Thank you for sharing interesting questions in a clear, forthright manner. I always enjoy and learn from your thoughts, no matter how wrong they may be.
I share your perspective: Eastern Orthodox, striving to operate in the real world.
To the instant issue: There is no world order, nor was there ever.
Rome once patrolled the Mediterranean. From 1830, England took the lead to protect freedom of the seas, end slave trade, suppress piracy, and stamp out cannibalism. In 1945, America inherited the Anglosphere.
Today there is only the rump of USSR and an already-failing, totalitarian China.
Note that only America matters, and her vigor is indispensable. Under Biden, PRC threatened Taiwan, fabricated the Spratly Islands, invaded Vietnam, and bullied South East Asia over fishing.
Under President Trump, PRC withdrew, historically patient, to await the next Democrat.
It is important for us to recognize Trump’s great stamina in winning office. Remember the endless false allegations against him, the fake scandals, and relentless media hatred. Remember as well not one but two baseless impeachments and a failed “investigation.”
Whatever his failings, Trump exposed and neutralized the “deep state.” today we enjoy the great blessing of that sunlight.
Thanks for this wonderful discussion. I really liked Santiago's distinction between Holy War and Just War- I do think there's oftentimes been quite a bit of flattening between the two, and I completely agree with him when he makes this critical distinction.
I do think Christine's question of authority is especially pertinent precisely because America, unlike the current institutions of Iran, was not founded as a religious state. In fact, it was precisely the opposite. So, to see the Trump administration utilising Christian nationalist rhetoric for interventions abroad is something I find especially odd. It gets at the question of, although the founders made sure religiosity could not infect the laws of government, that did not remove religiosity from politics.
That does bring about questions of Tom Holland's Dominion and Schmitt's Political Theology, where the authority of the secular state and morality is handed down from a religious tradition that is simply wearing a different set of clothes. For Schmitt, this presents as a problem with the non-sacral order, especially so in democracies, whereas for Holland, he sees much of Western morality through a Christian prism. I guess just war theory is a good example of this, where we see secular institutions using the moral force of religiosity in a different language via R2P. But, whereas Just War theory feels like it has a stronger universalism to it than R2P, that necessarily challenges the authority of secular orders when it comes to rights. Is it just a case that such an order, just like rights, is what Bentham called 'nonsense on stilts'.
I definitely think with blowhards such as Hegseth, we are seeing religion used as an aesthetic. In some ways, it reminds me of this Hillsong documentary I watched last week- where this sect was essentially peddling an aesthetic to lure 20-30 year olds into the church to grow their numbers. Their priests wore leather jackets, had tattoos, and talked about living life in a way that more traditional churches simply did not. I remember watching it and thinking, 'Who could get drawn into such an obvious group of charlatans and grifters?' and I feel the same way about authority and the MAGA movement.
It's interesting that many of the same people who have for decades denounced the Catholic church as morally bankrupt now use the church as an authority on war with Iran.
47 years. That's the number of years that Iran has been slaughtering innocent people all over the middle east and Africa. Speeches and posturing have solved nothing.
Stupidity is sometimes defined as doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result.
Thank you for sharing interesting questions in a clear, forthright manner. I always enjoy and learn from your thoughts, no matter how wrong they may be.
First, let me repay your generosity: You were thinking of Niall’s immodest “Ferguson’s Law:” https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/debt-has-always-been-the-ruinof-great-powers-is-the-u-s-next-02f16402.
I share your perspective: Eastern Orthodox, striving to operate in the real world.
To the instant issue: There is no world order, nor was there ever.
Rome once patrolled the Mediterranean. From 1830, England took the lead to protect freedom of the seas, end slave trade, suppress piracy, and stamp out cannibalism. In 1945, America inherited the Anglosphere.
Today there is only the rump of USSR and an already-failing, totalitarian China.
Note that only America matters, and her vigor is indispensable. Under Biden, PRC threatened Taiwan, fabricated the Spratly Islands, invaded Vietnam, and bullied South East Asia over fishing.
Under President Trump, PRC withdrew, historically patient, to await the next Democrat.
It is important for us to recognize Trump’s great stamina in winning office. Remember the endless false allegations against him, the fake scandals, and relentless media hatred. Remember as well not one but two baseless impeachments and a failed “investigation.”
Whatever his failings, Trump exposed and neutralized the “deep state.” today we enjoy the great blessing of that sunlight.
Thanks for this wonderful discussion. I really liked Santiago's distinction between Holy War and Just War- I do think there's oftentimes been quite a bit of flattening between the two, and I completely agree with him when he makes this critical distinction.
I do think Christine's question of authority is especially pertinent precisely because America, unlike the current institutions of Iran, was not founded as a religious state. In fact, it was precisely the opposite. So, to see the Trump administration utilising Christian nationalist rhetoric for interventions abroad is something I find especially odd. It gets at the question of, although the founders made sure religiosity could not infect the laws of government, that did not remove religiosity from politics.
That does bring about questions of Tom Holland's Dominion and Schmitt's Political Theology, where the authority of the secular state and morality is handed down from a religious tradition that is simply wearing a different set of clothes. For Schmitt, this presents as a problem with the non-sacral order, especially so in democracies, whereas for Holland, he sees much of Western morality through a Christian prism. I guess just war theory is a good example of this, where we see secular institutions using the moral force of religiosity in a different language via R2P. But, whereas Just War theory feels like it has a stronger universalism to it than R2P, that necessarily challenges the authority of secular orders when it comes to rights. Is it just a case that such an order, just like rights, is what Bentham called 'nonsense on stilts'.
I definitely think with blowhards such as Hegseth, we are seeing religion used as an aesthetic. In some ways, it reminds me of this Hillsong documentary I watched last week- where this sect was essentially peddling an aesthetic to lure 20-30 year olds into the church to grow their numbers. Their priests wore leather jackets, had tattoos, and talked about living life in a way that more traditional churches simply did not. I remember watching it and thinking, 'Who could get drawn into such an obvious group of charlatans and grifters?' and I feel the same way about authority and the MAGA movement.
It's interesting that many of the same people who have for decades denounced the Catholic church as morally bankrupt now use the church as an authority on war with Iran.
47 years. That's the number of years that Iran has been slaughtering innocent people all over the middle east and Africa. Speeches and posturing have solved nothing.
Stupidity is sometimes defined as doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result.