• The Quarterly Review
• Antiwar.com
• Eagle Forum
• Jihad Watch
• Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy
• New Criterion
• Intercollegiate Studies Institute
• Chronicles Magazine
• Lew Rockwell
• The American Cause
• Vdare

Articles are sorted in descending order by date. To find articles based on keywords, use the search function above.

So much for the clear breezy uplands of history and science. Down in the rain forest of actual human society, Darwin has had a more mixed reception. Strict fundamentalists in all three of the big Abrahamic religions regard his theories with loathing. The degree of loathing is different among the three faiths, being highest among , lowest among Jews, and intermediate among Christians. The loathing is real, though, and among some groups of believers, it is very intense. There are two reasons for this. In the first place, Darwin’s theories contradict the holy books, if those books are read with a close and literal meaning. In the second, the broad outlook on human nature implied by Darwinian ideas contradicts the notion of human exceptionalism, without which the Abrahamic religions lose their point. To put it crudely, those big old Western faiths see humanity as a Chosen Species, uniquely gifted by God with powers of moral discrimination and (though there are sectarian differences here) with the prospect of an afterlife. To modern biologists, informed by Darwin, we are merely another branch on Nature’s tree, our particular mental and social gifts in plain line of descent from homologues among the higher animals. [Read More]

Ron Paul is a potent force because his ideas have deep appeal. We all know, for example, that there is something horribly wrong with the way the federal government spends our money, and that whatever it is that is wrong gets wronger by the congressional session, under presidents of either party. I think we all understand, too, that the fault here is not, or not only, the stupidity or venality of our elected officials, but the dynamics of modern democracy. A system under which our representative could say "no" to us—indeed, would have no choice but to do so—would be one in which government expansion bumped up against iron (actually, in Paul's scheme, gold) fiscal constraints. A fiscal system revised along Paulian lines offers at least the possibility of that. Nothing else does. [Read More]