Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Big Brother in Brussels Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/big_brother_in_brussels#6885 Post contents: Boyd, Thanks for the insightful comments. Although I've never had the honor or meeting Russell Kirk, I have heard from others that he in person would be very frank about his views on race. Sebastian, You are correct. Scruton may not be a neocon, but he certainly associates with them. The New Criterion has really gone downhill. What was once a journal of "High Culture" (or more accurately, a journal defending Modernism), has turned to more pedestrian themes. I haven't look at it much recently, but over the past year or so the couple issues I did see had articles in them defending the Iraq war and toeing the neocon line on foreign policy. What this has to do with High Culture is beyond me. Kimball is an enigmatic figure. He came out against immigration when it was unpopular to do so, and was condemned by other neocons. He also made that documentary _A Frankfurt School Story_ with the Council on Conservative Citizens, which I was certain would get him fired from the New Criterion, but it did not. If he were located elsewhere, and surrounded by different people, I've thought that he would probably be a paleocon. Sid, Yes, you do hijack threads (both here and at Chronicles). You have the argumentative sophistication of a college freshman. Your fallacies and false dichotomies are too numerous to list in full, but I'll hit upon a few of the more egregious ones. You create a false dichotomy: "pagan racialist nationalism" vs. your politically correct view of race denial. Most people would fall into neither of these camps. Most of the racialists I have met are vehemently anti-nationalism. In fact, they see nationalism as the Trojan horse that has led to many of our problems. All the racialists I have met are Protestant or Catholic. I don't know a single pagan. And most of the racialists I have met are vehemently against "hate." They just want to protect their own. Furthermore, one does not even to be a "racialist" to want to protect his own. This a very natural instinct, one that is based in ancient concepts like kith and kin, and the respect of one's ancestral traditions (mores maiorum). Aquinas himself said: “after his duties towards God, man owes most to his parents and his country. One’s duties towards one’s parents include one’s obligations towards one’s relatives, because these latter have sprung from [or are connected by ties of blood with] one’s parents…and the services due to one’s country have for their object all one’s fellow-countrymen and all the friends of one’s fatherland.” Notice that the Latin for fatherland, 'patria', assumes link by blood. It is not propositionalism. It is a traditional concept of a nation. This is all I'm going to say on this matter, although I'm sure that Sid will continue to hijack the thread and write 452 replies. Sent at: 2008 11 20