Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: A New Humanism in Europe Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/a_new_humanism_in_europe#6241 Post contents: To return to the article by Breschi, I would submit that the politician in this century must answer a number of pressing questions, many of which are mentioned by Breschi and the authors whom he discusses. To list them, and to name good and bad ideologies that try to answer them: 1. How can a modern society (Gesellschaft) overcome anomie, atomization, anonymity , alienation, rootlessness, identity-lessness, purposelessness, decadence, the paucity of mass culture, the resulting low birth rates, etc. and still maintain personhood? <i>good </i>: Real Conservatism; <i>bad</i>: nationalism, racialism, Fascism, purgative retribalization 2. How can we be both international (a requirement if one is to have economic well-being in a high tech world) and local (needed to overcome the concerns of #1)? No good ideology to date 3. How can we be both economically prosperous and maintain individual liberty and individual empowerment? <i>good</i>: libertarians of the “Austrian” school. <i>bad</i>: Hamiltonian Whigs 4. How can a constitution maintain a democratic element – essential to protect civil and human rights – and at the same time protect property holders from the despoliation of those who would, through taxation, vote themselves a paycheck? How can this necessary democratic element coexist with the demands of distributive justice, among which is the encouraging of special talents (“elites”)? No good ideology to date 5. How can the demands of universal morality be satisfied? <i>good</i>: Christian Democracy, <i>bad</i> socialism; <i>mixture of good and bad</i>: Social Democracy and Greens 6. How can we maintain the dignity and integrity of person in Gesellschaft yet maintain a community (Gemeinschaft)? <i>Good</i> personalism, <i>bad</i>: both individualism and retribalization. Not only do these questions have good and bad answers, but the modern politician must address all of them, not just anyone in isolation. Single-issue isolation is the weakness of all the good ideologies listed. Burke knew that the political leader must do a very delicate balancing act between liberty and power. The six questions above suggest that this act has become even more complicated. I have suggested the solution that I think Breschi is offering: the confluence of Real Conservatism – what Breschi calls “traditional parties” – and Christian Democracy with Personalism. As time permits, I’ll return to #1, the most pressing issue for Real Conservatives by addressing the concerns mentioned by Paul Gottfried above. A footnote: Culture Marxism I have not listed because of my own version of “the strange history of Marxism”: It tipped over unintentionally but logically into what it says is its real opposite: neo-nationalism. Celebrate “diversity”, “multiculturalism”, poly-ethnic, poly-religious social orders, and soon you will have a society resembling Lebanon and the Balkans. If “pride” and ethnic revelry are good for the First Blacks, American Indians (I’ll avoid the fatuous “Native American”), Near East Arabs, Oriental religions, etc., then the same would be good also for “Scots Irish”, Germans, Celts, and Christians. The Culture Marxist protests that he is interested in “oppressed” and “left out groups”, but this nuance is quickly lost. Thus “Black Leadership” and La Raza sound like the “white” racialists-nationalists around here, with just he color changed. Breschi gets it right: <i>”The ‘Other’ you hate or detest and do not accept can be anyone, even the old white Frenchman for new French citizens who are African Blacks or Middle East Arabs, etc.</i> Post Script for Fighting Joe Cathey: All thugs, gangsters, murderers, fist-in-the-face slave masters, and those who would deny economic prosperity – whatever label fits them, and especially when they veil their crimes with the Gospel – merit prison, not political power, in this world, – and damnation in the next. Sent at: 2008 11 22