I haven’t read the article but the answer is yes, it is. Liberalism always leads to seeking the ultimate freedom, the freedom from human biology. And that is a losing battle.
It’s time to abandon liberalism. It led us to a very bad place and discredited itself completely. The idea that you can contain it in some primordial or less noxious form that we are seeing today is a fantasy.
OT: What’s up with Spain? Transport chaos as copper cables cut or stolen between Madrid and Seville…
https://x.com/larespuesta_es/status/1919496592408904010
Yes, classical liberalism is for losers.
Works great in homogenous Christian cultures (either actively Christian, or still living on the saved-up social capital) with no external enemies worth taking seriously.
Not up to snuff in any other circumstances. And tbh maybe a dead-end substitute religion even *in* those ideal circumstances.
“I thought for a long time that liberalism can be contained”
what’s your alternative that, unchecked, doesn’t lead to something just as bad or worse?
LikeLike
I agree on principle but in practice this always ends up with the government taking a side and beating everybody over the head with the values of a favorite interest group.
LikeLike
“in practice this always ends up with the government taking a side”
What’s the alternative?
I agree that drag queens should not be imposing their presence upon children (especially the grotesque and repulsive over-sexualized modern version, in theory I wouldn’t have a problem with a non-sexualized, non-grotesque Mrs Doubtfire-ish figure reading to children… though not being labelled as a drag queen).
But I’m incapable of religious faith, so what’s a good alternative to liberalism for me, especially since a society ruled by religion pretty much always ends up burning heretics (literally or figureatively)?
My idea is that different systems are needed to balance each other out… but what do I know?
LikeLike
https://blog.exitgroup.us/p/you-may-not-like-what-shiloh-hendrix
The liberal consensus is dead; what matters now is what comes after.
Ernst Junger published The Forest Passage in 1951, at the very dawn of the postwar liberal order. He recognized, as so many failed to, that all the managerial systems of the early 20th century were totalitarian — and that liberal democracy was, in some ways the most insidious, since it required not just obedience, but enthusiastic consent to function. The authoritarians could make you say the right things, but liberals demanded that you actually believe them.
The purpose of propaganda was not merely to convince you of particular propositions, but to draw the individual up into the world of global forces and conflicts in which he was totally helpless and insignificant — unless he joined himself to the superorganism and “did his bit”.
Today, we are at the twilight of that order — not because the tools of manufacturing consent have lost their potency, but because they are overpowering the institutions that created them.
Having effortlessly unraveled the old order, the postmodern organs of narrative generation are now powerless against themselves — every new attempt at “sense-making” instantly intercepted by swarms of counter-narrative.
The same tools that allowed the mega-states of the 20th century to mobilize millions are now empowering micro-mobilization in micro-conflicts — a million little tumors of power that are rapidly choking the state.
The dominoes – falling. Virtually all of Hamas – dead. The heads of Hezbollah – dead. The Houthis obliterate. The Syrian Assad regime collapsed. All of Iran’s anti-missile defense – destroyed. The balance of power in the Middle East, well the EU and Britain having kittens, relegated to a African 3rd world countries which can only slander and name call from afar…….. LOL
LikeLike
A conservative literary critic and college professor
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment