Is There a Right Left?

Yes, we really need a counterrevolution to stop multiculturalism and more tolerance towards members of the LGBTQ community. We are living in truly dangerous times for white "conservatives."

 

Related article/review of the book by the author of the article

The Struggle for the Soul of the GOP

 

I just read a couple of essays by Glenn Ellmers and a little about the Claremont Institute. Maybe I'm just not astute enough to understand the message or maybe they're being vague on purpose. To me, most of it reads like an abstract word salad that is largely devoid of clear policy positions or even proposed structural changes. It seems like they want to re-set and start over but replace it with what? It's clear as mud to me.

 

Claremont is basically the intellectual apparatus of the "new right" / post-liberal right or whatever you want to call it. THis book review is really a good read and look into that:

Inside the Postliberal Mind - The Bias Magazine

I dont think you will emerge with any clarity, because I dont think there is much "there" there, a point the reviewer lands on with engaging it pretty seriously.

 

Sounds like they want to “repeal and replace” the constitution with some crazed theocratic state, wiping out more than half of Americans for being… UnAmerican. Tell me again how this isn’t a cult?

I guess they’ll get back to you on the deets of the “new constitution” in ~2 weeks.

 

The TNR? I'm sorry, I would type more but laughing too hard to do so. I have not taken them seriously since their BS OIF reporting in '07 and I was reading it while in Ramadi.

 

Dumb article. Of course there is. A large portion of conservatives want nothing to do with trump. The fringe do for trump just like fringe for Bernie

 

Its a book review, so dont buy the book then

 

I’m already reading it. Matt is a contributor to Commentary Magazine, of which I am a subscriber.

When it comes to commentary on The Right, only The Nation is to be trusted less than TNR. This is the publication that bought Stephen Glass’ fabricated description of CPAC hook, line, and sinker and made no attempt to verify it.

 

Capt, you surely apologize a lot on Too Hot threads. Recognizing this and out of curiosity I looked through your posting history and was amazed at the number of times your posts begin, "I'm sorry, but.."

One can only speculate why you appear compelled to apologize when disagreeing with someone. Is it a military strategy?

 

I guess you libs will find out come the midterms....

 

You caught something I have noticed myself. I think it is related to this being a Democratic leaning board and trying to be respectful while disagreeing.

 

Thank you. Your post expresses the polar opposite of the post immediately preceding your last one.

 

Bernie Bros like Trump

 

I have a special level of contempt for The New Republic.

 

A good place for this. Sohrab Armari and Adrian Vermuele are the two leading Catholic fascist thinkers with a lot of influence over various officials. Someone flagged this book review by Armari in First Things in the guise of reviewing a book on early Christian history and his concluding embrace of a theocratic state of “Christian” authoritarianism. This is a very real train of thought among powerful Opus Dei types in our country we ignore at our peril.


Glancing through a rearview mirror, one framed by the Church’s own moral teaching and the humanizing sensibility she bequeathed to humankind, we might condemn the specific methods deployed seventeen centuries ago. We might with justification bristle at the burning of Porphyry’s books. But Daniel-Rops goes further than that—too far, indeed. He objects to the Church’s determination to enshrine the faith as the Roman public cult by appeal to the “secular arm.” But had she renounced this right, the Church would have transgressed the whole logic of classical political rationality, according to which “patriotism was piety, and exile excommunication,” in Fustel de Coulanges’s famous formulation. The Church resolved not to break with the classical world on this count, and Daniel-Rops’s objection in effect puts him at odds with the whole political thrust of historic Christianity.

In these final pages, one feels more strongly than elsewhere the postwar atmosphere of Daniel-Rops’s time bearing down on, and distorting, his historiography, not least in the jarringly anachronistic use of “authoritarianism” where he might have used “authoritative structures.” Even with the constant presence of danger and the occasional need to retreat to the catacombs, Christian life in the centuries prior to the Constantinian conversion was already developing authoritative structures, and at a relentless pace. Such structures are always necessary for governance, spiritual and temporal.

The general tendency of these structures was expansion, away from the margins and into the center of human affairs. Organization was the name of the game. There were rules for worship, for resolving disputes among brethren, for receiving new members, for dealing with apostasy, and on and on. None of this would make sense if the goal were to live apart from the world—or to eschew the coercion that inevitably is a part of all social organization. It all makes perfect sense, however, if the community conceived itself as a corporate extension of the Incarnation into the world at large, determined to burrow its way into the heart of universal civilization. And thank God it succeeded.




Apostolic Empire | Sohrab Ahmari

 

Although they actually despise him they were largely responsible for his election in 2016 by either staying home or voting for Jill Stein. Let's not forget that Trump won every one of the swing states responsible for his electoral college victory in 2016 by one percent or less.

 

I can count the number of posts on one hand you’ve made without using some form of reference to the name trump.
Astonishing really.