RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/from-critical-consciousness-to-oikophobia/

The widespread campus protests against Israel that followed the savage attacks by Hamas on our ally and fellow liberal democracy, were unprecedented in their solidarity with terrorist organizations representing a religion fundamentally opposed to modern Western civilization and its Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian roots.

Sadly and shamefully, demonizing Israel is unexceptional and expected from Western progressives and Leftists––purveyors of a “history” that traffics in unhistorical, ideologically mendacious assertions about imperialism and colonialism. These critics have adopted those lies and made them, along with specious charges of “racism” and “genocide,” the original sin of Israel’s creation and continued existence. The UN also has adopted those malign tropes, and made Israel the “Jew of nations,” the global villain par excellence, while also supporting and funding Hamas’ jihadist violence.

A Western civilizational innovation––critical consciousness, the self-examination and criticism of one’s own political community, practice, and values––has now gone rancid and led to a self-loathing oikophobia, the irrational fear, loathing, and hatred of one’s own culture and fellow citizens that encourages our enemies and rivals.

Domestic anti-Americanism, for example, has invaded our culture and schools, and has become a spurious token of intellectual sophistication, “citizen of the world” cosmopolitanism, and the hallmark of critical consciousness. In reality it is slow-motion suicide dressed up as high fashion.

Contemporary Anti-Americanism began with Marxist sympathizers and fellow-travelers, and spread during the Cold War as a weapon for the Left. It flourished in Europe, which had influential communist parties. The European Left, as French philosopher Raymond Aron wrote, “has a grudge against America mainly because the latter has succeeded by means which were not laid down in the revolutionary code.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/elon-musk-department-of-government-efficiency-tesla-washington

It seems that the postmodern world is a conspiracy against great men. Bureaucracy now favors the firm over the founder, and the culture views those who accumulate too much power with suspicion. The twentieth century taught us to fear such men rather than admire them.

Elon Musk—who has revolutionized payments, automobiles, robotics, rockets, communications, and artificial intelligence—may be the closest thing we have to a “great man” today. He is the nearest analogue to the robber barons of the last century or the space barons of science fiction. Yet even our most accomplished entrepreneur appears no match for the managerial bureaucracy of the American state.

Musk will step down from his position leading the Department of Government Efficiency at the end of May. At the outset, the tech tycoon was ebullient, promising that DOGE would reduce the budget deficit by $2 trillion, modernize Washington, and curb waste, fraud, and abuse. His marketing plan consisted of memes and social media posts. Indeed, the DOGE brand itself was an ironic blend of memes, Bitcoin, and Internet humor.

Three months later, however, Musk is chastened. Though DOGE succeeded in dismantling USAID, modernizing the federal retirement system, and improving the Treasury Department’s payment security, the initiative as a whole has fallen short. Savings, even by DOGE’s fallible math, will be closer to $100 billion than $2 trillion. Washington is marginally more efficient today than it was before DOGE began, but the department failed to overcome the general tendency of governmental inertia.

Musk’s marketing strategy ran into difficulties, too. His Internet-inflected language was too strange for the average citizen. And the Left, as it always does, countered proposed cuts with sob stories and personal narratives, paired with a coordinated character-assassination attempt portraying Musk as a greedy billionaire eager to eliminate essential services and children’s cancer research.

https://issuesinsights.com/2025/05/14/on-key-issues-behind-tariffs-trump-holds-an-edge-barely-ii-tipp-poll/

President Donald Trump has expended a lot of effort negotiating new tariffs with America’s trade partners. But will tariffs lead to lower income taxes and more factories at work in the U.S., as suggested? A plurality, though not a majority, of Americans say they will, and support them for that reason, according to the latest I&I/TIPP Poll.

With hot debate over tariffs ongoing and current talks with trade partners, tariffs have been in the media spotlight this year.

Seeking to find out how Americans see tariffs, the I&I/TIPP Poll posed the following statement to respondents: “President Trump recently stated that tariffs could lower or even eliminate income taxes for people earning under $200,000 a year.”

They were then asked: “Does this make you: More likely to support tariffs; Less likely to support tariffs; Neither more nor less likely to support tariffs; Not sure.”

The tally showed that a plurality of 32% answered “more likely,” while 25% said “less likely.” Another 30% said “neither more nor less,” but 13% said they weren’t sure.

Once again, demographic differences show there’s not really much overall common agreement.

Start with political affiliation. Only 16% of Democrats say they’re likely to support tariffs if they cut income taxes, while 54% of Republicans and 25% of independents do. Of the “less likely” responses, 37% are Democratic, only 15% Republican and 23% independent. As for the “neither” responses, 34% are Dem, 22% are GOP, and 36% come from indie voters.

https://gatesofvienna.net/2025/05/tarnishing-the-haloes-of-the-saints/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

NB: This following essay by Baron Boddisey first appeared at the Gates of Vienna website. It recounts events that began one dozen years ago, but whose repercussions only continue to intensify in the communist endgame.

The death of David Horowitz last month stirred up all the old traumas from the fall of 2013 prompted by the controversy over Diana West’s book American Betrayal.

Mr. Horowitz was canonized immediately after his passing, but I couldn’t bear to read all the encomia to the saint — which were legion — that appeared on almost every conservative website.

At the risk of speaking ill of the dead, I feel obliged to note that Saint David behaved in a less than saintly fashion towards my friend Diana West, beginning in the late summer of 2013. He led an unseemly charge against her, one that descended into the gutter from the git-go. He and his fellow polemicists mounted ad-hominem attacks, calling her vile names and disparaging her alleged mental state. On those rare occasions when they attempted to engage the content of her writing, they invariably set up straw men to knock down, in an attempt to refute arguments that she never made.

Diana was blacklisted that fall by all the mainstream outlets of Conservatism Inc., with only the smaller blogs and forums coming to her defense and allowing her a voice. Gates of Vienna was the largest platform among those that supported her, which — given the diminutive stature of this blog — indicates how far into the Outer Darkness she had been cast.

So what was all the fuss about?