Category: Substack

Postmarked Utopia

Ed Farrell, a long-time friend and reader of Maverick Philosopher since April 2010, tells me that he has a Substack up and running, entitled Postmarked Utopia.  Please do bring him some traffic. Here is the initial paragraph of his inaugural post:

I've called this site "Postmarked Utopia" not because I live in Utopia but because I live in a wannabe utopia: the progressive western world, which has once again embarked on the great project of destroying its cultural foundations so that some sort of free-and-equal paradise might rise like a phoenix from the ashes. With variations, this is the third, fourth, fifth, or sixth try at this. At the moment we're stalled in populist uprisings. Will we get past this? I hope not. If the past is any guide, Utopia is a bitch and delivers only brain-death and servitude. 

 

Morality Public and Private: On not Confusing Them

With a little help from Aristotle, Machiavelli, and Hannah Arendt. Substack latest.

By the way, I learned that Arendt had ten books by Carl Schmitt in her library. We will have to look into their relationship.

Is that a cigarette holder she's using?  A Randian touch. It would not be fair to call Ayn Rand a hack, but she comes close, and is nowhere near the level of Arendt.  A is A!

Portrait of German-born American political theorist and author Hannah Arendt with a cigarette in her hand, 1949.

The Atheist

Substack latest.

A rumination 'inspired' by Paul Brunton. An embedded article confronts Sam Harris, one of the "four horsemen" of the New Atheism, which is now old hat.  As old hat as the expression I just used. There's nothing new under the sun,  saith the Preacher, and in these hyperkinetic times, what's new gets old quickly. The New Atheism is as passé as folk music, as passé as blogging, although some among the superannuated are still at it and will be until blindness, dementia, or death doth part us from it.  

Curiously, thanks to Trump, Vance, and others, Christianity is now 'cool' among a large segment of youth. But don't get too excited about this development: it is in good measure driven by conformism and crowd behavior and by the lust to turn a buck, as witness 'prayer apps' and Martin Scorsese's latest offerings.

If you need an app to pray I will say a prayer for you. As for  Scorsese's latest, I didn't watch any of it, considering it, whether rightly or wrongly, sullied by his and his pal Robert de Niro's glorification of mafiosi and other assorted scumbags in such productions as Goodfellas and Casino. 

The Integrationist Fantasy

Top o' the Stack.

E pluribus unum? Out of many, one? It can work, and it did work for a time, though not perfectly. But thanks to ‘progressives,’ regression has set in. Whether a One can be made of Many depends on the nature of the Many.

A viable One cannot be made out of just any Many.

To think otherwise is to succumb to what I call the Integrationist Fantasy. This is the dangerous conceit that people can be brought together peacefully and productively despite deep differences in their languages, religions, cultures, traditions, and values.

Read it all; it's short: your Twitterized (X'ed out?) brain will be able to process it.

‘2A’ a Terrorist Marker?

Top o' the Stack.

It emerged in the Congressional FBI whistleblower hearings that the abbreviation '2A' is a "terrorist marker." That came as news to me. (But see here.) I have been using '2A' from time to time as an innocuous abbreviation of 'Second Amendment.' The context, of course, is the Bill of Rights which are the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution.

I have written sentences like this:

2A does not confer, but protects, the citizen's right to keep and bear arms.

My use of the harmless abbreviation makes me a terrorist, a white supremacist, and what all else in the eyes of the Biden regime. What does it make the regime? A police state.

Read it all.

Could a Jew Pray the “Our Father”?

I return an affirmative answer at Substack.

It dawned on me a while back that there is nothing specifically Christian about the content of the Pater Noster. Its origin of course is Christian. When his disciples asked him how they should pray, Jesus taught them the prayer. (Mt 6:9-13) If you carefully read the prayer below you will see that there is no mention in it of anything specifically Christian: no mention of Jesus as the Son of God, no mention of the Word becoming flesh and dwelling among us (the Incarnation), no mention of the Resurrection, nothing that could be construed as even implicitly Trinitarian. So I thought to myself: a believing (non-Christian) Jew could pray this prayer, and could do so in good faith. There is nothing at the strictly doctrinal level that could prevent him. Or is there?

Read the rest.