Previous 21 - 30 Next
In response to:

From Greatness to Whiteness

amirvish Wrote: Apr 22, 2014 9:18 AM
The Marxist paradigm remains alive and well and is so entrenched in the universities that most people - even those on the right who ought to know better - tend to frame their arguments in terms set by it. Marxism may be largely dead politically, but culturally, it is far from being so. And if that continues, it will soon be alive politically again.
Ms. Charen's general point about the Republican (and conservative and liberatarian) need to actually punch back should be taken seriously, and not just against the "war on women" meme. All too often, the right puts up nice candidates who might as well be punching bags. This was particularly true of Romney and McCain (although the latter was quite happy to punch back against other conservatives), and also George Herbert Walker Bush. It's a strategy for losing.
Feminists, especially young ones, have been in a permanent state of rebellion against a 1950s image that was never a reality. Just because Betty Friedan - with maids and a comfortable existence but a lousy marriage - was bored and frustrated doesn't mean everyone else was, or that every man was Don Draper. Dunst makes sense. Meanwhile, when the likes of Cameron Diaz - vapid if ever the word had meaning - prattles on about marriage being obsolete, or Gwyneth Paltrow divorces, sort of, and jabbers on oblivious to the level of self-absorption she exposes, everyone claims they're deep thinkers.
In response to:

The Left's Evolving Hierarchy of Rights

amirvish Wrote: Apr 06, 2014 11:19 PM
This correctly summarizes how the left has approached rights. Unfortunately, too many of those on the right have failed to recognize and uphold individual rights correctly either. Rights are legal recognition and protection of an individual's freedom of thought, and of non-violent, non-fraudulent action and association. Rights are not claims on anyone else's time, person, property, labor or good opinion. Short explanation: if someone else HAS to provide you with something they make or give, you do not have a right to it.
In response to:

Whose Side Is God on Now?

amirvish Wrote: Apr 04, 2014 5:10 PM
Well said.
Generally agree, but note that for much of our history our military, like our government, was smaller than virtually anyone else's - except on occasion the Navy. We had strong latent power based on all the other points that let us mobilize quickly when needed.
In response to:

Kristol Neoconservatism

amirvish Wrote: Mar 24, 2014 12:14 AM
Hoover was an interventionist and thus a fully-fledged neoconservative. Reagan, generally, was not. Irving Kristol is not a model for where the right ought to go today. There are no structural reforms that can make the welfare state work. It must be ended. And, there is no future for a me-to party that simply wants to drive over the cliff more slowly.
First of all, only some social or moral issues are also political and legal ones. Abortion involves issues of human life and thus is one that covers this range: if a fetus is a human being at a particular stage in its development - and objectively I think it is - then clearly whether it is protected or not is a legitimate point. Political and legal change, though, will requiring changing minds on this point first, just as Wilberforce did on slavery. Emphasizing this politically without first changing minds culturally is poor strategy. Similarly with gay marriage: the state has a certain interest in marriage but unless you win the broader debate first, you will fail to win politically. Other issues may or may not be both cultural and legitimate political issues. This doesn't mean giving up on social issues, it just means putting them in perspective and winning the right battles in the right sequence. We could win an argument about fiscal and personal responsibility and look to cut the welfare state. That would empower those who practice traditional values and penalize those who don't. It would force the latter to explain why their life choices should be subsidized. Likewise, we might win a reversal of no fault divorce on basic grounds of contract and fairness. So, let's pick our battles and, without renouncing certain issues, focus where we have to.
In response to:

Millennials Playing the Confidence Game

amirvish Wrote: Mar 14, 2014 12:51 PM
Not sure why Ms. Chavez makes the claim the traditional family was a stereotype no one wants to go back to. We have a lot of people who have no experience of that model but who have been told by the likes of Betty Friedan that it was a comfortable concentration camp, a horror to be avoided at all costs. Just like modern educators think emphasizing fundamentals means by rote learning and have no sense of how a traditional classroom actually functioned. They just know it's wrong. Now, not everyone was happy under those models, and there were some features to avoid, but there were also real strengths. Aristotle once noted you achieve real happiness by acting virtuously, not by doing the things that make you feel good. This is a lesson more than just today's millenials would do well to heed. I'd also take small exception to the claim about male-female education. Yes, more women are now graduating from college than men. I'd say that with two engineering degrees, I'm vastly better educated than a woman graduate of law school, journalism, business school, let alone or any of half a dozen fluff majors. Only the doctors and those in the sciences would compare, and most of the latter - outside of the life sciences - are men.
In response to:

War on Women

amirvish Wrote: Mar 11, 2014 11:42 PM
Now, if only John would turn his attention to the farce that is a coed military and all of the double and lowered standards established to ensure women "succeed" he would do us all yet another invaluable service. That would indeed be brave reporting, even for him.
Like it or not, the sexes are perceived as different and not just by people of the opposite sex. Ms. Sandberg et al can scream and shout all they want, but just because they think women should or should not be seen in a certain way doesn't mean other people are obliged to agree.
Previous 21 - 30 Next