152 Comments

The current cant phrase that I hate the most is “ our democracy “. It’s more revealing than the MSNBC talking heads realize. It’s is “ their democracy “ and they want to keep it that way. “ Far Right “ has become meaningless. The same people who prattle about “our democracy “ are in a constant lather about the “ Far Right “. The Far Right are apparently anyone to the right of Christian Democrats, British Conservatives or Mitt Romney. There are actually are Far Rightists. In Hungary Jobbik ( although now they’re purportedly mainstream), in Ukraine- Azov and like groups. The old Italian Social Movement may have fit the bill as did the early iteration of the Swedish Democrats and the old German National Democratic Party. But Orban - who I have no strong feelings about and would likely not have voted for- is not Far Right. He’s not trying to turn Hungary into a facist state or pretending he’s Admiral Horthy reborn. He’s a somewhat authoritarian, somewhat conservative politician who has the nerve to stand up the insufferable Eurocrats. Can’t do that!

Expand full comment
author

I believe Jobbik has fallen apart. Its voters did not like that its leadership aligned with the Left in the 2022 election. The far right party now is Mi Hazank ("My Homeland").

Expand full comment

I did a little research and I think you’re pretty much right but what is amusing is most of the reporting on the Hungarian Far Right makes it clear that there are these groups to the right of FIDESZ who think Orbans basically a wuss but they still call FIDESZ - predictably- far right.

Expand full comment

As for me, the current phrase I hate the most is pretty much all of them.

Functionally, “far right” often means merely *liberal*. If you believe France is a nation, you are “far right”. If you believe in free speech and due process, you are “far right”. If anywhere you dissent from Today’s Diktat, you are “far right”.

“Disinformation”, as far as I can tell, means *inconveniently grounded information*. If an argument musters solid evidence, it is liable to be “disinformation”. Arguments that are NOT “disinformation” often prove it by being a) logically incoherent and b) unsupported by meaningful data. Go ahead and test this heuristic. It works.

“Racist” means …

But why go on? The entire vocabulary of our public square has been redefined so as to gaslight at scale.

Expand full comment

Disinformation is a weird word. Logically someone is using that word to mean, a lie. Except the people using that term seem adverse to using the word lie.Of course disinformation isn’t really lies. It’s assertions that may or may not be true that you don’t like because they don’t fit in with what you believe. So even truth can be disinformation. Truth is a minor thing here. What matters is the correct line.

Expand full comment

Do you know the "Five Myths" feature in the WaPo. "Tell me what to think, mommy."

Expand full comment

And that line keeps changing. Palestine is all of the rage at the moment. At a meeting last week, I noticed that a young woman had a Palestinian flag cell phone case. Even a cell phone case is now political.

Expand full comment

"Gaslight at scale" is an absolutely wonderful term.

Expand full comment

Agreed.

Expand full comment

Hey, I just realized we're in March. I'm still good to hang out, if you're done with last month's work and have the time.

Expand full comment

It's winding down a bit, but I probably need a couple more weeks. To say things are in flux is an understatement. Looking forward to a relaxed chat!

Expand full comment

I think that there should be a film called *The Disinformationist*, possibly starring Denzel Washington.

Orwell knew the score, of course: these people try to control language in order to control minds. We're dealing with black magicians here.

Expand full comment

No it would have to be an actor who looks like Trump and who during the course of the film is revealed to be a grown up version of Damien 666 plotting the election of

Expand full comment

Sorry got cut off- Eric Swallwell as president.

Expand full comment

I figured that he'd be the good guy, though. Maybe Mel Gibson could do it.

Expand full comment

On Denzel , you nailed it! He’s the good guy who at the end of the movie- says Damien I’m here to save our democracy from your evil plans. How dare you misrepresent Satan as other than a positive force, as a member of the Church of Satan I resent this. Then Denzel skewers Trump- Damien . The credits role while we hear Lift Every Voice and Sing on the soundtrack.

Expand full comment

I guess I'll wait for the Angel Studios version. . . .

By the way, have you heard about that upcoming movie *Civil War*? I saw the trailer yesterday. Almost seems in poor taste, although apparently it features a "Western Front" composed of an alliance between Texas and California—which is to say, it is so unrealistic as to possibly be okay.

Expand full comment

I was thinking a newspaper might be in order: The Daily Disinformer.

Expand full comment

Our mascot could be a fox. "Watch out, chickens."

Expand full comment

At last, an honestly named newspaper.

Expand full comment

I'm someone who prefers short words to long words-- "Black" to "African American", "gay" to "homosexual". I'll happily replace "disinformation" with "lie". But I will not stop calling out propagandist falsehoods for the malicious untruths that they are.

Expand full comment

Sorry "gay" is out , "queer" is in. 😄

Expand full comment

I'm conservative about such things. Gay it is.

Expand full comment

I was most definitely joking. “Queer” is a truly annoying term, not to mention inaccurate (it conflates very different people together).

Expand full comment

Yes, I agree about "our democracy." Interestingly, as the German government announced its plans for almost unbelievably authoritarian measures (see here: https://www.eugyppius.com/p/germany-announces-wide-ranging-plans), I noticed that the phrase "unsere Demokratie" came up - "our democracy." Probably just an example of American cultural power, though I have begun to wonder if all this illiberal stuff is not being cooked up in a room somewhere, and then distributed across the West.

Expand full comment

More or less.

Expand full comment

In a Kentucky meth shack, deep in the woods.

Expand full comment

Yes, memos are sent out by the State Department and it is a global influencing effort. Saves a lot of thinking too.

Expand full comment

I'm not so sure it's American cultural power. More likely globalist elites implementing their plan for their World Order. Covid and the Great Reset? Climate Change? Our Democracy? Whatever it takes.

Expand full comment

Yes: it is their democracy, not ours. They're basically bragging.

Expand full comment

NPR recently promoted a story about how "democracy" in Poland was undermined by the conservative Law & Justice party during the last 8 years and that the newly elected majority party, Civic Coalition, would need at least a full term to undue the damage. Get it? Eight years to destroy democracy but one election day to get voted out of power. Logically, makes little sense. Of course, the new PM, Donald Tusk, is pro-EU and whose views on abortion, LGBTQ "rights", NATO & Ukraine, align perfectly with the Brussels bureaucrats.

Expand full comment

I would wonder how these people don't feel any shame about their egregious abuses of language, but I already know the answer to that.

Expand full comment

These are a pretty limited number of issues that already have hegemony. Isn't this a bit pointless, like bouncing the rubble with more bombs.

Expand full comment

Another point to remember is that Central Europe is not Western Europe. The people are different ethnically, culturally and have their own distinctive European History, warts and all. When you go East of Berlin, the atmosphere is really different.

Expand full comment

NPR uses "far right" all the time, basically for anyone to the right of Hillary Clinton. But "far left" is a phrase you will simply never hear. For NPR no one, not Mao, not Castro, not Pol Pot could possibly be described as "far left". That implies you can go "too far" left.

Expand full comment

Correct. Lenin is left-of-center. Trostky is a moderate leftist. Stalin is a conservative leftist. Tony Blair and Nancy Pelosi are right-wing. Charles Schumer is a moderate. Trump is a fascist.

Expand full comment

You forgot the ™. It’s Our Democracy ™. Get it right!

Expand full comment

Student debt forgiveness: everybody on the correct side of this issue says, "Why should

I pay for a degree in gender studies" and that's disingenuous. Race poisons everything in this country, and the taboos (for once an accurate usage of that term) set up around the issue make meaningful discussion virtually impossible.

Expand full comment

Outflank the left from the left - propose that minorities and minorities alone get student debt relief.

Expand full comment

What, force them to come out in the open? Playing with fire. That's the endgame.

Expand full comment

I think that a universal jubilee sounds fun: cancel all the financial records, *Fight Club* style.

Expand full comment

NPR had a funny segment where they interviewed college kids who had soured on Biden, all in perfect stereotypes: Angry Black Girl, Whiny White Girl Almost in Tears, Gay Dude, etc (funny how this works even on the radio). Anyway I thought it was hilarious that they were furious and disappointed at Biden's efforts to erase student debt. The "president" (meaning his millennial staff) keeps whacking at that silly Constitution in a shameless vote buying scheme, the nasty old conservative Supreme Court keeps whacking them back into line, and the college kids don’t even appreciate the effort.

Expand full comment

Far right: there was an interesting if fruitless dust up on X last week when Peter Hitchens characterized the Nazis as left-wing racist authoritarians. You would have thought he said that Taylor Swift was overrated. "Right" and "left" are not very helpful any more in talking about politics. "Civilized" and "barbarian" might be more to the point.

Many people, including some people in these boxes, on the correct side of these issues go after Giorgia Meloni because she insists on operating within constitutional norms and thinks playing Brussels is more fruitful than defying it. If you think we're past that, then you'd better say so.

Expand full comment

NS Lyons wrote an interesting piece on political ideologies that Dreher posted yesterday. Pretty funny how similar Commies, Nazis and modern liberals are. Just a few nuances.

Expand full comment
Mar 2·edited Mar 2

Given the tax and spend policies adopted by the British and American governments after World War Two, the changes brought by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were necessary because both countries had stagnant economies by the 70s. We had economic growth and tax cuts in the 80s. But the Reagan-Thatcher policies created problems as well, the most notable being an affluence stunted towards a cognitive elite. The upper twenty percent of each country has a stupendous amount of the wealth in comparison to the rest. Much of the Left in each country did little to alleviate the unequal distribution of wealth mostly because many on the Left are part of that wealthy cognitive elite and almost everybody on the Left supports the radical social changes since the 1960s. The new conservative must create economic conditions that do a better job distributing wealth to the middle and lower classes and to conserve the real culture as best possible. Conservatives should turn our backs on those on the Right who think that 1985 can be lived forever.

Expand full comment

Both Reagan and Thatcher were indifferent to "social issues". Thatcher said so, Reagan was sly about it (Nancy wasn't). And they left their mark on both both parties. Mark Steyn tells the story that when Boris Johnson was editing The Spectator (yes, that happens over there) he was casting about for an issue to wrap himself around. Steyn suggested "social issues", and BoJo answered, "What, you mean abortion?"

Expand full comment
Mar 2·edited Mar 3

Thatcher famously said "That there was no such thing as society."

Expand full comment

No she said there is no such thing as society. There is a difference there.

Expand full comment

Thanks

Expand full comment

That was her problem. Like the scientist that she was, Britain was a nation with economic equations and not individual people. I don't know whether Maggie really loved her people. They were abstract.

Expand full comment

No more abstract than they are for Obama or “Biden”. It’s weird how liberals get brownie points for “caring” about “the people”. It’s absolutely laughable to believe, for example, that liberals see poor blacks as actual people with real needs and problems and failures. They’re just abstract symbols who are only real to the extent they’re expected to show up and vote for Democrats (and then shut up and disappear).

Expand full comment

I'm always mystified by how it's so hard for people to understand that new problems require new solutions, or that in the face of novel challenges, we must forge novel pathways. Ideology is one helluva drug, and people will apparently do just about anything to not look at reality.

Expand full comment

"Distributing wealth" sounds awfully Marxist to me. The concept is there is some fixed pie of "wealth" that God created, and we’re just cutting it up and handing it around. Oh how much trouble this concept that won’t die has gotten us into! I fail to see how my life is affected by whether Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk has 10x or 1000x or 1Mx as much wealth as I have. A better idea would be to concentrate on the sectors that are causing problems for people’s household economics. When you do that, it quickly becomes apparent that they are sectors that the government is over involved in, either running directly or controlling a large share of spending or mucking up with thousands of laws and regulations - things like housing, health care, education.

You can make a good living without being part of the cognitive elite. My plumber charges a lot more per hour than I do.

Expand full comment

Re: In Hungary, in both those cases, the downfall and punishment of both those Fidesz politicians was swift and sure. Says Pappin, “When I look at the American elite, I see no accountability for bad decision-making.”

I think there's a valid question as to whether scandals in one's personal life should sink a political career. The pedophilia case above is different from that: it involves law breaking and a strong whiff of inside dealing. I did not support the Clinton impeachment and do not support the Left's use of sexual scandalmongering against Donald Trump-- insofar as these are private matters that do not touch on the public trust we should leave them to the tabloids.

Expand full comment

Well, circumstances change judgments. Clinton ought to have been left alone (everybody in Washington knew he was simply unable to keep it zipped), but, on the other hand, the GOP ought to have had its license to practice politics taken away if it refused to make hay with it, and for that every reason: before Monica broke the Standard ran a Sean Delonis cover of Clinton as a centaur rampant among the nymphs in the Rose Garden.

"Bobby" has a sordid personal history, including, good Lord, heroin addiction. But what's the alternative?

Expand full comment

I'm ok with a certain amount of scurrility on the margins in politics. But dragging that onto the floor of Congress is too much.

Expand full comment

Yes, yes, the GOP bungled it. They always do. But nobody put a gun to Clinton's head and forced him to perjure himself.

Expand full comment

Personally, I find it very justifiable to lie in order to protect your privacy from people who have no business asking.

Expand full comment

Down here in Florida a recent law required local officials to publicize their finances. Many have refused and resigned from office., Some towns are having trouble getting anyone to serve in those offices.

Expand full comment

Finances and sexual escapades are incommensurate.

Expand full comment

One word: Epstein

Expand full comment

As I said above comitting crimes is different from having an illicit fling, gay or straight, adulterous or merely fornication.

But I'm also opposed to treating gossip, slander and innuendo as proven facts, and yes that includes stuff directed at Trump as well as at Clinton or anyone else.

Expand full comment

Clinton attempted to suborn perjury and lied to a judge, which was why his law license was suspended. Hardly just a private matter.

Expand full comment
author

I'm not sure what you mean by "lawbreaking" in the pedophilia case. The pardon was done legally. The scandal was that the president saw fit to pardon a man found guilty as an accessory to covering up that particular crime. The man who received the pardon is said to come from a family that was well connected within Hungarian Reformed Church circles, and who allegedly prevailed upon the Reformed bishop to influence the president (who is also Reformed, and a political protege of the bishop, when he was in government) to grant the pardon. It was politically disastrous, but no laws were broken in granting that pardon.

Expand full comment

But pedophilia is against the law. As I said the of the pardon gives the appearance of impropriety just like some of the shenanigans Catholic authorities pulled

Expand full comment

Rod, do you know how one applies for a Danube Institute visiting fellowship? There doesn't seem to be an explicit pathway on their website

Expand full comment
author

There isn't an explicit pathway. Write to me at roddreher@substack.com and I can tell you what to do, I think. I don't handle those but I know who does, and I can give you my estimation about the likelihood of succeeding in getting one.

Expand full comment

Thanks Rod.

Expand full comment

"The truth is — and this is something Pappin and Sayers touch in at the very end of their illuminating discussion — the era of Western crusading for global liberal democracy has come to an end."

Has it, though? Isn't this what the constant hubbub about Hungary is all about, American attempts to colonize the country ideologically?

It would be on thing if the United States were to criticize Hungary and then leave it alone. We won't leave it alone, though; we'll continue to defame, lie, obfuscate and cherry-pick in a continued attempt to convince Americans that HUNGARY BAD. What the hell does it matter to the average American whether Hungary "bad" or "good" - the average American could never even locate the country on a map. And yet here is generates all this attention from the left, primarily, which feels it must crush any conservative attempt to embrace the "Hungarian way."

Is it because that "way" poses a legitimate alternative - or threat - to the Western "Pride" ideology? Or is it just because the Left can't leave well enough alone and have to harass everyone - every nation - that doesn't share their "inclusive" agenda?

Expand full comment

"Has it, though?"

Depends on how we define 'liberal democracy'. If democracy is now illiberal, then such crusading is at an end.

Expand full comment

What the modern Left clerisy and their globalist backers requires more than anything is a revolving cast of Emmanuel Goldsteins, however implausible or distant.

There is only one narrative for them, the same morality play repurposed for each issue, whether personal or political: someone somewhere is a Deplorable bigot who dreams of either restoring the Third Reich or Jim Crow (or both), and the only way to fight this is to turn over our brains and our countries to our morally exalted "expert" class who are brave defenders of Justice and Our Democracy™.

In the personal realm this allows them to never climb down from their place at the apex of morality and wisdom, because "extremists" don't deserve debate or recognition, only demonization and expulsion from polite society.

In the political realm, this works like a coalition bw a pyromaniac and a Fire Dept: the media wing's job is to constantly create and cultivate "hate" EMERGENCIES!, which include everything from a stray noose on a tree limb or garage door to a regime-opposed protest by truckers and/or farmers to a distant European country electing a "far right" leader. Then our global NGOocracy steps up to rescue us from the danger by proposing speech codes, global surveillance, bans and cancellations, attempts to kick political opponents off the ballot, all to save the day and rescue us from the Hate Emergency du jour.

They do this and will keep doing this because it works, it helps them expand and consolidate power, and because most Westerners have been conditioned to submit when faced with the sharp edge of a bigotry accusation.

Expand full comment

At least so far no one's pulling a Henry Kissinger on Hungary.

Expand full comment
Mar 2·edited Mar 2

Unfortunately, most people on the Left have no intention of trying to understand what is actually going on in Hungary. Just look at the comments from any article about Hungary from the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Atlantic or even the Wall Street Journal. The comments are trite and pithy. "Orban and Hungary need to be kicked out of the EU!" "Orban and FIDESZ are fascists!" Anyone who tries to understand Hungary thoughtfully is probably not going to be someone from the radical Left. I've mentioned this before on this blog, but when some of my neighbors found out that I went to CPAC in Hungary, they called me a fascist. One neighbor who is third or fourth generation Ukrainian won't talk to me. One neighbor did ask about my experience at CPAC in Hungary, and I told him that there were three basic themes promoted: a man can't have a baby, you can't have open borders and you can't allow George Soros-funded district attorneys to ruin the cities. Pretty much common sense. I also have mentioned to those critical of Hungary that the mayors of four of the eight largest cities are members of parties other than FIDESZ showing that there is not a strangle hold on elections in Hungary. In one sense, Hungary is like Pennsylvania, my home state. Outside of Philadelphia, which is close in size to Budapest, it is fairly rural and conservative hence the moniker, Pennsyltucky. However, coming back to the eight largest cities in both Hungary and Pennsylvania, seven of the eight largest cities in Pennsylvania have been controlled by Democrats for decades, only Scranton has had a Republican mayor in office in the past ten years. Based on that information for the uninformed observer, Pennsylvania is Democrat, fascist state with a strangle hold on elections.

Expand full comment
author

Well said, Andy.

Expand full comment

Wear your ostracism as a badge of honor. Actually, although Hampshire County voted 79 % for Trump in 2020, my immediate neighborhood is majority left. Many are second homes for Washington lefties. My wife and I are pretty much despised. I could care less.

Expand full comment

Well, move to South Dakota, where you will be embraced by the majority.

Expand full comment

Too cold. I am the riff-raff that keeps South Dakota safe and clean.

Expand full comment
Mar 2·edited Mar 2

Speaking of disinformation, South Dakota is neither safe nor clean, but it's a nice advertising tool, isn't it?

Expand full comment

I can see you sitting on your porch like Clint Eastwood in “Grand Tarino”. Haha

Expand full comment

Budapest is literal paradise compared to Philadelphia

Expand full comment

It's awful what Philly has become. Even Rittenhouse Square is questionable these days.

Expand full comment

Purely informational, but "the government-aligned foreign policy institute" Pappin works for is the Mathias Corvinus Collegium, which received $1.2 billion from the Hungarian government in 2020. That sounds like the Collegium is a little more than "aligned".

Expand full comment

As usual Rod's analysis of the reasons for Orban's and Hungary's constant harassment and criticism is off the mark. The EU leadership is determined to turn the EU into a political dictatorship. The sooner the better. To do that it has to discredit, if not crush, nationalism in its membership. I'm not sure most of you are aware that the EU was created as anon-democratic institution. It has a parliament but the voting rules allowing multiple parties prevent any strong centralized group from emerging in opposition to Commission policies and it would make any real difference since the parliament cannot - I'll say it again - CANNOT initiate legislation, only say yes or no. The parliament is simply a place where. favored bureaucrats can make a lot of money doing absolutely nothing. The unelected elite run the EU and they are seeking new rules which solidify their power. Read The European Conservative regularly t (it's a lot more informative than Rod's substack but not as much fun since you can't comment) and find out what's happening. Take a look at what Donald Tusk is doing in Poland revamping the country's entire educational system to diminish, if not eliminate the study of Poland's history and culture nd focus on globalist values. Orban opposes the EU's attack on national values and that makes him the enemy of the EU. He is against third world immigration, multi-culturalism and and a variety of woke immoralities - in short everything that the EU has come to stand for - and for policies that improve not destroy the lives of his citizens. Country after country is being destroyed by third world immigration policies, whites are being subordinated in their own countries and the last thing the EU wants is for a leader of one of its members to highlight that. And America agrees with the EU is on the same path. but because of our federal system, we have a better ability to resist.

Expand full comment

I know we disagree on the Israel/Palestine conflict but You're completely on the money here. I know it's cliche but the EU is like the Borg from Star Trek. They want everyone to assimilate or die and believe resistance is futile to their "progress". Yes Donald you hit the nail on the head here.

Expand full comment

Thanks for your comment. I'm 86 so it may not happen in my lifetime but the EU will collapse. Germany which is or I should say was the bedrock of the EU is headed for a severe economic collapse and the EU becomes irrelevant without a strong Germany. . Germany cannot thrive without cheap Russian energy and that is gone forever, it is losing major portions of its export business with its major customer, China, and that will only get worse., its climate change policies are beyond insane, and they claim to be millions short in workers and the immigrants they are getting from the Middle East and Maghreb are as the English say not fit for purpose.

Immigration is literally destroying life in what used to be peaceful and reasonably prosperous countries like Sweden and the Netherlands. Farming through Europe is being destroyed for no purpose other than to satisfy the insane climate changers. DEI and climate change policies will destroy the continent. Poland which was an upcoming country will be decimated by Tusk for years to come.

Yes we do differ rather dramatically on Israel/Gaza and several other things and what surprises me is that you can so on the money on some subjects and so wrong (my opinion) on others. You evidence a lack of consistency. In any case, tomorrow is my last day and I hope Rod's subject lends itself to some final comments.

Expand full comment

From a man your age (I am 42), I will take that as a compliment. I would just say I have a unique, original point of view that is all my own. I spent about a year of my life in the former Soviet Central Asia and speak some Russian.God bless you sir. You are German?

Expand full comment

Catholic theology and UFOs:

https://youtu.be/AlMQf0ydV20?si=A3swUurmoEnmHFHM

Expand full comment

I'm concerned that Orban is starting to cozey up to Xi Jinping. maybe you could splain this?

Expand full comment

At this point, I'm not sure that Chinese hegemony would be a worse option than Western hegemony. They have serious problems, but they don't glorify and evangelize perversion, for example. When the EU treats you as the enemy, it makes total sense to look for a friend in China.

Expand full comment

Rest assured Chinese hegemony is worse than Eurocrat hegemony.Much worse. If you doubt it read up on the present status of Christians and Muslims in China . Remember the Uighurs, Tibetans and at this point the Mongols. China is at this point a national socialist state of a very ugly kind.The Eurocrats are pretty sickening but not on the level of the Chinese leadership.

Expand full comment

I said hegemony, not actual rule. I get the impression that the Chinese simply want power in the old-school way, and that they are relatively uninterested in making other nations adopt Commie ideology, so long as they pay fealty.

Expand full comment

This is a little complex. It depends upon what they actually think and what you mean by hegemony. A hegemon is a dominator . In more ways than one , I’d rather be dominated by Ursula von der Leyen than Xi ( not so much Macron).In the contemporary sense we tend to come to the concept of hegemony via Gramsci.( Gramsci capturing the institutions).So to what degree is the present Chinese leadership geared to that, in long run?Remember Chou en Lai’s apocryphal quote about the French Revolution- it’s too early to say.Leninism is still an ideological template for the Chinese leadership.Gramsci was the John the Baptist of Eurocommunism.So where does China and Xi fit in ? They’re quite aware and quite ready for the long march through the institutions being a very long march and ready to give out many a Trojan Horse.No LGBTQ plus Eurocrats beat that!

Expand full comment

My understanding is that China is not all that interested in the world outside of China, which they consider to be populated by irredeemable savages.

I'm sort of talking about the distinction between authoritarianism and totalitarianism, here. I think that the Eurocrats are more interested than the Chinese in imposing their ideologies on others and controlling minds and souls, as opposed to merely gaining power on the physical plane.

Again, I'm referring to China's attitude toward those outside of China, or China's idea of what belongs to them (such as Taiwan and Tibet). I just mean hegemony in terms of broad sphere of influence.

I also think that at heart, the Chinese are still basically Confucians—and that post-Mao, the Commie stuff is a rather superficial overlay. They still use the lingo, but the spirit of it just isn't there; and the brutality toward the perceived "Other" is just ordinary sin, one of the ways that a belief in hierarchical harmony could go horribly wrong.

Expand full comment

Don’t count on it. Pay some attention to the Chinese attitude to what is referred to their diaspora. The Chinese security agencies actively infiltrate these communities and expect them to support Chinese policies in their countries. Are the Confucius Institutes innocuous? Xi has made it clear that he’d like China to supplant the US as world hegemon. So right now the game is -oh we don’t care what you do we’ll loan you money? Have you had much experience with lenders? Ever met a loan shark?No the Chinese play a long game and of course bluff. It’s what you do in poker.

Expand full comment

“Therefore, it is reasonable to establish political and legal norms around the goal of protecting traditional families, their formation, and their flourishing.” Pappen’s assertion here is an articulation of what I really wish US politicians and thought leaders would express.

For all the blathering about “family values” on the US right, who has actually done anything to actually help family formation? Families are formed, after all, by young people. Presenting the traditional family as just one (and an officially disfavored one at that) “lifestyle choice” is corrosive to our culture.

Expand full comment

Great piece Rod. I listened to the podcast this morning. What impressed me most was his understanding of human frailty. Plus, Sayers was superb as as always.

Expand full comment

Freddie at Unheard was indispensable during Covid. I've been a fan ever since. Recently, he and his co-host Florence did a boots-on-the-ground report from San Francisco. Both were on high alert as they walked around the Tenderloin district where open air drug markets proliferate. Being two posh English youngsters, they received criticisms from the usual sources but rest assured -- the drug dealing and mentally-ill homeless are as bad as they reported.

Expand full comment

Says Pappin, “When I look at the American elite, I see no accountability for bad decision-making.” Isn't this why US institutions are not delivering?

Expand full comment

US conservatives like Hungary because it is a Western (largely Roman Catholic meaning Western Christian) light weight version of the nation they really want to publicly like (but cannot except for people like me who don't give a damn what other people think) and that is the predominantly Orthodox Christian Russia led by Vladimir Putin. They liked Poland for the same reason until the Globalist Tusk came back to power in that country. Modern day Russia is the ultimate example of militant, unapologetic National Conservatism with a deeply Christian foundation and heritage. While Churches are emptying out and being abandoned, demolished or turned into roller rinks (or worse) in the West they are still being built and rebuilt throughout Russia. Russia is one of the last places in Europe where True Christianity is actually safe and secure, protected by the state.

https://youtube.com/shorts/H19uVf3li5Q?si=ZmYRjHr_RNAn89jE

Look at this video. This Orthodox priest is leading Russian soldiers in prayer (probably near the battlefront in Eastern Ukraine). They are kneeling before an icon of Our Lord and Savior and Sovereign King Jesus the Christ. This while the governments in Washington, London and Brussels push homosexual and transgender ideology in their nations, through their institutions and even in the elementary schools and now even in their military. If I am a True Believer in Jesus Christ which side should I be praying should win the war in Ukraine? The godless perverted West and their Russian hating puppets in Kiev (who have outlawed the True Orthodox Church in Ukraine led by Metropolitan Onuphrey) or Russia who have not only allowed for but helped fund and promote the rebuilding of Orthodox Temples throughout the Motherland where Orthodox Chaplains lead Russian soldiers in prayer in the war zones? It's no contest to me. I want the Russians to win and the godless to be knocked off of their pedestals.

So yes by all means support Viktor Orban and his vision for Hungary. It's about as good of a vision as you will find in the West these days I will absolutely give you that. However many of us know who you really wish the Western nations would emulate even if you still want to think of the Russians as uncivilized, uncultured barbarians of the steppes. Many of you don't want to admit that Russia have a civilization and culture that rivals any in the West and has done so for centuries now and while you folks are losing (or have largely lost) your cultures and civilization to liberal fundamentalism and global capitalism. Your (my) Western Civilization is dying. Russian civilization is still intact and in many ways thriving. Admit it folks! You know it's true!

Expand full comment

Re: This Orthodox priest is leading Russian soldiers in prayer (probably near the battlefront in Eastern Ukraine). They are kneeling before an icon of Our Lord and Savior and Sovereign King Jesus the Christ.

I'm supposed to be pleased that the Orthodox faith has been bullied and bribed into blessing the murderous evil of an unjust war? I'd rather see the Rainbow Flag over a pile of mangled corpses than the icon of the Theotokos.

Oh, and it reason the truth that Russia's social social dysfunction stats (abortion, prostitution, addiction...) make America's look idyllic. Moscow is lot farther from the New Jerusalem than New York City is. Russia's "morality" is a Potemkin creation of Putin's propagandists.

Expand full comment

Go kneel before the Rainbow flag then, I won't. You all live in nations who's governments built Empires upon mountains of skulls yet you dare point the finger at Russia for daring to resist Western Imperialism and Hegemony and taking up arms to defend their own historical Motherland! This while our own governments and leaders destroy our own Motherland and Civilization and we sit here and do nothing except say at least we are not Bad Old Russia! I got nothing but love and respect for the Russians. I became Orthodox among the Russians. If we had more Western Christian men willing to fight and die for what was once Christendom we would still have our Civilization. Nah instead our great grandfathers went off to fight and die not for the Cross, not for Christendom but for "liberalism" and "democracy" and look where it's led us! Now we want to be pacifists and say, "Well you know His kingdom is not of this World so we'll just sit here and do nothing as they destroy everything good and come for our children". If it wasn't for the example of brave Christian warriors (like these Russians in that video) I'd become a Muslim.

Expand full comment

You misread my comment totally.

Expand full comment

You call Orthodoxy in Russia, "Potemkin", I'm willing to bet you've never been to Russia. The Orthodox Faith runs deep throughout in Russia (which includes Belarus and most of Ukraine). I get it you don't like Vladimir Putin or Patriarch Kirill. You'd probably happy with a liberal Europhile Russian leader who was subservient to the West. You'd probably likewise be happy with a passive Russian Patriarch who'd shrug at Bartholomew overstepping his ecclesiastical jurisdiction and claiming authority over Orthodoxy in modern Ukraine. My suspicion has been for awhile now (especially since the post-Cold War, US led West has become increasingly hostile towards Russia) that many Orthodox converts in the West (I am a Western convert to Orthodoxy as well just so everyone knows since 2009) have converted to Orthodoxy are Orthodox primarily in their heads. They like the idea of Orthodox Christianity, they like it's antiquity, they like it's universality and it's mysticism) but Western Converts to Orthodoxy often seem to remain loyal to the Western Liberalism of the Civilization they grew up in and forget that when they become Orthodox they are joining not just a Faith but a different Civilization that for almost a thousand years now (since the Great Schism of 1054 AD) that's for the entirety of that history (to the present day in the conflicts in Ukraine, and in Syria) has been in a state of perpetual war with the West in one form or another not because it has sought out conflict with the West but because the West has for a millennia now sought to conquer, subjugate,.exploit and convert the Orthodox East. If you don't understand that then you don't understand the deep roots of the current conflict (which President Putin explained to Tucker Carlson in that interview) and you'll never truly understand Russia or even Serbia or Greece. I understand this. I understood this before I converted to Orthodoxy from Traditional Roman Catholicism. It's actually one of the reasons it took me so long to convert to Orthodoxy because I was (and am still in many ways) a man of Western Christendom. To be Orthodox is to be the enemy of Western Christendom (post schism). I understood that completely and it was hard for me to choose the Orthodox side for precisely that reason even though in my heart and mind I believed Orthodoxy to be the One True Faith a full 14 years before I was finally chrismated Orthodox in a Russian Church in the former Soviet Union. Understand where I'm coming from now?

Expand full comment

Once again you show poor reading comprehension. I most certainly did not call the Orthodox Church a fake! I called the pretense that Russia is somehow a beacon of virtue a fraud since even those stats on social dysfunction the Russian regime admits to are far worse than such things are in the US. Russia leads every nation in the world in abortions! It has the highest HIV infection rate in Europe. 73% of Russian marriages end in divorce. It leads the world in male alcoholism (Hungary is 2nd), and is second only to Australia in female alcoholism. Its prostitution rates (206 per 1000 women) is the highest in the world (Venezuela and Latvia are tied for 2nd with 150 per 1000).

This is not a country whose morals on the ground one can admire.

Expand full comment

Russia is indeed still healing from 75 years of godless Communist rule.You can't undo four generations of atheist materialism in a generation or two. Orthodoxy hasn't been Russia's official religion since 1917. It's not the official religion now, even though it has much greater freedom to operate in society than in Soviet times. It's going to take awhile and it's going to take persistence of the Church. Just like how the Woke want to catechize Western school children in progressive Wokeism so must Orthodox catechize young Russians in the Faith. I mean you went to Catholic school didn't you Jon? You don't learn the Faith through osmosis you must learn the Faith, you must be taught the Faith. This is happening in Russia, slowly, slowly. It takes time. Public schools are still secular.

It takes time for Christianity to soak into a society that has been atheist as long as Russia has. It's the same in my wife's country (which is a predominantly Muslim former Soviet Republic). People are still learning Islam. Slowly but surely young Uzbeks are coming to the Mosque and praying Namaz five times a day. Slowly but surely women there are covering there heads with a scarf or hijab. Slowly but surely they are learning to read and recite the Quaran. These things take time, but they're happening. Does this mean people aren't still out there drinking vodka and eating pork kebabs? No, the old Soviet culture has not been completely been uprooted in former Soviet Central Asia and a lot of the locals actually like it that way.

Expand full comment
Mar 3·edited Mar 3

You misread my comment totally.

I wasn't going to bother to explain, but I suppose I should.

The rainbow flag is a profane icon. War and slaughter are profane acts. Let profane things "bless" profane acts. Do not seek to sanctify what is irredeemably wicked with sacred things.

Expand full comment

Blessing soldiers going off to war is nothing knew to Christianity. American priests and pastors did it in nearly conflicts American soldiers fought in. It's definitely not knew to Orthodoxy. Look at Byzantium. Look at Tsarist Russia. Were they wrong?

War is profane? War is evil? Sometimes war is necessary to protect that which is sacred. You remember that old Kenny Rogers son The Coward of The County where the Gatlin boys accosted Tommy's woman Becky.."Sometimes you have to fight when you're a man."

Expand full comment

There are many things of value in the Christian religious tradition. The attitude "Onward Christian Soldiers" is not one of them

Expand full comment

And what of Saint Constantine (the First Christian Emperor of Rome)? What of Saint Justinian the Great (the Byzantine/Eastern Roman Emperor)? What of the first Christian Tsar of Russia, Tsar Prince Vladimir? What about the Prince of Novgorod, Saint Alexander Nevsky?

Expand full comment

'This Orthodox priest is leading Russian soldiers in prayer (probably near the battlefront in Eastern Ukraine). They are kneeling before an icon of Our Lord and Savior and Sovereign King Jesus the Christ. This while the governments in Washington, London and Brussels push homosexual and transgender ideology in their nations, through their institutions and even in the elementary schools and now even in their military. If I am a True Believer in Jesus Christ which side should I be praying should win the war in Ukraine?'

Depends which Jesus Christ you believe in, I suppose. Is it the one who instructed his followers not to resist evil, and who willingly went to his own death? The same one who instructed us to love our enemies? The one who told the story of the Good Samaritan? Or is it a newly muscular, militarised, entirely worldly 'Jesus Christ' who just happens to be a 'national conservative', and is happy to sprinkle holy water onto tanks about to invade neighbouring countries? I suppose at least this fictional American right wing Jesus likes to kick the queers when they get uppity, which is the main thing.

Yeah, let's bring on the holy war. The Devil will be happy to hear the news.

Expand full comment

To resist the Devil and his forces is evil? Because the West has fallen. It is no longer Christian. It serves Satan. They're erecting shrines to Satan in places like state houses in Des Moines of all places (the American Heartland). Russia has decided not to be overrun by the godless, Satanic West. Are they wrong? I think not.

Expand full comment

You seem to be very clear on who is evil and who is good. Who serves God and who the Devil.

Of course, it is you who serves God. And you are just sure, aren't you, that anyone you diasgree with or dislike - the Muslims, the gays, the atheists - are all servants of Satan.

It's such a basic trap but it's still surprising to see it in action.

Have you read the Gospels at all?

Expand full comment

Yes I've read the Gospels. You can't tell me that there's a moral equivalency between the United States government (or the UK or EU) and the Russian government right now. One defends Christianity and the Traditional Family while the other is hell bent on it's destruction. There's no equivalency between those two. One is on the right path although not perfect (there no perfect government), the other is on the path to Hell and trying to drag the rest of us and the entirety of the World with it. I like you Paul. I respect you and your opinion. You can't see the truth in what I'm saying?

Expand full comment

I think you have bought into what the Russian government wants you to think. They present themselves as defenders of Christianity. But it's Pharisaical. It's all surface. Patriarch Kyrill is a former KGB buddy of Putin's, and the state in Russia has done what it has been doing since the days of Peter the Great - co-opting the church for its own agenda, in order to bring along the masses of people, by convincing them its actions are 'Christian.' Even Stalin ended up realising this was good politics.

But is it 'Christian' to launch an unprovoked war on a neighbouring country? A war that has so far killed at least 50,000 *Orthodox Christians* in both countries? What does that have to do with gay marriage in the West? How can it be 'Christian' to launch any war at all - especially a territorial one - in the name of a man who instructed us *specifically* not to resist evil, to respond to violence by asking for more of it, and to love our enemies even as they hate us?

These are serious questions. When I read the gospels I see no justification for any of this. It's why I think it's a trap. I also dislike the Western collapse, the attacks on the family, etc etc. But I am not going to respond by romanticising any other worldly regime. The fact that you might not like transgenderism does not mean you need to line up behind Putin - or anyone else.

The kingdom is not of this world - this is the main thing I take from the gospels, always. We get dragged to hell when we give in to hatred and fear, and start calling for the death of our enemies. Christ died to teach us another way. A harder one. I don't pretend to be good at following it, but it's clear.

Expand full comment

Paul. I have to admit you're disappointing me my friend. I thought you'd be politically more sophisticated than this. You're showing me the usual Western naivete when it comes to all things Russian related these days. That's ok, not all of us are geopolitical/real politik junkies with a pulse on how history ties into current events (I have been since NATO bombed the Orthodox Serbs in the 1990's). That opened my eyes to a lot of inconvenient truths about the West ,Western Imperialism, historical Western aggression towards the Orthodox East and this whole history going back to the Great Schism of 1054 AD (only about 75 years after the Baptism of the Rus in the waters of the Dnieper River).

