Monday, 15 October 2018


“Fi­nally, we come to split­ting. Split­ting, or com­pulsive, neu­rotic re­order­ing of all per­sons and things as ei­ther good or bad, was orig­i­nally seen as a fea­ture of bor­der­line-per­son­al­ity dis­or­der. To such peo­ple it of­ten seems the cen­tral pur­pose of men­tal life. Now it’s widely un­der­stood to be the nor­mal be­hav­ior of the hu­man brain when wound up on so­cially con­structed ide­o­log­i­cal rage.”

Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. in Friday's Wall St. Journal

“At his po­lit­i­cal ral­lies, Pres­i­dent Trump has taken to call­ing out “the rad­i­cal De­moc­rats.” De­moc­rats are ap­palled at the Pres­i­dent’s rhetoric. We can’t imag­ine why. If the par­ty’s post-con­fir­ma­tion cam­paign against Jus­tice Ka­vanaugh isn’t a rad­i­cal de­par­ture from the norms of Amer­i­can pol­i­tics, we can’t imag­ine what is.”

Editorial, Wall St. Journal

“To es­cape poverty, you just need to grad­u­ate from high school, hold a job—any job, min­i­mum-wage job, full-time—and wait un­til you get mar­ried to have chil-dren. Nearly three-fourths of all peo­ple who fol­low those sim­ple rules are not poor.”

Heather Mac Donald
 in Friday's Wall St. Journal

"We are still relatively untroubled by anti-Christian fanaticism disguised as human rights militancy, because our mind traditionally associates fanaticism with religion and human rights with moderation. What brought the nineties of the last century into the ideological configuration of modernity was the legitimising of privileges for certain minority groups as claimed by activists in the name of the fundamental human rights. For example, making obscene gestures in public is classed under the Criminal Code as an offence against good morals. This does not apply when obscene gestures are made in a "Gay Parade": In these cases, the Criminal Code is suspended because gay people, through activism that assimilated human rights with the right to be homosexual, have earned the right (in fact, the privilege) to be obscene in public, which for everyone else remained a criminal offence.
How did we get here? Simple: through the activism of a militant minority on behalf of human rights based on Leninist principles. Naturally, it is not about fundamental human rights, which are universal, but about certain privileges that are discriminatory, which are pushed down the throats of the majority in order to make everyone feel guilty, with the help of a sophism of the following type: accept the privilege that we claim as a human right, we make peace; you do not accept it, we declare war, because you violate human rights. In this way marginal ideas (compared with those of society as a whole) are promoted as having to become mainstream. The majority give into emotional blackmail, vacate the centre, and in the void this frees up the marginal attitude is triumphant."

H.R. Patapievici, one of Romania's two leading intellectuals now that Neagu Djuvara is dead, September 2007 in "Idei în Dialog"

"Protestantism is in essence, under Calvin’s huge shadow, a conglomerate of one-man sects loosely held together by a common metaphysics."

John Carroll


  1. "Mitchum isn’t just a good Marlowe, he may be the Marlowe"

    “Farewell, My Lovely” is a 1975 Marlowe movie, a product of the 70s nostalgia boom. The early 70s liked the 30s...
    The movie avoids the clean, modern interpretation of the 40s for something shabby and inhabited, and it looks fantastic. Mitchum isn’t just a good Marlowe, he may be the Marlowe - older than the character was supposed to be, but man, he had everything that made Marlowe a hero: the rue, the reserve, the amusement, the quiet strength, the doggedness.

  2. The art of not reading is a very important one. It consists in not taking an interest in whatever may be engaging the attention of the general public at any particular time. When some political or ecclesiastical pamphlet, or novel, or poem is making a great commotion, you should remember that he who writes for food always finds a large public. — A precondition for reading good books is not reading bad ones: for life is short.

    “On Books and Writing – no. 16” in Schopenhauer: Essays and Aphorisms, trans. R. J. Hollingdale, (New York: Penguin, 1970), p. 210.


  3. Who is the second intellectual?