Modernity, in terms of the views and values that have brought us out of the feudalism of the Medieval period and led us to the relative richness and comfort we enjoy today and which are rapidly spreading around the worldis under threat from the extremes at both ends of the political spectrum. Modernity is worth fighting for if you enjoy and wish others to enjoy the benefits of a first-world existence in relative safety and with high degrees of individual liberty that can express itself in functional societies. Most people support Modernity and wish its anti-modern enemies would shut up.
You may die anyway. You—or the leader of your party—may make it into the cockpit and not know how to fly or land the plane. There are no guarantees. To compound the metaphor: With Trump, at least you can spin the cylinder and take your chances.
To ordinary conservative ears, this sounds histrionic.
Can things really be so bad if eight years of Obama can be followed by eight more of Hillary, and yet Constitutionalist conservatives can still reasonably hope for a restoration of our cherished ideals? Not to pick too much on Kesler, who is less unwarrantedly optimistic than most conservatives.
And who, at least, poses the right question: The truth is that Trump articulated, if incompletely and inconsistently, the right stances on the right issues—immigration, trade, and war—right from the beginning. But let us back up. One of the paradoxes—there are so many—of conservative thought over the last decade at least is the unwillingness even to entertain the possibility that America and the West are on a trajectory toward something very bad.
On the one hand, conservatives routinely present a litany of ills plaguing the body politic. Massive, expensive, intrusive, out-of-control government. Ever-higher taxes and ever-deteriorating services and infrastructure.
Inability to win wars against tribal, sub-Third-World foes. And so on and drearily on. Conservatives spend at least several hundred million dollars a year on think-tanks, magazines, conferences, fellowships, and such, complaining about this, that, the other, and everything.
And yet these same conservatives are, at root, keepers of the status quo. Oh, sure, they want some things to change. They want their pet ideas adopted—tax deductions for having more babies and the like.
Many of them are even good ideas. But are any of them truly fundamental? Do they get to the heart of our problems? A recent article by Matthew Continetti may be taken as representative—indeed, almost written for the purpose of illustrating the point.
What does Continetti propose to do about it? Decentralization and federalism are all well and good, and as a conservative, I endorse them both without reservation. But how are they going to save, or even meaningfully improve, the America that Continetti describes? What can they do against a tidal wave of dysfunction, immorality, and corruption?
A step has been skipped in there somewhere. Wishing for a tautology to enact itself is not a strategy.Essay about An Inconvient Truth.
An Inconvenient Truth An Inconvenient Truth is a documentary film directed by Davis Guggenheim.
It is a film about global warming, presented by former United States Vice President Al Gore. The answer must be someone, not just something. For the problem (suffering) is about someone (God—why does he why doesn't he ?) rather than just something.
To question God's goodness is not just an intellectual experiment. It is rebellion or tears. It is a little child with tears in its eyes. 2. slavery existed only briefly, and in limited locales, in the history of the republic – involving only a tiny percentage of the ancestors of today’s americans.
This free Science essay on Essay: Is this an inconvenient truth for the phytoplankton Alexandrium? is perfect for Science students to use as an example.
President Donald Trump looking at the solar eclipse without protective glasses, with his wife Melania and son Barron at the White House, Washington, D.C., August 21, The date October 12 has been much on my mind this year.
It was on this day in that the fascist forces of General Francisco. By: Publius Decius Mus September 5, Publius Decius Mus was the pseudonym of Michael Anton, who in January of left the private sector to serve on the National Security Council.