbols (if you believe science gives access to “truth” you are a theologian) that gives us some power to deal with chaotic reality. So is religion. They are twin phenomena, and science grew out of religion. Newton was a religious mystic, copernicus thought the sun was divine. Their science was religious, not a rejection of religion.

    Science could not have developed without specific religious ideas. That truth is sacred, and that man must dominate nature. China, with its taoist heritage, was aware of technological ingenuity, but rejected it as a worthless goal. The Greeks also considered technological ingenuity to rank very low on the scale of values.

    Science depended on the religious belief that it wad man’s task to dominate nature, a Christian belief. Non Christians thought technology irrelevant to human happiness.

    The myth of original sin, though a symbol, is more true to human nature than modern myths, and more likely to produce sanity and wisdom than any of the myths supplied by modern science.

    When you destroy religious myhts, they just get replaced by worse myhts, as we see on the left today.

    The problem with modern science isn’t it’s ability to give us some control over nature, but it’s belief that any aspect of human existence it’s method cannot address isn’t important, or doesn’t exist.

    The result is the modern west, where the sole task of society is to increase domination over nature. This is viewed as the only worthwhile life. Yet no one is happy, and people turn to outlandish myths in search of a better way of living.

    While incapable of shedding the belief that the only worthwhile human life is increasing control over nature, modern western man implicitly rejects such a life as pointless. Thus modern nihilism.

    An ethic based on domination can never lead to happiness or contentment.

    Yet if you suggested to a modern man that the point of life is harmony with nature, not domination, he would consider it absurd.

    East Asia embraced technological ingenuity, which goes against their entire philosophy of life, only to avoid domination by the west, and continue to use technology only for that purpose. Which is why Asians continue to be uncreative technologically despite being as intelligent as whites and fully able to utilize technology. They have not adopted the world view which sees the point of human life as ever increasing control over nature.

    Western nihilism, of course, is unsustainable in the long run.

  63. Rurik says:

    even god religions are more about a way of life than beliefs.

    they’re about fealty to the God, or more to the point, His rep here on earth

    they’re about control

    The emphasis on beliefs in Christianity is a relic of Greek rationalism.

    the epitome of Greek rationalism was Socrates, and they put him to death for it

    he questioned everything, and was hardly what you’d call a Christian type- who are by definition forbidden from questioning the tenets of their would view

    Religions temper human vanity. Secular humanism makes humanity central.

    have you ever been to an American high school football game? They believe God Himself wants their team to win. They feel He is listening to their petitions for a victory. They think He cares about them and who will win the game. The religious believe their existence is of central importance to the universe and to God. Secularists believe we’re all space dust temporarily animated. Which mentality is more self-absorbed?

    Science cannot supply sanity or wisdom.

    no, but it can give us the tools to understand our place in the universe so that we can use philosophy and our own innate humanity to discover sanity and wisdom

    Science depended on the religious belief that it wad man’s task to dominate nature, a Christian belief. Non Christians thought technology irrelevant to human happiness.

    no

    man’s desire to dominate nature (and each other) is written in our genes.

    The myth of original sin, though a symbol, is more true to human nature than modern myths, and more likely to produce sanity and wisdom than any of the myths supplied by modern science.

    personally I consider it insane to go through life telling yourself that you were born a sinner. And that you belong on your knees begging God for forgiveness for something you’ve never done, but for the sins you were born with. Bull biscuits. That’s insane.

    The problem with modern science isn’t it’s ability to give us some control over nature, but it’s belief that any aspect of human existence it’s method cannot address isn’t important, or doesn’t exist.

    this is silly

    science hardly tell us our soul is not important, whatever the soul is. In fact finding out what the soul is today is one of the holy grails of science. Perhaps we’ll never know, but science hardly considers it unimportant. To the contrary.

    The result is the modern west, where the sole task of society is to increase domination over nature. This is viewed as the only worthwhile life. Yet no one is happy, and people turn to outlandish myths in search of a better way of living

    you’re mixing up a witches brew of many causations into a trite bromide for all the challenges of our times. It’s more complicated than that

    Yet if you suggested to a modern man that the point of life is harmony with nature, not domination, he would consider it absurd.

    it is the Christian who believes the earth and all its denizens were put here specifically for man to exploit

    I am the one countering that by saying nature exists for its own sake

    you have it backwards

    Western nihilism, of course, is unsustainable in the long run.

    truth, understanding and science do not lead to nihilism

    the nihilism you are feeling is the nihilism of finding out your belief system is flawed

    you’re left standing on wobbly ground, and wondering what is the meaning of it all if everything you’ve been told is untrue

    but if you can persevere, and discover truth beyond your childhood indoctrination, you’ll discover a marvelous and magical world of infinite possibilities and an enthusiasm for life you never dreamed possible

  64. @Quartermaster

    May be my fault. The link in my original document had “articles” in the URL; the one that now works has “article.”

    I can’t account for this. I don’t hand-type URLs, just copy & paste them from the URL bar at top of screen. The original URL worked when I wrote the piece (which is date-stamped 8/9/2014) at Richard Spencer’s request. I remember being surprised that it did, and giving Lowry appropriate credit.

    Possibly the NRO people have fiddled with their website & changed URL protocols. Possibly something else, though I can’t think what.

    Of course, if we’re living in a computer simulation, this may be an error in the sim code . . . .

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 have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS