Henry Kissinger on the liberal world order

Third, safeguard the principles of the liberal world order. The founding legend of modern government is a walled city protected by powerful rulers, sometimes despotic, other times benevolent, yet always strong enough to protect the people from an external enemy. Enlightenment thinkers reframed this concept, arguing that the purpose of the legitimate state is to provide for the fundamental needs of the people: security, order, economic well-being, and justice. Individuals cannot secure these things on their own. The pandemic has prompted an anachronism, a revival of the walled city in an age when prosperity depends on global trade and movement of people.

The world’s democracies need to defend and sustain their Enlightenment values. A global retreat from balancing power with legitimacy will cause the social contract to disintegrate both domestically and internationally. Yet this millennial issue of legitimacy and power cannot be settled simultaneously with the effort to overcome the Covid-19 plague. Restraint is necessary on all sides—in both domestic politics and international diplomacy. Priorities must be established.

Henry Kissinger writing in the Wall Street Journal

This entry was posted in civil society, COVID-19. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Henry Kissinger on the liberal world order

  1. Rob MW

    Individuals cannot secure these things on their own.

    Well they did in 1775 thru 1783 mate. If enough individuals get together the second amendment makes sure it stays that way.

    Collectivists have gotta collectivise.

  2. Tim Neilson

    So what’s he suggesting? Is this just another open borders loon desperately trying to rationalise the utter, proven failure of their dogma?

  3. Roger

    The world’s democracies need to defend and sustain their Enlightenment values.

    Well they won’t achieve that by admitting millions of immigrants from low trust societies.

  4. notafan

    French or British Enlightenment?

    Also you can thank the Chinese for making the greatest modern contribution to globalism.

  5. Bad Samaritan

    I made the decision 30 years ago to never live in an Australian city ever again. Visit my old pals from time to time in Sydney but not even go into them apart from that.

    Where I grew up was ultra working class. My best mate’s (still) dad bought a vacant block in 1946 after he’d come back fromWWII. This from a dept of the Army disposal auction in Lilyfield (inner west not far from ABC HQ, for non Sydney savvy), which is now a totally 100% infested-with-F’wit-millionaire- greens- voters shytehole. Further away, where I often played footy (my team based at Leichhardt Oval) it’s nought but third-world savages having punchups over dunny paper.

    Yeap. You now get the worst of all worlds in old Sydney Town, thanks to leftist globalist institution-creep. Fuckemall!

  6. Iampeter

    Third, safeguard the principles of the liberal world order. The founding legend of modern government is a walled city protected by powerful rulers, sometimes despotic, other times benevolent, yet always strong enough to protect the people from an external enemy. Enlightenment thinkers reframed this concept, arguing that the purpose of the legitimate state is to provide for the fundamental needs of the people: security, order, economic well-being, and justice.

    That’s just saying the exact same thing.

    What enlightenment thinkers did was discover the concept of “individual rights” and realized that for people to live among each other prosperously, the function of government should be to protect individual rights. This was a revolutionary departure from all previous political systems and why we’ve advanced so much in so short a time.

    These are the basic principles that we need. An ethics that upholds mans purpose to pursue his self interest and a politics that supports mans individual right to do so.

  7. mark jones

    Henry fails to state the true enemy is down the block at 405 East 42nd St.

  8. Rafe Champion

    Lets have the best of both worlds.
    Chew gum and walk at the same time.
    International movement of information, goods and people with appropriate border controls.
    Not easy but we had better be prepared to make the effort.

  9. Tel

    So Kissinger is talking about Enlightenment values, order and justice.

    Ummm, Kissinger was also they guy who led Nixon into an illegal, unauthorized bombing campaign in Cambodia and dodged the Constitutional oversight of Congress and tried to keep it a secret. We are being lectured by a scoundrel about what our values should be.

  10. Simple Simon

    the Covid-19 plague

    There’s that word, ‘plague’.
    Sensationalism on stilts.
    When someone uses it about COVID-19 you know you are being manipulated, and should turn away.

    The real plague, also known as the Black Death, came in three forms, bubonic, pneumonic, and septicaemic. Their respective death rates have been estimated to have been 30-75%, 90-95%, and 100%.
    (Interestingly, there is still no cure for septicaemic plague.)

    At present, the highest death rate for COVID-19 is from Angola, at 25%, but this comes from a tiny number of recorded cases: 8 confirmed cases, 2 deaths, and 1 recovery, and so is statistically unreliable.

    Plague COVID-19 is not.

  11. stackja

    Henry Kissinger gave Red China an opening to the free world. X-1 lied. People died.

  12. Iampeter

    Lets have the best of both worlds.
    Chew gum and walk at the same time.
    International movement of information, goods and people with appropriate border controls.
    Not easy but we had better be prepared to make the effort.

    Yea, let’s have capitalism AND socialism. Gotta have the best of both worlds, right?

    You’re right that it won’t be easy!

  13. Tim Neilson

    Iampeter
    #3392328, posted on April 4, 2020 at 1:16 pm

    Should we allow totally free movement of people into Australia at present?

    Should we allow totally free movement of goods out of Australia (including goods like hand sanitiser, medications etc. strip mined from supermarket shelves by busloads of Chinese)?

  14. thefrollickingmole

    The founding legend of modern government is a walled city protected by powerful rulers

    Another way to look at it is as a “Commonwealth”, where the fruits of a group are shared within the group.
    It doesn’t necessarily prevent others from joining, or trade between those outside the group, but it does so with an eye to the common-wealth of all in the group.

    Glodalism is the refusal to participate in the commonwealth, and instead operate as a rootless cosmopolitan elite (no thats not a code for a certain ethnic group, I have see it used as such though) vs everyone else in their “Commonwealth”.

    A elite in a Commonwealth would build and staff the most efficient widget factory in his country. If comparative advantage means thats not viable then he directs his resources to another venture.
    An elite “cosmopolitan” would build it anywhere he got the best return. Hed have no compulsions about taking a viable business within the Commonwealth and shipping it off negatively affecting his host nation.

    There is no reason for a member of a Commonwealth to have any regard for what a cosmopolitan “elite” desires, they are the worst class of people on par with Communists.

  15. BorisG

    Ummm, Kissinger was also they guy who led Nixon into an illegal, unauthorized bombing campaign in Cambodia and dodged the Constitutional oversight of Congress and tried to keep it a secret. We are being lectured by a scoundrel about what our values should be.

    And all was actually done in defense of freedom from another plaque: communism. Which was indeed a grave threat to western lives and values. How do you balance those?

  16. Roger

    Lets have the best of both worlds. Chew gum and walk at the same time.
    International movement of information, goods and people with appropriate border controls.
    Not easy but we had better be prepared to make the effort.

    Three cheers for Westphalian sovereignty and the nation-state!

    Rumours of its demise have now been demonstrated to be premature.

  17. Fisky

    As someone joked on Twitter, Adam Smith never called for the Royal Navy’s construction to be outsourced to the Spanish Armada, but that is pretty much what 21st century globalists would have wanted.

  18. Infidel Tiger

    The enlightenment was anything but.

  19. Iampeter

    As someone joked on Twitter, Adam Smith never called for the Royal Navy’s construction to be outsourced to the Spanish Armada, but that is pretty much what 21st century globalists would have wanted.

    These strawmen are getting ever more unintelligible.

    Glodalism is the refusal to participate in the commonwealth, and instead operate as a rootless cosmopolitan elite (no thats not a code for a certain ethnic group, I have see it used as such though) vs everyone else in their “Commonwealth”.

    Or more openly antisemitic.

    Should we allow totally free movement of people into Australia at present?
    Should we allow totally free movement of goods out of Australia (including goods like hand sanitiser, medications etc. strip mined from supermarket shelves by busloads of Chinese)?

    Nah, we should create a police state. How could we let such an opportunity go to waste?!

  20. Iampeter

    The enlightenment was anything but.

    I’m surprised caves in Afghanistan have access to the internet.

  21. Tim Neilson

    Nah, we should create a police state. How could we let such an opportunity go to waste?!

    Poor old drooling braying sub-cretinous Iamashiteater.

    Once again showing he is too stupid to be able to think in any way whatsoever but braindead cartoon like binary absolutisms.

