15 Comments
Jul 23, 2022·edited Jul 23, 2022

Young 'conservatives' like this kid Barron think it's cool that Republicans have finally pushed homophobic dinosaurs outside the tent:

https://humanevents.com/2022/07/22/trump-2024-crush-the-establishment/

Three times he raises support SSM and LGBT 'rights' as one of the reasons why the real Republicans are now going to kick some GOPe ass. He's such a young little fool he doesn't know what the world was like before we all had to fake our affirmation and admiration for the poor dysphoric non-breeders. Yeah buddy. Now that we've embraced the LGBT movement America First can really put the pedal to the medal. Ain't it great that we've put those icky culture wars behind us?

Expand full comment
Jul 23, 2022·edited Jul 23, 2022

I agree Dreher tends to be long-winded (and derivative, to boot). I much prefer reading Michael Brendan Dougherty — though what he’s doing at National Review is beyond me. Seems an odd fit for someone who is much more paleo- than neocon.

Expand full comment
Jul 23, 2022·edited Jul 23, 2022

Meanwhile, Russia and China are standing up another world reserve currency...seems a tad more important than the identity politics and social justice tripe our intellectually crippled "elites" keep pushing.

https://quoththeraven.substack.com/p/russia-and-china-officially-announce

Expand full comment

Mark, I don't recall your policy about posting links to other blogs that lend support to a given thread - apologies in advance if you prefer otherwise - however this essay by Daniel Greenfield at his Sultan Knish blog seems particularly tuned to the thread discussion here

https://www.danielgreenfield.org/2022/07/identity-politics-for-people-without.html?m=1

Expand full comment
author

No problem at all. Thanks.

Expand full comment

How about long term optimism. Your first sentence states "Launching a war on reality is ultimately a losing proposition." The reality is, and I live in New York, couples consist of one man and one woman. You see an occasional odd couple, a biologically same sex couple, but only rarely, comparatively speaking. The laws maybe favor this? I have never in my life seen such a disrespect for the laws, even extending to stopping at red lights. You gave much room for optimism in yesterday's column, "Neocon/Globalist Dream Crumbling." But even should Davos get their NWO, as individuals we will continue to live in our reality. There is an old Turkish proverb that says – 'When a clown moves in to a palace it does not make him a king, it just makes the palace a circus'

Expand full comment
author

It's true, it's a mixed bag. There's a lot of confusion, and that makes resistance rather squishy:

https://amgreatness.com/2022/07/21/the-tide-is-turning/

"Conservatives are gaining ground on the gender battle as well. As we all know, a central tenet of the leftist ideology is that biology and gender are unrelated. But according to polling data released June 28 by Pew Research Center, 60 percent of respondents believe “a person’s gender is determined by their sex assigned at birth.” This, as the study notes, is “up from 56% in 2021 and 54% in 2017.” Americans clearly aren’t buying into the Left’s gender insanity."

"Gaining ground" is a very relative concept. We've lost a helluva lotta ground, in the first place. It's the kind of thing you see all the time on the football field.

Expand full comment

I don't recognize any gender battle. I win hands down. Men are attracted to women, and I assume women are attracted to men. We are born with biological differences. Vive la difference! That some do not fit into this pattern causes me no concern. That some want to make it a 'cause celebre' causes me no anxiety, although I do regard it as a 'manque de pudeur.' These are private matters. Should the government make laws favorable to a small minority of the population, I will learn to live within these laws as I do with many things where the government sticks its nose into matters best left to the individual.

Expand full comment

We start our fight back against The Madness (TM) by stopping using the word "gender" outside of Romance linguistics. There are NO genders; there ARE two biological sexes, and you are either one or the other. That comes under the heading of First Principals.

Expand full comment
author

I like that! But ... principles.

Expand full comment

The left doesn't view them as private matters - that's just the hammer they use to break the window.

Once in the house, they proceed to destroy all of reality, forcing their flavor of the month on you, demanding your approbation, and criminalizing your convictions.

Expand full comment
author

Exactly. Ideas have consequences. When you pretend that you can draw some line that's not based in principle, there's no line at all. Anything goes. Grooming the kids in school, etc. But the other point is that what we're seeing now should have been obvious to anyone. The reality underlying it all is not "love is love".

Expand full comment
author

How broad minded: Reality is a private matter and denying it is of little interest to society as a whole.

Expand full comment

It is of interest to society as a whole when the world is populated almost exclusively by people who felt an attraction to someone of the opposite sex.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment
author

I was struck by that, too. Not enough to go their site and read the whole thing, but yes ...

Expand full comment