One of the priceless things about working at a university -- other than watching youth trends evolve right under your nose -- is the endless stream of visiting speakers, cool indie films and other forums happening on campus. All the better when they're on your lunch break.
We have an upcoming visit from historian John Lukacs, a self-professed "reactionary" who is disenchanted with the last 40+ years of the conservative movement. The guy reminds me a bit of my father: intriguing, sometimes brilliant insight into history mixed with bizarre doses of unwavering ideology.
This "anti-populist" bemoans the populism, hatred and nationalism of conservative movement politics while also holding the Roman Catholic Church as a bastion of what is good and right about Western Civilization.
He rips the lazy intellect and empty symbolism of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush and mourns how "conservatism" has become focused on anti-liberalism rather than goals in its own right:
"Today's politicians of the right, Lukacs writes, have abandoned the conservative values of stability, order, and tradition and instead learned to bind nationalist majorities together by evoking hatred, directed not just against foreign foes but against fellow citizens who are seen as insufficiently patriotic."
On patriotism, he has an interesting personal experience, since he deserted the Hungarian army when it was drafted into German alliance during WWII.
He says liberalism is an outdated movement that accomplished its worthy goals (essentially, equal rights and free speech), while the new "enemies" are "the (outdated) idea of Progress, together with the (thoughtless) belief in Technology."
Oh, and mass populism, which he says is eroding democracy.
The professors who will likely disagree with some of his stances are nonetheless excited to have him on campus. Like talking with my father, it should be fun even when he starts to sound crazy ("Oh, about that wonderful Church ..."). It's great to hear people who -- even if they fail to recognize ambiguity in this world -- at least avoid blind fealty to a Party line.
I don't pretend to comprehend (Okay, I do pretend, but I recognize that I can't) how the world works and know how to achieve peace and happiness for all, but it's fun to keep trying. And interesting to hear a different view from someone who isn't trolling for votes or business lobby concessions.
Speaking of not comprehending how the world works, here is a great list of 13 things about our physical world that baffle scientists. See there's dark matter, and then there's dark energy. To say nothing of the placebo effect and tetraneutrons. Fascinating and maddening questions ...
And speaking of "that sonofabitch Reagan," the NY Times columnists had an amusing fight over whether pre-dementia Reagan (was there such a time?) had a clue that he launched his 1980 presidential campaign with a symbolic gesture that essentially said: "Slavery wasn't so bad."
I used to read David Brooks for an "other side" perspective, but I stopped that quite a while ago because every column seemed to revolve around his armchair social pseudo-science and unacceptable rationalizing for whatever mush-of-the-moment he was on. (Okay in a personal blog, mind you ... not so in a national column.)
I think the final straw was when he went on a truly surreal rant against modern parents and their "pretentious children's names like ... Elijah." Excuse me? Even his old fart's slim point was undermined by the fact he obviously didn't know the people he thought he was talking about, yet he used a litany of cliched examples about "them" to paint an inexcusably universal indictment.
Nonetheless, I had to check out his attempt to "right" a "slur" against Reagan by clarifying why Reagan launched his campaign in a powder-keg location that spit in the face of civil rights. I mean, you know, it's a state's right to look the other way at lynching if'n it wants to.
Happily, Bob Herbert comes back a few days later and -- without calling his Times colleague out directly -- explains just what kind of message Reagan was sending to African-Americans and his white would-be voters.
Still, Reagan could give a heck of a speech, and he was in movies, and he made us feel like proud Americans if we tilted our heads just so, and his administration's crimes weren't his fault because he wasn't really aware of them ... So let's name another national capital airport after him.
As you may have noticed, the site has changed. Sampa, the free-site host, did a version 2 of some sort.
Despite an FAQ that made it sound like allowing one's site to go through v.2 surgery would be okay, there were several flexibilities that surprisingly disappeared with the click of a button. (e.g. I cannot believe sidebars like this one are even narrower than before.)
And I'm told -- miraculously! -- that the conversion cannot be undone. Truth be told, I'm actually quite pissed. But free is free. Sampa has otherwise been good to me.
So I need to sort through site "features" to see how I can make do. Except that I don't have the time at the moment, in the middle of graduate classes and Lighthousehockey.com. (btw, I've removed that Lighthouse RSS feed so that you're not clogged with random Islanders hockey gibberish).
But I promise to touch up the accessories when I get a chance, and return to irregularly scheduled blogging.
Subscribe to this Site
, a self-professed "reactionary" who is disenchanted with the last 40+ years of the conservative movement. The guy reminds me a bit of my father: intriguing, sometimes brilliant insight into history mixed with bizarre doses of unwavering ideology.
February, 2008