    It’s way beyond his “mental” [if one can use the concept about his ranting] capacity to understand that there can be some degree of regulation in accordance with the rule of law that doesn’t constitute a police state.

    Yes, people are concerned that the current level of regulation in, e.g., CFMEUistan is getting police state like, but that doesn’t mean we have to throw open the borders – only that we should dial back some of the restrictions.

  22. thefrollickingmole

    Iamacuckold..

    Me: Deliberately rule out anti semetic meaning to a term used to describe a group of people feeling themselves to hold no great allegiance to their own nation (note: not race you fuckwit)

    Iamacuckold: You must mean something anti semetic….

    Another from Numberwangs academy of the gifted, where “context doesnt matter” only what the voices in your head say…

  23. Iampeter

    Once again showing he is too stupid to be able to think in any way whatsoever but braindead cartoon like binary absolutisms.

    Politics IS binary.
    Knowing what you’re talking about and having clear positions IS absolutism.

    Me: Deliberately rule out anti semetic meaning to a term used to describe a group of people feeling themselves to hold no great allegiance to their own nation (note: not race you fuckwit)

    Then you should learn what terms like “rootless cosmopolitan elite” actually mean and how to use them correctly and in their proper context.
    Otherwise you end up beclowning yourself. Don’t take it out on me bud.

  24. John A

    Enlightenment thinkers reframed this concept, arguing that the purpose of the legitimate state is to provide for the fundamental needs of the people: security, order, economic well-being, and justice.

    Those four goals were always present. What the Enlightenment (maybe En-darken-ment would be better) did was install the State as the Provider rather than the Protector of those four. The enlightenment deliberately dethroned God as Provider (aka Jehovah-Jireh) and as everything else, of course.

  25. thefrollickingmole

    Iamacuckold.

    Im well aware of its meaning from the days of the turd reich.
    Im also aware the term was “rootless cosmopolitan” the elite part makes the term rather more specifically NOT the turd reich one.

    And you want to go on about reading comprehension?

    What a idiot.

    Rootless cosmopolitan elite perfectly describes the (largely) uni educated, insulated from economic shocks executive, managerial and government class who see their allegiance more strongly entwined with those of the same “class” rather than their fellow citizens.

    The fact the rootless cosmopolitan elite dislike the term so much is because it so precisely encapsulates their worldview in just 3 words.

    Your attempt to label it anti semetic is a piss poor effort.
    Low energy.
    Sad.
    Bad faith.
    Dishonest.

  26. Tim Neilson

    Politics IS binary.

    So, we’ve either got totally open borders or we’ve got a police state?

  27. Tim Neilson

    PS

    In the past you’ve fellated yourself frenetically on this site about Aristotle.

    So tell me Iamashiteater, do you think that Aristotle’s principle of the “golden mean” is inapplicable to politics?

    I mean, if politics is binary, it must be inapplicable, mustn’t it?

  28. Tim Neilson

    Iamashiteater believes that we have to admit proven COVID 19 carriers into Australia without exception, as many as want to come here, otherwise we’re a “police state”.

    That’s what he said above at 2.52 pm.

  29. Iampeter

    Those four goals were always present. What the Enlightenment (maybe En-darken-ment would be better) did was install the State as the Provider rather than the Protector of those four. The enlightenment deliberately dethroned God as Provider (aka Jehovah-Jireh) and as everything else, of course.

    Whether the authority you believe needs to be mindlessly obeyed is God or the state you’re just saying the same thing. This is why communism is just a secular version of Christianity.
    What the enlightenment did was describe a proper function for government, even though all the proper arguments and philosophical grounding for it would only come later.
    A proper understanding of a proper functioning government does indeed require rejection of irrational nonsense like gods.

    That’s what the enlightenment and Western civilization is all about. Rational means for life on earth, not irrational means for life in some afterlife.

  30. Iampeter

    @Tim N – That’s right, freedom just means lawless anarchy. Duh. Meanwhile arbitrarily regulating people going about their affairs is totally not the stuff of a police state. You deep thinker you.

    @thefrollickingmole – Ah yes. The classic Cat unhinged rant followed by belligerent doubling down! A tried and true approach by the many big brained, deep thinkers here.

