Be cautious with people denigrating "the Enlightenment" to advance some political project (which is invariably Woke, Left or Right). It refers to several things, not all of which agree.
America is based on Scottish Common Sense Realism, not French or German Idealism. 🇺🇸
The post-liberty Right ("Woke Right") tend to talk trash on the Englightenment in a sloppy way so they can attack American Classical Liberalism instead of conserving it. This error is only forgiveable at first. By now, the big players MUST know better because it's been clarified.
It's certainly the case that Communism arises out of the Neoplatonist/Idealist German and French Enlightenment, but American Classical Liberalism, which opposes these and always has, comes from somewhere else, despite some overlaps at the beginning, namely Common Sense Realism.
People who continue to push their politics by conflating these extremely different programs with completely different metaphysical commitments (Realism vs Idealism, for one) are hardly more than dangerous charlatans at this point, because it's been explained clearly.
Beware anyone who says American Classical Liberalism is the problem, especially if they blame the Enlightenment, Rousseau, or any German philosophers, and challenge them to explain how Scottish Common Sense Realism is different at the most fundamental levels.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Corrupted Christian doctrine together with a deracinated, subverted liberalism, both calling themselves "progressive" at times, worked together to this end. A reactionary church will be summoned as its negation so that the resistance will not find genuine faith in God or country.
Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum have been quite clear for over a decade, as have other organizations working in this manner for roughly a century, that they seek a values shift that's to be accomplished through faith. The future they plan isn't secular at all.
You may have noticed that people who are wrong, especially when doing wrong, not just factually wrong, often attack people telling the truth. That's Error hating Truth.
Why does Error hate Truth? A borrowed lesson from my friend the Honorable Bob McEwan. 🧵
Imagine we're in an auditorium, and I say the auditorium is 50 feet wide, and you say it's 60 feet, and someone else says it's 80 feet. Obviously, we cannot all be correct (although we could all be wrong).
Now suppose we don't have any way to measure the room but decide it's important to figure out. I sit there and give my best arguments for 50 feet, and you argue for 60, and the other guy argues for 80, and we appeal to this and that and talk and talk and talk.
If you wonder why I don't interact with her, it's because she's dangerously obsessed with me and does this dishonest cluster-B thing all the time. Most of her posts are about me. Most of her streams are about me. It's all unhinged cluster-B provocation. See it?
I spare absolutely zero sympathy for the Groypers, but I think it's kind of funny how she's ingratiating herself with them and doing a borderline elevation of Nick Fuentes to do it, getting them to take her orders and do her bidding. That much is actually kind of hilarious.
I feel like this makes me need to talk about Mao's Hundred Flowers Campaign, although I don't claim to know what motivates Tucker Carlson on his strange turn lately (no accusation, judging by fruits).
"Let 100 flowers bloom. Let 100 schools contend." 🧵
In 1956, Mao Zedong, believing he had brainwashed the population of China into deep socialist belief, and to make a liberalizing show in the wake of Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin, launched the Hundred Flowers Campaign, which encouraged free speech and criticism of the CCP.
It was one of Mao's greatest political miscalculations, as it turns out. Following a disastrous collectivization program called the Socialist High Tide. Over the course of several months, criticism grew and increased to where a real threat to CCP control arose.
(a) throw doubt on the moral standing of the Western nations, especially the US, regarding WWII,
(b) so they can discredit the "post-WWII liberal consensus" at its foundation, and
(c) spread muck and division in the conservative ranks (agitprop).
There's a building that faction wants to implode, by one means or another, and that building is belief in America and the Western Alliance as a force for good in the world. Revisionism on WWII (and Lincoln is coming), in addition to the Spanish Civil War, takes out key beams.
Like how Howard Zinn devastated two generations of young Americans' ability to believe in their country with his Leftist revisionist People's History of the United States, these revisionists are sowing doubt in their countries' histories in a frustrated faction on the "Right."