Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Our Task Link: http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/another_posting#22439 Post contents: Paul: Since I did not see the particular comments that you are apparently talking about, perhaps I should back up a bit. Last year I complained about the use of "four letter" words, my thinking being (as it still is) that we could express ourselves without resorting to filth and those kinds of abusive insults and epithets. If, indeed, that is what we're talking about, then I think indeed that there are concrete standards that can and should be enforced...standards of common decency and decorum. But when I see such phrases as "neo-Nazi" or "anti-semitic" or "racist," for me it only harkens back to the shibboleths of those thought-control enforcers, on both the left and the right. Thus, immediately, I wondered: would this "ban" include thinking that paralleled that of, say, E. Michael Jones, Jared Taylor, even an Alain de Benoist? Could a writer praise the late George Wallace or Lester Maddox, for instance, without being censored? What about a Madison Grant or Lothrop Stoddard? Or Comte de Gobineau? I suppose what I am saying is this: it is relatively easy, or so it seems to me, to determine what a four letter word is, but it is much more difficult, it seems to me, when we move beyond that and create reasonable standards in other areas. What still worries me is that general tendancy of my (former) allies on the Right to move towards an accomodation, either explicit or at least tacit, with our enemies. I have seen this process go foward for over fifty years, taking its toll in our ranks. Perhaps my worries are exaggerated, and if so, well, so be it. But I think I should prefer to err on the side of openness, and simply ignoring idiots and malefactors.... As I said earlier, my inclination is not to participate.... Sent at: 2008 05 16