  31. Rafe Champion

    Border protection can work effectively and fairly, at least as well as anyone could reasonably expect, if not for the subversive efforts of the new rootless cosmopolitan elite. They converted Fraser’s effort to rescue Christian Lebanese into a conveyor belt for Islamic opportunists, they use the courts and the grievance industry to foist various kinds of undesirable “refugees” upon us, they have run dead in the face of the more than decimation of Christian communities in the Middle East and they turn a blind eye to the plight of South African farmers. We can use farmers and what do we get? Economists! On the upside we got my dentist as well.

  32. Tim Neilson

    A proper understanding of a proper functioning government does indeed require rejection of irrational nonsense like gods

    I’ve asked you before and you’ve always gutlessed out.

    Describe your understanding of the scientific method.
    Then explain how a proper application of the scientific method disproves the existence of God.

    If you think the existence of God can be proved by non-scientific means, pleas identify them and explain how the disproof works.

    (But, for your own good, don’t beclown yourself yet again with your “existence exists” imbecility.)

  33. Tim Neilson

    That’s right, freedom just means lawless anarchy.

    Poor old zero comprehension. Mr intellectual loser par excellence. I said It’s way beyond his “mental” [if one can use the concept about his ranting] capacity to understand that there can be some degree of regulation in accordance with the rule of law that doesn’t constitute a police state. and he comes up with the self-fellation above. All part of his total inability to understand anything that isn’t cartoon like binary absolutism.

    Duh. Meanwhile arbitrarily regulating people going about their affairs is totally not the stuff of a police state

    Poor old zero ability to articulate an argument. He still can’t distinguish between even the most minor degree of regulation whatsoever and a “police state”.

    You deep thinker you.

    I don’t have to be a “deep thinker” to trounce you in logic every single time. Always and totally.

  34. thefrollickingmole

    imacuckold

    I can’t fix your lack of comprehension and general mental enfeeblement.
    As per usual you squirt crap like a squid squirts ink, the slightest thing away from your one track orthodoxy and another squirt of ink designed to obscure the poverty of you mind.

  35. Iampeter

    I’ve asked you before and you’ve always gutlessed out.

    Describe your understanding of the scientific method.

    Why? LOL. What does that have to do with the proper function of government?
    Also, how would describing the scientific method change anything about god being irrational nonsense?
    I haven’t “gutlessed out.” There’s just a limit to how many non-sequitur’s and confused tangents one should be expected to answer before just concluding that you’re a delusional, dishonest wanker and a waste of time. You don’t know anything.

    Poor old zero ability to articulate an argument. He still can’t distinguish between even the most minor degree of regulation whatsoever and a “police state”.

    Look, I get it. You’re a “capitalist socialist.” Or do you prefer “socialist capitalist?” Whatever.
    In any case, you won’t be stopped by glaring contradictions and not knowing anything about the subject. No clarity of the binary fundamentals of politics, nor the absolutism of having a clear position for the likes of you. You’re too smeArt for that.

    How does your head contain a brain of such amazing size?

  36. Iampeter

    imacuckold
    I can’t fix your lack of comprehension and general mental enfeeblement.
    As per usual you squirt crap like a squid squirts ink, the slightest thing away from your one track orthodoxy and another squirt of ink designed to obscure the poverty of you mind.

    Wow.
    You’re the one that uses terms you don’t understand to try and sound smarter than you really are but I’m the one that lacks comprehension?
    Keep on diggin’! You and Tim can work together and maybe you can reach rock bottom quicker!

  37. thefrollickingmole

    Another vacuous waffle from the house of waffles.
    Sad
    Low energy
    Weak.

  38. Rafe Champion

    I have a comment in moderation and I am not sure what part raised offence, possibly a reference to South African economists that could be regarded as derogatory.

    In less offensive terms: Border protection can work effectively and fairly, at least as well as anyone could reasonably expect, if not for the subversive efforts of the politically correct bureaucrats and decision-makers. They mismanaged PM Fraser’s effort to rescue Christian Lebanese in the civil war, they use the the courts protect the “rights” of “refugees” who don’t meet the UN criteria for bona fida refugee status , they are apparently not worried about he more than decimation of Christian communities in the Middle East or the plight of South African farmers. We can use farmers and what do we get? Economists! On the upside we got my dentist as well.

