The topic of immigration has become impossible to address rationally. A mix of emotivism, historical guilt, a sense of crippling fatalism, and the sanctimony and cultural hegemony of the Left has prevented us from discussing the topic calmly and rationally. Anyone who tries is inevitably vilified as ‘racist’ and ‘xenophobic’. Consequently, the compulsory multicultural and pro-immigration thinking that has been imposed on us has led to some nonsensical and outright lies.
Immigration is a pressing issue nowadays, especially in Europe and the United States. Regarding immigration, the standard position of economists…
Let me say a few things about art and truth first of all. The Enlightenment — by which I mean that mass of thinking and idea-mongering that began in the beginning of the 17th century and went on through the beginning of the 19th — was that period in our intellectual history that brought with it … a certain loss of the religious anchor in everyday life.
It was as a student that I met my first Hungarian intellectual. I was so ignorant at the time that I did not even know that Hungary had an intellectual tradition that in importance completely belied its relatively small size both in geography and population. Of course, knowledge is always finite and ignorance infinite, so perhaps I need not feel too ashamed of my former self; but my ignorance is still infinite.
“At the moment, a battle is being fought between two models: that of a dehumanized world and that of a society — we should say, a civilization — that gives man his full place.”
These are the opening lines of a speech given by Msgr. Prince Louis de Bourbon, Duke of Anjou, at the recent World Congress of Families meeting in Verona.
If migration is ‘the biggest challenge of our time’ — the key issue is: who will decide this challenge? There are three possibilities: supranational institutions (let’s call this ‘Davos’); the migrants themselves arriving without the consent of the people in the nations that are affected; or the demos — the citizens of democratic nation-states.
From a Swiss perspective, small is beautiful. As important as recognizing this is, it is also worth considering the reasons behind this. There are three concepts rooted in economic anthropology that can help us understand this better: first, ‘scarcity and alertness’; second, ‘bonding and bridging’; and third, ‘competition’.
I’m going to talk about poetry today. It has occurred to me lately that in the United States, only Christians … [and a few] Orthodox Jews, can still understand what in the world a child is, what a wonder a child is, what a child is even for. Let me begin with the last stanza of … Keats’ “Ode to Autumn”.
Faced with the large, often uncontrolled movements of people we see around the world today, many countries – including my own – are seeking to more effectively protect their borders, enforce their immigration laws, and generally ensure that immigration promotes the interests of their citizens. But effective national solutions for migration must begin with clear and informed thinking about problems.
Thomas Jefferson, while not recognizing any established religion in the newly created United States, realized that in order to enact laws that would ensure the ‘unalienable’ and ‘self-evident’ natural rights, they could not separate themselves from God and his natural law. But today, the Western body politic has altogether abandoned that natural law.
After decades of relative neglect, Oswald Spengler is being remembered as one of the undisputed key thinkers of the 20th century—and as a philosopher whose predictions about the future of the West seem to fulfil themselves at a surprising speed.
Copyright © 2019 The European Conservative