We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Wednesday, November 18. 2020
I am obliged to confess that I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University. Not, heaven knows, because I hold lightly the brainpower or knowledge or generosity or even the affability of the Harvard faculty: but because I greatly fear intellectual arrogance, and that is a distinguishing characteristic of the university which refuses to accept any common premise.
William F. Buckley Jr.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I feel the same way about actors.. I'd rather see 2000 random people chosen to be the actors in all of the movies, TV shows and plays, than the current batch of weirdos and freaks who portray themselves as being "Stars" and Idols to be emulated.
I don't know enough about acting to know whether or not someone off the street could do a better job acting. What I DO know is that while many actors consider themselves to be astute analysts of the political scene, and consider it their duty to inform the public about their political views, most actors know as much about politics as they do about quantum physics.
One reason why someone off the street could do a better job of political analysis than an actor is that group-think on politics appears to be much stronger for actors than it is for someone off the street. That doesn't mean that group-think on politics doesn't exist for the man in the street, but that it isn't as strong as it is for Hollywood.
ANY bi-polar person could be a good actor. Zero doubt! And likely 90% of all known actors are bi-polar.
I write as a professor myself.
I think Buckley is absolutely right!
Most academics create an inverted pyramid of ideas based on a single good point (that they made in their 20s)!
Practical men (of both sexes) on the other hand, consult their experience as to human nature and the give and take of human existence. They seek to rub along and live their lives as they wish, not to force everybody to act out some wonderful abstract principle.
I've spent a lot of time around teachers and college professors, and I've noticed the phenomenon of "intellectual arrogance". It's a strange thing, because (in the British university tradition, at least) the more educated a man, the more he's willing to consider a wide variety of ideas. The best Professors are the ones who are polite and patient. They don't fear ideas, because they don't have to. In fact, they enjoy a good banter with a young up-and-coming intellectual. The problem occurs when the Professors don't mature to a level which is congruent with their station in life. A man can learn philosophy, and still be a jerk. So how can Professors be made more worldly in the Alfred North Whitehead, or Francis Bacon, or Bertrand Russell sort of way? Those characteristics imply refinement and depth of character; which are masculine, Anglo Saxon traits. So I suppose to create those sort of men, we must first re-create that sort of society.
Just for fun, I checked YouTube for a "Good British Men" video. There aren't any good British men videos. Only bad British men.
If you are not familiar with Hardcore History, it is a podcast narrated by Dan Carlin. I'm listening to the one on the "Celtic Holocaust". He starts out asking, what are you willing to die for? It's one thing to risk your own life, but what of your loved ones? What if your sons were to be executed along with any young children and your wives and daughters were to be sold into slavery? What if you were given the choice between living, albeit miserably, and the annihilation of your culture, what would you do? Of course, in hind sight, despite Caeser's and the best efforts of later Emperors, we know Celtic mores persisted for several hundred more years until the Highlanders and the Irish were at last Germanized and Romanized by the English.
I tried a few of Carlin's and he does do his homework, but he gets out over his skis a lot with his interpretations. I recommend "Tides of History" with Patrick Wyman. He did a couple of years on the Fall of Rome, then another three on the Middle Ages, and has just now started doing prehistory. If you want the interesting contrast history, he is a USC PhD in hisotry who is also an MMA writer.
cont from #3, I had to break this comment apart, in order to post it.
But, setting aside the later day Celts, at least, you could make the case, that Roman subjugation was positive and offered advantages. I don't think this is true of what 2020's Progs have to offer Middle America. To me, the future they offer seems inferior, subpar, a step backwards. It's not even Socialism – the working class, public ownership of the means of production, even decreasing income inequality – this doesn’t look like the focus of today’s left. Whatever the Left’s agenda is, it is more global corporatist, or post-socialism than socialism. It seems like it’s more about a privileged class enjoying its privileges and claiming power in the name of its own idea of the common good, more than anything else. It is characterized by corporate Americas instinctive hostility to privacy, individual rights, freedom of expression, etc.
These people do not wish Working America, well, at all, in any way, any more than their Chinese mentors do.
The Manhattan Contrarian is not as gentle as Buckley.
WFB, the CIA controlled-oppo plant, should have changed his last phrase from :
"common premise" to "common sense!"
More accurate and more meaningful at the same time!
Seriously? If you're going to be governed by a random group of people, Pick people from the heart land, people from fly over country.
Real average Americans.
It was a reasonably average group when Buckley made the comment, even though it is not now.
The new normal
If you have any doubt that the MSM is part of the Democrat party look at all these headlines telling you the same thing. "Time to heal". Just remember this in case Trump's lawyers can prove the election was stolen and Trump really won. I want to see every news outlet repeating the mantra "Time to heal".
Oops, here it is:
True when Buckley said it, true now with one exception: What's a telephone directory?
I haven't seen a phone book in years. With the advent of cell phones, the amount of residential land llnes has diminished to the point where phone books are useless, as is 411 for personal phone numbers.
Gad. I hadn't even noticed that the statement has far less meaning now than when I first read it.
You don't have to ask them. They are like vegans, they will tell you within the first ten seconds how much smarter they are.