A lot of those are just China keeping their slavish workers hating on foreigners.

It’s similar to white slave lords in 1830 getting whites to hate/fear blacks, Republicans, and abolitionists.

CCTV is pretty much China’s version of a world propaganda arm. And they can reach pretty far.

Abe’s problem is all the anti nuclear people in Japan. They are going to need nuclear power, and more, if they want to be a strategic alliance.

Not just India. I’ve heard of Japan making agreements with a number of nations in the region, including Vietnam. And also note that Abe recently managed to get approved a new reading of the “Japan renounces war” section of the constitution that allows Japan to engage in hostilities in defence of a military ally.

If China does decide to make a military grab against one of its neighbors, look for a new round of attempts to guilt Japan over its actions in World War 2.

Whatever you believe strongly enough to assert in public aside, one could not have more divergent and antithetical views of human meaning and existence than between the idea of “man” in the scholastic tradition of Christendom (or even late antiquity) and the postmodern … I don’t even know what to call it since it is not even intellectually coherent … “view”, I guess.

On the one hand you have a rational creature with a dual nature; part material and passing, part everlasting and supernatural; a being which is directly related and responsible to the creator and sustainer of being itself.

On the other hand you have an ultimately unintelligible monism in which elements of an meaningless material field pointlessly organize themselves with varying degrees of complexity to the point wherein some of them “internally” register their own existence – for a period – until they pass and permanently, irretrievably, disintegrate. Sparks, impelled upwards into the darkness by a fire which will itself wink forever out, or reconstitute in a way in which all that was, will be so completely eradicated that it will, in fact, have never existed at all.

In this second scheme there really is no place for virtues or excellence, or even rights and wrongs, since kinds themselves do not exist as objective entities or categories. To be a female for instance is simply to be a consciousness subject to the “tyranny of biology”, and from that standpoint no excellence as a female makes any difference.

In fact the entire notion of humanity disappears and becomes so fuzzy that talking to some of these people is like talking to someone mentally ill – which might often be the case when it comes to your talking to modern liberals.

I have been surprised recently, despite my constant harping on this same chord, at how deeply this nihilism has penetrated nowadays into “everyday people” who will quite blithely or even vehemently admit that human being per se means nothing to them, but persons (whatever that mask is supposed to represent or signify) do – sort of.

It is not just the mentally ill jabber of some academic somewhere, which nowadays places the life of a monkey above the life of a human infant. “Normal”, if you can call them that, people are saying it as well.

Now just what a post-rational “human”, ideologically abstracted from his biological teleology is supposed to ultimately and essentially be in this trans-human world, I cannot say; and have not been able to get any of these types to clearly say.

I used to sarcastically refer to them as having reduced themselves to will-to-power bags of meaningless appetite. That is all I could see as logically left to them after performing the reductions and transmutation which their own ideology entailed.

I think now that many fewer of them would feel insulted by this characterization than were just a decade or so ago. They have entered the void, and they are content. You can tell by the delirious shrieking, that they are happy there.

Ted Cruz most definitely has that attitude of support for and belief in “the traditional vision of America described by Bloom.” Not only that, he understands it, and seeks to promote it,

The book was published in 1987. Do you think that Reagan didn’t believe in that traditional vision? Do you think George HW Bush didn’t either?

But that changed NOTHING.

Ted Cruz would be another more conservative president, not that different from those two ones. And then you would have a new Obama, and America would continue its decline.

Conservatives don’t like risks. Cruz would be likely quite a good president for more civilized times. But we are not in civilized times anymore. Either you take some risks, either you’ll be a banana republic in a few decades. Look at Venezuela, because that could be your future.

Right now, America is going down, and you will need something more that Ted Cruz to stop the decline. Perhaps Trump won’t be able to do anything about it. Indeed, quite surely he wont, since it’s too late, but at least maybe, only maybe, you could have a chance.

Your comment is completely devoid of logic.

I wrote [emphasis mine[ “the only thing about Trump that I think is both appealing and sincere.” Get it? The ONLY thing.

And I’m being generous and giving Trump the benefit of the doubt there in alleging he sincerely holds those feelings.

But what I didn’t write, although I certainly might have, is that Ted Cruz most definitely has that attitude of support for and belief in “the traditional vision of America described by Bloom.” Not only that, he understands it, and seeks to promote it, and is smart enough to understand how to do so (he supports and understands, among other things, the Constitution, and small government).

And in your last sentence, what on earth are you talking about when you say “the same”? Are you under the impression that Ted Cruz (or any true conservative, for that matter, since Reagan) has been president for a while?

Everyone who reads this blog at all regularly knows what I think of Donald Trump. But I do know that one of his main appeals–and probably the only thing about him that I think is both appealing and sincere–is the fact that he ascribes to the traditional vision of America described by Bloom, the one that so many people (including me) are angry at having seen undermined for so long.

Yet you keep supporting Cruz.

There’s an old proverb: a crazy man is the one who wants something to change but keeps doing the same.

While conservatives should be undertaking a full-spectrum social activist movement, Bloom’s work goes to why if conservatives will or can only invest in activism in one area, that area should be the campus and academy.

The campus and academy are primary fount and incubator, as well as vector, of social ideas and culture. For that reason and because of the microcosmic scale, activism on campus offers the best return on investment for activists with limited means. That’s why social activist movements are often born on campus.

The strategic evaluation and effectiveness that inform the Left’s vigilantism on campus are the same reasons that conservatives should be zealously, vigorously competing in the activist game on campus.

_________________

The year is 1907, one hundred and nine years ago.

Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

‘In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.’

Every American citizen needs to read this!

KEEP THIS MOVING!!!