  39. Tim Neilson

    What does that have to do with the proper function of government?

    Poor old zero IQ, the Lionel Messi of intellectual own goals.

    Iamashiteater said A proper understanding of a proper functioning government does indeed require rejection of irrational nonsense like gods

    I said Describe your understanding of the scientific method.
    Then explain how a proper application of the scientific method disproves the existence of God.

    If you think the existence of God can be proved by non-scientific means, pleas identify them and explain how the disproof works.

    And now the poor old zero logic intellectual failure asks what my comment has to do with the proper functioning of government!

    It’s desperately sad.

  40. Tim Neilson

    No clarity of the binary fundamentals of politics, nor the absolutism of having a clear position for the likes of you.

    Poor old self-beclowner, still fanatically defending his belief that the imposition of restrictions on proven COVID 19 carriers entering Australia means we’re a “police state”.

  41. Tim Neilson

    Actually Iamashiteater, there’s something I’ve been wondering for quite a while.

    What’s the highest position of decision making authority you’ve ever held in your life, and how did you go carrying out your responsibilities?

    I mean given that you’re the universe’s greatest authority on “the proper function of government” presumably you’ve got an excellent appreciation of what it’s like to make decisions for an organisation and be accountable for the consequences.

  42. Ed Case

    Kissinger was responsible for the U.N. taking the Republic of China’s seat on the Security Council and awarding it to the PRC at a time when the PRC were propping up the NVA during the Vietnam War. That action didn’t promote the interests of The West [p.131].
    http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Tucker%20Taiwan%20Expendable.pdf

  43. Iampeter

    In less offensive terms: Border protection can work effectively and fairly, at least as well as anyone could reasonably expect, if not for the subversive efforts of the politically correct bureaucrats and decision-makers.

    Border protection can work effectively and fairly at doing what?

    They mismanaged PM Fraser’s effort to rescue Christian Lebanese in the civil war, they use the the courts protect the “rights” of “refugees” who don’t meet the UN criteria for bona fida refugee status , they are apparently not worried about he more than decimation of Christian communities in the Middle East or the plight of South African farmers. We can use farmers and what do we get?

    What does that have to do with immigration?

  44. Ed Case

    They mismanaged PM Fraser’s effort to rescue Christian Lebanese in the civil war,

    That’s a howler Rafe.
    The Civil War in Lebanon was waged by Christian political factions against one another.
    Anyway, wasn’t importation of surplus Lebanese an initiative of the Gorton Government, not too sure any Christians made it over here?

  45. Iampeter

    @Tim – because responding to this:

    A proper understanding of a proper functioning government does indeed require rejection of irrational nonsense like gods

    With this:

    Describe your understanding of the scientific method.
    Then explain how a proper application of the scientific method disproves the existence of God.

    …makes perfect sense! LOL!

    It makes about as much sense as this equally brilliant offering from you:

    I mean given that you’re the universe’s greatest authority on “the proper function of government” presumably you’ve got an excellent appreciation of what it’s like to make decisions for an organisation and be accountable for the consequences.

    Words fail.

  46. Tim Neilson

    Words fail.

    In your case logic fails.

    You said a proper understanding of a properly functioning government require[s] [your word] “rejection of irrational nonsense like gods”.

    If you reject “gods”, presumably you must have grounds for doing so.

    If you don’t have grounds for rejecting gods, but do reject them, you’re the one being “irrational” and your much vaunted understanding of government is revealed to be baseless – baseless on your terms which “require” such rejection.

    All I asked was for your grounds for rejecting gods – scientific or otherwise.

    And you’re gutlessing out yet again because you’ve got nothing.

    Poor old logic fail. The intellectual own goal specialist just keeps doubling down.

  47. Tim Neilson

    It makes about as much sense as this equally brilliant offering from you:
    I mean given that you’re the universe’s greatest authority on “the proper function of government” presumably you’ve got an excellent appreciation of what it’s like to make decisions for an organisation and be accountable for the consequences.

    I’ll take that as an admission that you’ve never held any sort of position of accountable responsibility in your entire life, and are thus totally and utterly ignorant of the realities of decision making.

  48. Roger

    Well, that escalated quickly.

    I was hoping to drop back into a rational debate about the nation state being the common man’s last bulwark against cosmopolitan bugmania.

  49. max

    Iampeter
    #3392239, posted on April 4, 2020 at 12:17 pm
    What enlightenment thinkers did was discover the concept of “individual rights”

    In the tradition of Whig history, Judge William Blackstone called them “The absolute rights of every Englishman”, and explained how they had been established slowly over centuries of English history, in his book on Fundamental Laws of England, which was the first part of his influential Commentaries on the Laws of England.[6] They were certain basic rights that all subjects of the English monarch were understood to be entitled to,[6] such as those expressed in Magna Carta since 1215, the Petition of Right in 1628, the Habeas Corpus Act 1679 and the Bill of Rights 1689.[7]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_of_Englishmen

    In the 1760s William Blackstone described the Fundamental Laws of England in Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book the First – Chapter the First : Of the Absolute Rights of Individuals[1] as “the absolute rights of every Englishman” and traced their basis and evolution as follows:

    Magna Carta between King John and his barons in 1215
    confirmation of Magna Carta by King Henry III to Parliament in 1216, 1217, and 1225
    Confirmatio Cartarum (Confirmation of Charters) 1253
    a multitude of subsequent corroborating statutes, from King Edward I to King Henry IV
    the Petition of Right, a parliamentary declaration in 1628 of the liberties of the people, assented to by King Charles I
    more concessions made by King Charles I to his Parliament
    many laws, particularly the Habeas Corpus Act 1679, passed under King Charles II
    the Bill of Rights 1689 assented to by King William III and Queen Mary II
    the Act of Settlement 1701

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Laws_of_England

  50. max

    Sources of our liberties –book

    I. MagnaCarta,1215
    II. CONFIRMATIO CARTARUM 1297
    III. The First Charter of Virginia, 1606
    IV. Ordinances for Virginia, 1618
    V. Mayflower Compact, 1620
    VI. Petition of Right, 1628
    VII. The Charter of Massachusetts Bay, 1629
    VIII. The Charter of Maryland, 1632
    IX. Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, 1639
    X. Abolition of the Star Chamber, 1641
    XI. Massachusetts Body of Liberties, 1641
    XII. Charter of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, 1663
    XIII. Concessions and Agreements of West New Jersey, 1677
    XIV. Habeas Corpus Act, 1679
    XV. Frame of Government of Pennsylvania, 1682
    XVI. Bill of Rights, 1689

  51. Rafe Champion

    WTF do people think they are achieving by feeding the troll?

    There are serious issues to discuss and they have been lost in the shit fight.

    Ed Case, I like your point about Kissinger taking Taiwan out of the UN in favour of communist China, very Realpolitik I suppose, what a shame we were fighting the communists at the time.

    Not convinced by your challenge to my account of Fraser and the Lebanese. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/inquirer/malcolm-frasers-lebanese-concession-became-a-disaster/news-story/fcd9ac233271fa9614210ca68a8a2bd4

  52. Tim Neilson

    max
    #3393040, posted on April 4, 2020 at 8:01 pm

    Thanks max.

    Good work.

  53. Tim Neilson

    Roger
    #3393009, posted on April 4, 2020 at 7:52 pm

    Sorry Roger.

    Sometimes I can’t help myself.

    the nation state being the common man’s last bulwark against cosmopolitan bugmania – yes, sure looks that way.

  54. Iampeter

    In your case logic fails.

    Well, politics has nothing to do with religion.
    Religion isn’t disproved by the “scientific method.”
    What you do in your professional careers, how you lead teams, manage business, etc, has nothing to do with understanding the proper function of government. There’s zero relationship between these areas.
    I was being pretty literal earlier in the thread when I said you don’t know anything.

    WTF do people think they are achieving by feeding the troll?

    Hmmm, you’re directing that at me I suppose? OK, don’t let me interrupt you engaging in what you imagine discussing “serious issues” looks like…

    Ed Case, I like your point about Kissinger taking Taiwan out of the UN in favour of communist China, very Realpolitik I suppose, what a shame we were fighting the communists at the time.

    Cringe.

    Have you even figured out what “immigration” even refers to yet, Mr Kissinger taking Taiwan?

    What an embarrassment.

  55. max

    Mr. Rafe, Henry Kissinger just repeat old mercantilistic fallacies

    The Black Ships
    On July 8, 1853, the U.S. Navy steamed four warships into the bay at Edo and threatened to attack if Japan did not begin trade with the West.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Ships

  56. Tim Neilson

    Religion isn’t disproved by the “scientific method.”

    Congratulations. Never has a truer word been spoken.

    So what grounds do you have for the rejection of “gods” which you yourself has stated is “required” for a proper understanding of a properly functioning government?

  57. max

    The Quest for Community by Robert Nisbet

    For the Philosophical Conservatives the greatest crimes of the Revolution in France were those committed not against individuals but against institutions, groups, and personal statuses. These philosophers saw in the Terror no merely fortuitous consequence of war and tyrannic ambition but the inevitable culmination of ideas contained in the rationalistic individualism of the Enlightenment. In their view, the combination of social atomism and political power, which the Revolution came to represent, proceeded ineluctably from a view of society that centered on the individual and his imaginary rights at the expense of the true memberships and relationships of society.

    Revolutionary legislation weakened or destroyed many of the traditional associations of the ancien regime—the gilds, the patriarchal family, class, religious association, and the ancient commune. In so doing, the Conservatives argued forcefully, the Revolution had opened the gates for forces which, if unchecked, would in time disorganize the whole moral order of Christian Europe and lead to control by the masses and to despotic power without precedent.

    From this basic conception of the effects of the Revolution upon traditional society, the conservatives proceeded to a view of man and society that stressed not the abstract individual and impersonal relations of contract but personality inextricably bound to the small social group; relationships of ascribed status and tradition; the functional inter- dependence of all parts of a society, including its prejudices and superstitions; the role of the sacred in maintaining order and integration; and, above all, the primacy of society to the individual.

    The family, religious association, and local community— these, the conservatives insisted, cannot be regarded as the external products of man’s thought and behavior; they are essentially prior to the individual and are the indispensable supports of belief and conduct. Release man from the contexts of community and you get not freedom and rights but intolerable aloneness and subjection to demonic fears and passions. Society, Burke wrote in a celebrated line, is a partnership of the dead, the living, and the unborn. Mutilate the roots of society and tradition, and the result must inevitably be the isolation of a generation from its heritage, the isolation of individuals from their fellow men, and the creation of the sprawling, faceless masses.

  58. Iampeter

    Congratulations. Never has a truer word been spoken.
    So what grounds do you have for the rejection of “gods” which you yourself has stated is “required” for a proper understanding of a properly functioning government?

    So, you think me pointing out that you know nothing re any of the random tangents you yourself keep bringing up, derailing yet another thread, means I want to debate these things with you, as opposed to meaning that debating such things with you would be a complete and obvious waste of time?

    Yep. Super big brained genius confirmed.

  59. Ed Case

    Rafe
    I was mistaken about the Lebanese Civil War being between Christian Militias.
    The odd thing about the Lebanon Concession Immigration of Fraser’s Government was that Fraser had
    been requested by Maronite businessmen in Sydney to help Christians to flee the Civil War, yet of the 12,000 that entered Australia before the Concession was shut down in 1976, >90% were non Christians.
    Something fishy there.
    I wonder, do Maronite Businessmen still have a huge amount of pull in the Liberal Party in N.S.W.?

  60. Ed Case

    Talk delivered at a Quadrant dinner in 2004 about difficulties encountered by Police interacting with these migrants. https://web.archive.org/web/20060207222734/https://quadrant.org.au/php/article_view.php?article_id=581

  61. Kneel

    So what grounds do you have for the rejection of “gods” which you yourself has (sic) stated is “required” for a proper understanding of a properly functioning government? ” is very pertinent to your stated position, as noted in the question itself, yet you refuse to answer.
    Why? Surely you have thought this through – you keep telling us you have. Did you miss that possibility? If so, what else have you possibly missed, even ignoring the half of the tree you pruned with no stated justification…

Comments are closed.