Doesn’t just bow to its inevitability, but positively embraces it as something wonderful. See Mr. Fincioen’s article–I refuse to link to it. I’m not sure if he officially speaks for the magazine, but the fact that such an abomination was allowed to be published shows that the Brussels Journal (BJ) is mutating into a Leftist outfit.
And here my opinion of the BJ had just been going up after they published one of rkirk’s excellent essays (to which I’ll happily link). It seems that the ham-fisted indoctrination in European schools of which he speaks, particularly its enthusiasm for sexual perversion, has come to influence the BJ itself.
Filed under: pseudoconservatives |
Throne and Altar 
People on the right seem too concerned with fitting in, a thought that came to mind when reading your post on communist sex appeal. Unfortunately an appeal to the majority will generally lead to a shift toward the left. Why, I’m not entirely sure. Donoso Cortes suggested that the masses are easily swayed by malicious opinions and he cited Christ’s trial to suggest that the Bible is against democracy.
I suppose that 1 Kings 19.18 could also make it clear that the number of those immune to the malady of our times is rather small.
People on the right seem too concerned with fitting in
I really like John Zmirak’s take on this phenomenon. He calls it the self-purification of marginalized groups:
Zmirak:
You see, one of the most dominant motives in any socially stigmatized group . . . is self-purification. One tries to wash away the taint that your opponents have attached to you by finding someone within your own movement who is more distasteful, more extreme, more socially maladroit, then denouncing him. Best of all if you can lead the chorus of ostracism.
Bill, I try to do this in reverse by finding someone less extreme, more moderate and sensible, and trying to antagonize them in order to purify the political right.
😛
Thanks for the linkage and compliments. I obviously disagree with Fincioen about this, and I’d be willing to bet that most of the people who read and write for Brussels Journal do as well. The writers represent a huge range of viewpoints, so their opinions aren’t neccessarily editorial positions of the blog as a whole. On the one hand they have pieces like, say, the recent one on René Guenon; on the other they have the plain-james neocon stuff. (An upcoming Brussels Journal piece of mine actually touches somewhat on said neocon stuff and pseudoconservatism, although it’s not a response to Fincioen.)
Thanks for reminding me of Zmirak’s description of this phenomenon, which seems spot-on to me too. It’s interesting that we only seem to see this phenomenon on the Right.
Hi rkirk (Is that what you still prefer to be called?),
Right now, I’d agree that BJ is a mixed bag. On the other hand, I suspect that, absent significant pressure from the genuine Right, any eclectic group will be driven by the desire for outside respectability to be swallowed by neoconnery and digested into liberalism. Hence, my slightly unfair compaints and denunciations will continue.
Congratulations on your recent articles, by the way.
Hello Bonald, and thank you again for the compliments. Rkirk is fine. I think you’re right about the dangers of swaying leftward, largely for the reasons outlined in Mark’s and Bill’s comments and in your post about communist sex appeal. Ideological purity is one area in which the examples set by the Left have a lot to teach us.