Zmirak embraces the term "Christian Nationalist" which is the newly-coined slander from the Hoity-Toity Coastal Crowds and the moronic Christopher Wray. Look for it, on sale, at your friendly NYT/WaPo/TeeeVeeeeee store. (It helps when you remember they hate you.)
...The term of abuse getting used by those want the FBI monitoring biblically faithful churches (instead of, I dunno, Islamist mosques) as likely hotbeds for terrorism? “Christian Nationalist.”...
...we should go with “Christian Nationalist,” and explain in calm detail exactly what we mean. What’s so poisonous about Nationalism, anyway? As Israeli scholar Yoram Hazony explains in his brilliant work of original political philosophy, The Virtue of Nationalism, it’s a concept with a mostly noble pedigree....
... Nationalism is the Golden Mean, the middle way between two historical extremes. On the far right, you might say, is Tribalism. That’s the political system based entirely on kinship and proximity. Tribalists only care about, sacrifice for, or promote the interests of, people who look just like them or live right near them. Tribalism produced the political chaos and constant wars of the American Indians, the Renaissance Italians, and today’s unhappy Syrians. You can base Tribalism on perceived racial kinship, as white supremacists do. But you can also ground it in something else, such as regional separateness, or politicized religion, like the Irish Republican Army.
At the opposite, left extreme is world-straddling Globalism, or (more candidly), Imperialism. Imperialists want to impose the same system of values, the same ruling elites, and the same economic/political system on people across the world. History tells of religious Imperialists, like the Muslim Brotherhood. But there were also racial Imperialists, like Genghis Khan and Hitler. And ideological Imperialists like Josef Stalin, and today’s President Xi of China. American neoconservatives, it’s clear, were horses of just this feather. ..
Looks good to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment