SUBSCRIBER LOGIN






Search First Things

Advanced Search

RSS

Postmodern Conservative
Archive

Categories

Monthly


Masthead

Founding Editor
James Poulos

Contributing Blog Editors
James Ceaser
Ralph Hancock
Peter Lawler

Associate Bloggers
Samuel Goldman
Jonathan Jones
Jason Joseph
John Presnall
Carl Scott
Pete Spiliakos

Blogroll




Friday, December 3, 2010, 5:16 PM

At one time the website Front Porch Republic stood as a shining light, celebrating an open and public discussion of the limits of government, the intrinsic necessity of conceiving of ‘place’ in the human drama, and the acknowledgement of ‘liberty’ as a requirement inherent in the notion that human discourse is an essential element in the total dimensions of human existence.

FPR has a brilliant stable of writers/thinkers and for a very long time provided an exciting and ebullient discourse that drew some very intelligent people into a vibrant and often erudite discussion.

Somewhere along the line FPR derailed. To be honest, I’m not sure exactly when but it seems that the overall tone of the website moved away from the ideas and principles of republicanism and toward some ‘second reality’ predicated on a derailed and perverse statism.

Surely there were other signs: the webmaster (or someone) took to ‘deleting’ comments found unacceptable without notifying the offender, posts that were judged to be too “conservative” were ordered edited, the shift away from republicanism became apparent particularly in Dr. Medaille’s blogs explicating Catholic Distributism which appears to require a ground defined by the idea of an elite, consolidated regime that would nuture and subsidze (among others) the valorous subsistence farmer, where the subsistence farmer would now become the beneficiary of the transfer of wealth, the Welfare Queen of the new, wholistic and Earthcentric, Regime.

‘Conservatives’, both bloggers and commentors have abandoned FPR, perhaps reaching denuoement with the withdrawal of arguably their most important writer/thinker, Caleb Stegall, this week. It appears Mr. Stegall withdrew in protest to Dr. Medaille’s latest post.

I’m no expert on internet ‘blogs’. I assume the problems related to FPR are yet another and ongoing example of the human condition but it seems to me that given the outstanding beginning and the stated objectives of this crew of intellectuals and academics they could have succeeded, grounded as they are, on Bill Kauffman’s ideas of ‘place, limits, and liberty’, ideas that are inherently celebrated and revered in the American psyche, ideas that by their very definition reject the derailed foreign ideologies dominating modernity.

Perhaps FPR has fallen victim to what a friend referred to as “socialist succotash!”


Wednesday, July 7, 2010, 1:49 PM

“Whatever the reason,” writes Prof. Deneen, clearly sporting for another round of epic battle, “it’s good news indeed. Score 1 for FPR, zero for the PoMoCons.” But Brooks’ defense of the suburbs was wrongly grounded. Here’s why we know better and shouldn’t waver.


Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 10:06 AM

Let’s take the solemn dress code away from the Goths, the Rosaries away from the gangs, the blood & death fixation away from the scene-kids, the art away from the academics, the Latin away from the Harry Potter geeks, the bi-location away from Siegfried & Roy, the exorcisms away from Art Bell, the Angels away from Hollywood, the bling away from the players, the stigmatas away from the Arquettes, and the ghosts away from the new agers. In Denver there’s a beautiful downtown cathedral called the Church of the Holy Ghost. Who’s not curious about what goes on in there?

Read it all.


Saturday, June 5, 2010, 8:22 PM

I find this Michael Chabon op-ed, written in the wake of Israel’s interception of the Gaza flotilla, to be remarkable, and not in a good way. A few extremely cleverly oblique references to God, while the figure who identifies that God rather than merely naming him — guess who? — is comprehensively repressed. Chabon apparently wants his fear to be taken seriously that inside any gentile who dares suggest Jews evolved themselves extra-big brains must be an anti-Semite. So fine: I don’t think Jews have been hated, or continue to be hated, because they’re crafty, Mr. Chabon. It’s not because they’re “the people of Maimonides, Albert Einstein, Jonas Salk and Meyer Lansky.” It’s because they’re the people of Moses.


Thursday, June 3, 2010, 7:28 PM

Friday, April 16, 2010, 11:09 AM

Yes, Virginia. Will Wilkinson does the world a service and gives Glen Whitman plenty of space to air his deep concerns with nudgetarianism. At a recent panel discussing prospects for libertarian/liberal relations, I asked whether the real trouble, as opposed to liberaltarianism, wasn’t actually progressivism. After all, small-l liberalism and small-l libertarianism have certain affinities that needn’t result in progressive outcomes, even smart paternalist ones of the sort touted by the Nudge brigades. When big-L liberals and libertarians get together, the danger, as I’m seeing it, is that the Liberals become less liberal and the libertarians become less libertarian. It’s nice to see even some liberal-friendly libertarians recognize how serious the consequences of such a wrong turn could be.


