I'm amazed how many people think "separation of church and state" is in the US Constitution, or that it was the theory behind the 1st Amendment, or that it was America's founding "purpose," or that the founders generally believed in it.
None of this is true.
If any of you are interested in learning the actual history of the theory of "separation of church and state" in America, Philip Hamburger of Columbia Law School wrote the best book on the subject:
The bottom line is that "separation of church and state" didn't become the law of the land in the United States until the Supreme Court's decision in Everson v. Board of Education applied the 1st amendment to the states. That was in 1947.
For 346 days—from Oct 7, 2023 until the detonation of 4000 Hezballah beepers in Lebanon on Sept 17—the Biden administration kept Israel’s hands tied, trying to force an early “peace” that would prevent an Israeli victory. Those days have ended. tabletmag.com/sections/israe…
In November, 2023, I laid out the Biden administration’s strategy for the entire war: Supply Israel but *prevent* Israeli victory in order to maintain a “balance of power” between Israel and Iran in the Middle East. /2
Why would any American work to maintain a “balance of power” between the Israel and Iran? The Iranian regime is relentlessly hostile to the West and calls for the destruction of both Israel and the US. Shouldn’t America hope for an Israeli victory in the current conflict?
/3
I hate to spend even ten minutes on a lowlife like Avik Roy. But he recently gave a 45-minute interview in which he repeatedly says NatCons seek a "white ethnostate" in America as our "core" goal. I want to make sure everyone understands who and what this guy is.
/1
Avik Roy's "white ethnostate" interview was posted as a podcast on Law and Liberty along with a transcript of the interview. You can read it here:
Avik Roy begins his "white ethnostate" interview by stating that his target is national conservatives, our NatCon conferences, and our 10-point Statement of Principles.
/3
For months friends have been asking me: "What's wrong with James Lindsay? Why's he acting so strange?"
I've been saying I don't really know. He refuses to even have a conversation with me.
But I finally have some thoughts to share: A thread on "What's wrong with James?"
/1
The first thing to understand about where James's head is right now is that he believes "conservative Christianity" is about to be "largely politically nullified" in the United States.
/2
This isn't a long-term prediction. James has said repeatedly that the destruction of conservative Christian influence is going to happen in a massive attack by the left over the coming summer.
/3
If you don’t know the Bible well, you cannot understand the forces that created the Western world.
If you don’t know the great thinkers of the common law tradition, you cannot understand the forces that created Britain and America.
1/
The reason the Bible and the common law tradition have been excluded from the history of ideas and political theory is that they give expression to human particularity—and not *only* to human universals.
But you cannot understand human beings without human particularity.
/2
This exclusion of the Bible and the common law tradition from our understanding of history and ideas leaves us intellectually crippled.
It means we can’t understand our own past and present. It means we can’t see the path forward.
/3
An alliance does not require a “fusion” of interests or identities. It’s a limited collaboration in pursuit of specific common aims.
Alliance between Jews and Christians doesn’t require “fusion.”
Alliance between anti-Marxist liberals and conservatives doesn’t require “fusion.”
The 1960s strategy of “fusion” between anti-Marxist liberals and conservatives was based on the negation of conservatism as an independent movement with a vision and an identity of its own.
/2
But anti-Marxist liberals do not share a vision of society with their conservative friends.
We have two different visions. There can be no “fusing” these visions into one without destroying one vision or the other.
/3