I have never understood the animus toward Russia on the part of the British ruling class and the NeoCons - much less the outright hatred. They have been the aggressors toward Russia all along, so their emotional antipathy toward supposed Russian aggression or threats should actually be reflexive. Is it so simple as their wanting to rule the world and projecting that Russia does also and has therefore blocked their path? Well, I guess the notion of Empire can be blinding and dies hard (unfortunately for everyone).
The other thing I really appreciate is your highlighting Kirk and the notion that having a Conservative mind shouldn't translate into subscribing to an "ism". Kirk is a fascinating figure but I admit I couldn't make it all the way through The Conservative Mind (tl;dr). So I very much appreciate your reminder from him of what being a Conservative is all about and how it contrasts to Liberalism and Libertarianism.
Well Said, D1. I've struggled for decades, as a somewhat-maturing adult (I'm workin' on it...) why I wasn't really comfortable with calling myself 'a conservative' when denying true affiliation to the Republican party. I sort of settled on 'Conserve the Constitutional Representative Republic' however Mark's post, specifically as you pointed out, Kirk's writings (I think actually speech/talk transcriptions) so well explain the 'conservative mind'. I believe I can be a bit more at peace about claiming - not to be a conservative - but of a having conservative mindset. Peace to all MIH Readers and the Happiest of New Year moments to you all as well. [Really, it isn't possible to have a whole year of goodness, right? So here's to lots of good moments]! (WrH)
I think that's a pretty good "settle." That's pretty much where I landed, too. I always say I am a "Constitutional Conservative." Nothing is ever 100% black and white / binary but the way things are in our country now I think that is a pretty good place to put your stake in the ground.
Happy New Year to you, too! Glad you are here at MIH!
I know Victoria Nuland hates Russia with a passion. But imho in general self interest and greed is motivating the efforts against Russia. They hate Putin because he put an end to the pillaging by the Western elites of Russia under Yeltsin and have been demonizing him ever since. They then blamed Putin for the election Of Trump and it was off to the races
Well, we can't stop the people who are running our country from printing money, and printing votes when necessary to achieve the appearance of democratic approval.
Every state takes the funny money; blue states do not want to fix their elections.
It has been interesting to live in Oregon and watch it become a one-party state since the institution of vote-by-mail 25 years ago. All of our considerable problems now belong wholly to the Democrat party which staffs government top to bottom: elected officials, appointed commissioners, unionized labor. Factions within the party fight over the control of spending made possible only by modern monetary theory. Republicans so-called will never take back the state. By design, Oregon moves in lockstep with California and Washington to achieve supranational goals.
I wonder how much of the left's new hatred for Russia stems from the fact that in Russia, Communism (their revered ideology) failed; and while Putin may be authoritarian--which has a very long history in Russia--he has not tried to bring back Communism.
He's hyperbolic as always and shows an anti-West bias as always. But his point about control of shipping routes by BRICS is very valid. That is something the importance of which Mark has addressed, along with Luongo, and along with myself some time back. This will be a huge advantage for BRICS going forward and it scares me because I have the feeling the West will do everything it can to prevent. That said, the U.S. and its economy can withstand the loss of ME and Russian oil and gas; Europe not so much.
I don't especially like Russians; as I am of Polish, Czech and Slovak ancestry, that aversion may have a genetic origin for all I know. Be that as it may, engaging in a war with Russia is absolute madness. Russia has endured and survived much more than the West can throw at Russia through its corrupt Ukrainian surrogate.
Brilliant and thought provoking and just in time for Epiphany! I’ll be reading and re-reading this post. Who woulda thunk it? Conservatism raises character, disposition and vision, over ideology. And the Neocon variety is born of emotion, a loss of control. You come away from Putin’s visit to the hospital absolutely struck by his abikity to speak of the war without anger, without heated emotion, but using intelligence and insight. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, in Gaza, the firestorm continues. Hatred is not a strategy - someone must have said.
I tend to agree with everything you are saying here. I do wonder, though, if the object of the Neocons fear is simply their own failure rather than some external threat to the country. For so many years all these think tanks have published papers advocating their positions; careers have been made, the government has funded all these folks based on their "expert" opinions, and the MIC has used their writings as the basis for lobbying and procurement of funds. What if it is all exposed as a sham? Maybe even a scam? Whither all the great Neocon thinkers and the politicians who used their ideas to support the MIC?
Interesting... I can see the scapegoat angle on a subconscious psychological level of the elites (but not necessarily at the level of awareness). Every movement or group needs an enemy? Someone to blame when things don't work out? Thanks for a different perspective on this.
Thanks very much for sharing Girard's ideas about the crucifixion and scapegoating, and for your clarification. Very interesting indeed. It seems evidence supports him.
Thanks also for making clear your distinction between the elites and the Neocons - I agree. To your point about the lizard-brained Neocons, I remember after the fall of the USSR I thought "Finally, no more cold war! Now we will have the 'peace dividend!'" Little did I know that the Neocons simply did not have the capability of adjusting and did not have any alternate view of reality queued up; they were trained to think of Russia in only one way. And of course the whole MIC financial system was also predicated on that view. What a crime and a shame and what a tragedy for so many people in the world!
Yes, the wish to explain it until, finally, the befuddled masses either grasp the ideas being pummeled into them or, in any case, stop arguing. In the UK the blessed Margaret Thatcher was the one who led her 'Conservative' Party to the fount of Friedman and neoLiberalism. And she was a devil for explaining things until her opponents gave up.
I haven't read the Federalist article yet but your precis is very able and deeply thought-provoking, thank you Mark. How you continue to produce these 'Stacks at such a high level beggars belief but I'm so grateful that you do.
It seems to me that one (anyone) cannot step outside of ideology. It ( whichever flavour of 'it' that it is ;-) ) is the very stuff that we think with. I'm using the word ideology in an expansive sense, to encompass culture, national sentiment, <<...the religious, the ones who revere their history, their culture, their memories of a different time...>> - yes, them/us.
Even in the narrower political sense, the ism if you like, the Conservative tradition has one massive advantage: accepting the world for what it is.
That pestilential wish to improve things all the damn time is _always_ going to lead to suffering. No plan will, can, ever turn out exactly as envisaged. Letting strategies emerge is both pragmatic and much less strain. I won't divert into a lecture about the Noble Truths etc but at a personal level, letting go of that pernicious wish to be always in control, always aware of where one is heading, always "right", takes so much enjoyment out of the journey and it's so flippin' tiring!
If more people could stop pursuing happiness, quote unquote, I bet more people could find it.
As an undergrad I came across Voegelin's New Science of Politics--the view of history was transformative, in connection with my studies in Thomist philosophy. You'll notice that the author of the Federalist article editor-in-chief of VoegelinView.
What a great post! Thank you.
I have never understood the animus toward Russia on the part of the British ruling class and the NeoCons - much less the outright hatred. They have been the aggressors toward Russia all along, so their emotional antipathy toward supposed Russian aggression or threats should actually be reflexive. Is it so simple as their wanting to rule the world and projecting that Russia does also and has therefore blocked their path? Well, I guess the notion of Empire can be blinding and dies hard (unfortunately for everyone).
The other thing I really appreciate is your highlighting Kirk and the notion that having a Conservative mind shouldn't translate into subscribing to an "ism". Kirk is a fascinating figure but I admit I couldn't make it all the way through The Conservative Mind (tl;dr). So I very much appreciate your reminder from him of what being a Conservative is all about and how it contrasts to Liberalism and Libertarianism.
Well Said, D1. I've struggled for decades, as a somewhat-maturing adult (I'm workin' on it...) why I wasn't really comfortable with calling myself 'a conservative' when denying true affiliation to the Republican party. I sort of settled on 'Conserve the Constitutional Representative Republic' however Mark's post, specifically as you pointed out, Kirk's writings (I think actually speech/talk transcriptions) so well explain the 'conservative mind'. I believe I can be a bit more at peace about claiming - not to be a conservative - but of a having conservative mindset. Peace to all MIH Readers and the Happiest of New Year moments to you all as well. [Really, it isn't possible to have a whole year of goodness, right? So here's to lots of good moments]! (WrH)
Hi Wayne,
I think that's a pretty good "settle." That's pretty much where I landed, too. I always say I am a "Constitutional Conservative." Nothing is ever 100% black and white / binary but the way things are in our country now I think that is a pretty good place to put your stake in the ground.
Happy New Year to you, too! Glad you are here at MIH!
I know Victoria Nuland hates Russia with a passion. But imho in general self interest and greed is motivating the efforts against Russia. They hate Putin because he put an end to the pillaging by the Western elites of Russia under Yeltsin and have been demonizing him ever since. They then blamed Putin for the election Of Trump and it was off to the races
"how do Americans take back our country...?"
Well, we can't stop the people who are running our country from printing money, and printing votes when necessary to achieve the appearance of democratic approval.
Every state takes the funny money; blue states do not want to fix their elections.
It has been interesting to live in Oregon and watch it become a one-party state since the institution of vote-by-mail 25 years ago. All of our considerable problems now belong wholly to the Democrat party which staffs government top to bottom: elected officials, appointed commissioners, unionized labor. Factions within the party fight over the control of spending made possible only by modern monetary theory. Republicans so-called will never take back the state. By design, Oregon moves in lockstep with California and Washington to achieve supranational goals.
I wonder how much of the left's new hatred for Russia stems from the fact that in Russia, Communism (their revered ideology) failed; and while Putin may be authoritarian--which has a very long history in Russia--he has not tried to bring back Communism.