Friday, April 16, 2010, 11:02 AM

I’m up at Bloggingheads talking American “rustics” with Jim Pinkerton — folks I sometimes refer to, in a spirit akin to Hunter Thompson’s, as “rubes.” One big question is whether Mead’s much-discussed foursquare categorization of Americans — Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, Jacksonian, and Wilsonian — is good enough today at capturing what’s going on in “rustic” America. Probably not, I think. I can’t be the only one who looks back on Thompson radicals of ’70s Colorado and sees an embryonic coalition: Freak Power and Rube Power. Echoes, perhaps, of what Reihan alludes to with the motto Keep America Weird — borrowed from a place where you can find rubes as well as freaks: Austin, TX.


Monday, April 12, 2010, 12:47 PM

And now, a bit of news I’m excited to share: I’ve signed on as Managing Editor at Ricochet, a new online political forum coming your way in a matter of weeks. Feast your pre-launch curiosity at Facebook and Twitter. There’ll be details to follow, of course. Meanwhile, life will go on according to custom and habit here at Pomocon. Cheers!


Monday, April 5, 2010, 3:01 PM

The recent and dramatic rise of modern Gnosticism, implemented in part, by the capture of the vocabulary of reality, is merely the continuation of the effort, identified by Eric Voegelin, to form a Western civil theology by immanentizing the Christian eschaton. The totalitarians of the previous century in effect were examples of this political action and the failure of these sundry regimes indicates the results when the gnostic movement moves through reality challenging Christianity and proclaiming a new civil theology and the end of history. At least so far. History has shown it is a difficult proposition to vitiate the differentiated reality of two millenia of philosophical and theological analysis, not to mention the event of the Christ.

The modern Gnostic order has not receded nor does it tack in quite the same direction as it did during the totalitarian era. The modern Gnostic movement, represented by the current administration of President Barrack Obama and his particular Marxist variant, a combination of, among other things, a virulent scientism, progressivism, and the Obama cult of personality that suggests a racist component, is much more subtle, seeking to appeal to the economically “challenged” by promises of transfer of wealth through punitive taxation on the wealthy, placing responsibility (and guilt) for African Chattel Slavery on the white middle class, and to move the country, economically,  away from market capitalism.

The Obama regime proffers on the basis of the immanetization of human existence, a false representation of concrete society as an eschaton, the fallacious Utopian dreamworld of a madman.

Christianity which stands to be destroyed if Gnosticism wins the day, finds itself in reduced circumstances. The Roman Catholic Church is faced with a bitter and fractious critique related to various officials “hiding” pedophile priests from civil prosecution. The mainstream Protestant churches, perhaps continuing to suffer from the effects of their own gnostic revolution (the Reformation), have become nearly completely immanentized. It should be noted that contemporary Christianity as a result of the rise of materialism, individualism, existentialism and to a lesser extent dialectic-materialism has not succeeded in deeply penetrating many social institutions. Also, Voegelin adds, “…the likeliness of a fall from faith will increase when civilizational progress of education, literacy, and intellectual debate will bring the full seriousness of Christianity to the understanding of ever more individuals.” All of which indicates the tenuous position of Gnosticism’s primary opponent in the current struggle between good and evil.

Still the challenge facing the classical Gnostic movement may be occurring much quicker than it would in, for example, Europe, and may be an indicator that the corruption is not as pervasive as once feared.

The best illustration of that challenge is the so-called Tea Party Movement (TPM). Here it is plainly visible that the TPM represents an opposition to a rising state repressiveness and while we may criticize the planning, execution, and indeed effectiveness of the TPM, at least to date, we should realize that these people represent the initial cadre of free citizens who are seeking redress of grievance from a regime that is more than willing to resort to violence. History has numerous examples of derailed and psychopathological Gnostics, unable to recognize reality, and immersed in their counterexistential dream world, reacting violently to their greatest fear, “the horror of existence and a desire to escape it.”

Indeed, we are living in truly interesting times.


Tuesday, March 30, 2010, 12:44 PM

In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, Norman Podhoretz emerged from semi-retirement to express his approval for Sarah Palin. No, I don’t propose to revisit the Sarah, pro- and con- debate, which will remain sterile and tedious until she actually, like, runs for something (or not). But I do want to suggest a revision to Podohoretz’s interpretation of William F. Buckley’s of most famous and, I think, misunderstood remark: that he’d rather be governed by the first 2000 names in the Boston phonebook than the combined faculties of Harvard and MIT.

Now Podhoretz admits that what Buckley meant is not immediately clear. Neverthless, he, like almost everyone else, takes it as endorsement of populism. Better Joe the Plumber–or, perhaps, Al the Electrician–than Quincy Mather Winthrop, the Lowell Professor of 14th Century Central Asian Aesthetics. Well, maybe so. But the thing about the phonebook is that the people it lists are pretty randomly distributed. And 2000 is a lot a names, which could very well include a few of the good professor’s colleges in addition to a healthy majority of regular folks.

So it seems that Buckley was suggesting that it’s better to be governed by something like a representative sample of the population as whole than a guild of professors. Which is even more plausible than betting on the individual Al rather than the individual Quincy.  On the other hand, there’s likely to be a place in that sample for intellectuals, even if a smaller one than they often think they deserve.

Older Posts »

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact