BRUCE LERRO—While the forces of modernization may have weakened religious beliefs, the doctrines, myths, rituals, and entire architecture of religion (specifically monotheism) were reorganized and used in the name of a secular political religion: nationalism. Beginning in the 19th century, individualists were expected to renounce loyalty to class, ethnicity, and region – not so they could be “free as a bird,” but also to become bound to a new secular community of strangers serving the state. Citizens may gain political rights, but that is far from the end of the story. The socialization into nationalism has been an enormously successful project of the 19th-century ruling classes. Individualists were mobilized to fight and die in wars to prove their patriotism. The reality is now that stateless individuals are not allowed to exist anywhere in the world.
BOURGEOIS VALUES
-
-
PATRICE GREANVILLE—These periodical performances before Congress are not good for the hoi polloi. They mislead the masses and actually hide the true mechanics of power. At best, these politicians’ and bureaucrats’ well-remunerated minuets are, like the shadows in Plato’s cave, only rough and remote approximations, not of a reality, but of an ideal perhaps impossible to realize without the benefit of revolution. Thus, the fake verbal duels and posturings will never yield a reliable representation of the actual power structure that oppresses the majority, nor of the ominous direction it is moving.
-
THOMAS FAZI—Javier Milei, Argentina’s self-styled “anarcho-capitalist” president, enjoys an almost Christ-like status among heterodox conservatives and MAGA-style Right-wingers, almost on a par with Trump himself. Like lovestruck teenagers, a certain type of conservative drools over Milei’s over-the-top mannerisms and “based” speeches against “libtards” and “communists”.
There is, however, a problem: aside from his questionable hairstyle and swamp-draining rhetoric, Milei actually has very little in common with Trump. For all his faults, Trump stood on a platform that rejected the neoliberal orthodoxy that had defined the Republican Party ever since the Reagan era. Trump’s agenda, by contrast, was markedly anti-libertarian: he advocated economic nationalism and protectionism, lambasted globalisation, promised to protect social welfare programmes, vowed to support local industries, and even courted the labour movement.
-
EDITOR—Sabby comments on the grotesquely disproportionate complaints and whining proffered by Zionist apologists over a speech that, wile well-intentioned, and even courageous, considering the venue, was nowhere near clear and strong enough to convey the main points. Jonathan Glazer didn’t even utter the word genocide. Instead, he nervously read something that sounded like classic “bothsidism”.
-
EDITOR—Sabby presents the “debate” between “Rabbi” Shmuley —a shameless Zionist propagandist—and Norman Finkelstein, first aired on the Piers Mrgan show, with Shmuley, as usual, trying to buffalo his opponent, while Norman remains absolutely calm in the face of a torrent of ad hominem provocations. Piers Morgan doesn’t help much as a moderator; the man clearly has his orders from above, so he actually piles on Norman Finkelstein until the latter puts him in his place. Sabby, meanwhile, champing at the bit, literally boils with rage and frustration while Norman does not seem unduly unruffled by Shmuley’s insults. It’s clear she would have probably disposed of Shmuley on the first round.