We must read different stuff. I always seem to see him labeled as an outright "dictator"--kind of an Orange Man without the hair. :-)
Haha!
The Rules-Based Order is less fun when you are not in control of the rules. Those barbaric Houthis are ruining everything, along with evil Putin.
Pepe Escobar has a great essay on the changing world. https://www.unz.com/pescobar/how-yemen-changed-everything/
He's hyperbolic as always and shows an anti-West bias as always. But his point about control of shipping routes by BRICS is very valid. That is something the importance of which Mark has addressed, along with Luongo, and along with myself some time back. This will be a huge advantage for BRICS going forward and it scares me because I have the feeling the West will do everything it can to prevent. That said, the U.S. and its economy can withstand the loss of ME and Russian oil and gas; Europe not so much.
Definitely interesting.
I don't especially like Russians; as I am of Polish, Czech and Slovak ancestry, that aversion may have a genetic origin for all I know. Be that as it may, engaging in a war with Russia is absolute madness. Russia has endured and survived much more than the West can throw at Russia through its corrupt Ukrainian surrogate.
Brilliant and thought provoking and just in time for Epiphany! I’ll be reading and re-reading this post. Who woulda thunk it? Conservatism raises character, disposition and vision, over ideology. And the Neocon variety is born of emotion, a loss of control. You come away from Putin’s visit to the hospital absolutely struck by his abikity to speak of the war without anger, without heated emotion, but using intelligence and insight. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, in Gaza, the firestorm continues. Hatred is not a strategy - someone must have said.
Conservatism is about virtues, while the other ‘-isms’ are about values.
I tend to agree with everything you are saying here. I do wonder, though, if the object of the Neocons fear is simply their own failure rather than some external threat to the country. For so many years all these think tanks have published papers advocating their positions; careers have been made, the government has funded all these folks based on their "expert" opinions, and the MIC has used their writings as the basis for lobbying and procurement of funds. What if it is all exposed as a sham? Maybe even a scam? Whither all the great Neocon thinkers and the politicians who used their ideas to support the MIC?
The "compulsion" you speak of is the ideology of the Neocon elites.
Right ... food for worms, but first worms for food.
Interesting... I can see the scapegoat angle on a subconscious psychological level of the elites (but not necessarily at the level of awareness). Every movement or group needs an enemy? Someone to blame when things don't work out? Thanks for a different perspective on this.
Thanks very much for sharing Girard's ideas about the crucifixion and scapegoating, and for your clarification. Very interesting indeed. It seems evidence supports him.
Thanks also for making clear your distinction between the elites and the Neocons - I agree. To your point about the lizard-brained Neocons, I remember after the fall of the USSR I thought "Finally, no more cold war! Now we will have the 'peace dividend!'" Little did I know that the Neocons simply did not have the capability of adjusting and did not have any alternate view of reality queued up; they were trained to think of Russia in only one way. And of course the whole MIC financial system was also predicated on that view. What a crime and a shame and what a tragedy for so many people in the world!
Yes, the wish to explain it until, finally, the befuddled masses either grasp the ideas being pummeled into them or, in any case, stop arguing. In the UK the blessed Margaret Thatcher was the one who led her 'Conservative' Party to the fount of Friedman and neoLiberalism. And she was a devil for explaining things until her opponents gave up.
I haven't read the Federalist article yet but your precis is very able and deeply thought-provoking, thank you Mark. How you continue to produce these 'Stacks at such a high level beggars belief but I'm so grateful that you do.
It seems to me that one (anyone) cannot step outside of ideology. It ( whichever flavour of 'it' that it is ;-) ) is the very stuff that we think with. I'm using the word ideology in an expansive sense, to encompass culture, national sentiment, <<...the religious, the ones who revere their history, their culture, their memories of a different time...>> - yes, them/us.
Even in the narrower political sense, the ism if you like, the Conservative tradition has one massive advantage: accepting the world for what it is.
That pestilential wish to improve things all the damn time is _always_ going to lead to suffering. No plan will, can, ever turn out exactly as envisaged. Letting strategies emerge is both pragmatic and much less strain. I won't divert into a lecture about the Noble Truths etc but at a personal level, letting go of that pernicious wish to be always in control, always aware of where one is heading, always "right", takes so much enjoyment out of the journey and it's so flippin' tiring!
If more people could stop pursuing happiness, quote unquote, I bet more people could find it.
As an undergrad I came across Voegelin's New Science of Politics--the view of history was transformative, in connection with my studies in Thomist philosophy. You'll notice that the author of the Federalist article editor-in-chief of VoegelinView.
New (or forgotten) names to me. Will have a scratch about.
Well said! The hand in the glove is seldom discussed.
Thanks Mark - great post.