I've never been the same since. I've always been since then cynical of US/NATO foreign policy. I've always been skeptical of the Western MSM and everytime my cynicism and skepticism on those regards has proven to be right. I was right about the catastrophe that was the Iraq War. The only one I got wrong was 9/11. I blamed all Muslims and Islam for 9/11 at the time but the more I dwell on the facts the more I'm convinced my own government either did it themselves or allowed it to happen to give them causus belli to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, to enact the Patriot Act and conduct this endless and unconstitutional War on Terror with detrimental effects on the Constitutional Rule of Law and the Civil Liberties (championed in the Bill of Rights) for every American. You remember the Russian-Georgian War of 2008. You know who gave Mikhail Sakashvilli the Green Light to launch a war against the Russian backed breakaway Republics of Abkhazi and South Ossetia (I had just returned from the former USSR when this happened)? Washington did. The Bush Administration did. You know why? It's because the Bush Administration wanted the Republic of Georgia in NATO but this could not legally happen (by NATO's own charter) until Georgia had full control over it's territorial borders. That war showed me outright Western Media lies because I had been watching Russian news stations for sometime at that point and I saw that the Western MSM was taking footage of the Georgian attacks on the capital of South Ossetia and claiming it was a different city within Georgia proper in territory that was undisputably Georgian. These were outright lies. The initial Georgian attacks killed several Russian soldiers, what would the US or UK had done if it had been their own soldiers instead of Russian ones in a similar scenario?

I breathed a sigh of relief when Obama was elected (I voted for Ron Paul) only to be horrified when Obama launched another war (with our NATO allies of course, the usual suspects)to overthrow Mummar Ghaddafi in Libya. They destroyed Libya with civil war in the wake of Ghaddafi's brutal demise (that Hillary Clinton laughed about). Libya is in shambles. Scores of thousands dead.

That wasn't enough though. Syria was next on the list. Bashar Al Assad had to go. So once again Washington and the Usual Suspects set about setting Syria on fire in an absolutely savage civil war where Western Intelligence agencies partnered with people we would have been calling Al Qaeda Jihadists 10 years earlier and set them loose on that country (where they butchered non-Sunni religious minorities including Christians) like slaughtering sheep. Our governments did that Paul. Christian villages were wiped off the map, the only reason there are still Christians in Syria today is because Bashar Al Assad has friends in Moscow and Tehran and together Russia (especially the Russian Air Force)and Iran and allied Shia Militias (especially Hezbollah) intervened in Syria and largely defeated ISIS and Al Nusra and the like. We still don't know how many have died in that war but the lowest estimates were at a half a million with higher estimates over a million (many of whom were peaceful Syrian civilians). The great moral, democracy loving Western Powers did that to Syria. For what? Was any moral justification for it? Of course not. It's what the Neocons wanted (plus the Israelis were getting a little nervous about Assad's close relationship with Iran). You remember Russia was responsible for stopping (in the UN security council) the US/NATO push to "intervene" in Syria like they did in like they did in Libya. Washington never forgave Moscow for that.

What happened next? Well the United States Government (and probably British Intelligence as well) decided to get revenge on the Russians. 2014 Maidan Coup. A mildly pro Russian, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych is driven from power and Victoria Nuland is in there saying who Washington wants in the "new" US/NATO friendly Ukrainian Government that Washington invested 5 billion dollars to get. What happened next anyone could have predicted. Moscow had always said Ukraine in NATO is an existential threat to it's own National Security. Ukraine has a large Russian speaking population, many of whom consider themselves (and always have considered themselves to be Russian Orthodox peoples). Crimea was one of these places and also a vital strategic importance to the historic Russian Black Sea Fleet going back to the 18th century. Of course the Russians (who already had a large military presence in Crimea) weren't going to give back this historically Russian territory of vital strategic importance (Russia's only warm water fleet) to a now US puppet regime in KIev. So Putin's Little Green Men took Crimea back with almost no bloodshed at all and with full support of the local population who always considered themselves to be Russian.

That's when Washington and Kiev (and probably the Brits and Eurocrats) got worried that all of Novorosiya (as most of the Russian speaking territories of Eastern and Southern Ukraine were known as) would go the way of Crimea. Pro-Russian opposition to the Kiev Junta was predictably springing up not just in the Donbass (Lughansk and Donetsk Oblast) but in historical Russian cities and regions like Kharkov and Odessa. That's when Washington/Kiev/NATO launched the War in Donbass which they called the ATO (Anti Terrorist Operation). This is also when Ukrainian Ultra Nationalists burned to death 45 or so Pro-Russian protesters in the historical Russian city of Odessa when they barricaded them inside the Trades Union building and set it ablaze. They unleashed these Ultra Nationalist (including outright Nazis) paramilitary groups on anyone they suspected to have Pro-Russian sympathies. That's why they crushed any insurgency before it got started in places like Kharkov and Kherson and Odessa. They weren't so lucky in the Donbass where the tough coal miners (it is a region of coal miners and steal mills) took up arms (probably with Russian help) against the US backed Kiev Junta.

The ATO or War in Donbass raged in 2014 and 2015 (until the Minsk Accords which the West beguiled Russia into signing but never intended to implement). The Donbass Rebels (with Russian support and volunteers and sometimes Russian military intervention) were winning major battles. Then the Accords were signed but skirmishes continued right up until the Russians actually invaded in February of 2022. Most of the civilians who died between 2014 and 2022 were civilians in the Pro-Russian breakaway territories of Lughansk and Donetsk the the LDNR (Lughansk Donetsk Norodny Republika, meaning Peoples Republic). 14,000 deaths, thousands of dead civilians most of them from the LDNR which was under siege by the US backed Kiev Junta.

Expand full comment