Rod Dreher has written both about Hungary (after 3 months there) as well as Afghanistan. His recent book has been translated into Italian, and he notes some popularity with other Fantasy Intellectuals
"I would point out too that though I wrote the book for my fellow Christians, <i>Live Not By Lies</i> has developed a following among non-Christians, including the Orthodox Jewish commentator Dennis Prager (I’m headed out to L.A. next month to film a PragerU spot for it), the liberal Jewish writer and anti-woke activist Bari Weiss, and anti-woke left-wing secularists Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying. This book and its message is for all of us who want to live in freedom."
It was Rod who got Tucker Carlson to visit Hungary and interview Orban.
He values localism, particularity, and sovereignty, believing that each nation should have the right to decide its own way of life, in accord with its own values
He understands the Realpolitik of the current moment, and the barely-concealed illiberalism of liberals
He grasps clearly the threats to social cohesion and societal thriving from racial and gender politics
He defends the traditional family, and supports it with policies encouraging family formation
He believes in the free market, but will not defend its claims at the expense of the common good
He understands immigration as a potential threat to the stability and cultural continuity of the nation
And in all these things, he is willing to fight hard for the things he believes in
Funny sad how a few of them, especially localism, also apply to the Taliban.
"It depends on what you measure. Loury’s correspondent looks at college degrees obtained, and there black women do not lead. But Gray apparently cited an analysis that looked at current college enrollment rates, where black women do lead. And I think that current college enrollment rate is certainly a legitimate indicator of the degree to which education is valued within a cultural group."
I am curious as to your reasoning here. I would think that more weight should be given to obtaining degrees as an indicator as compared to enrolling, particularly if they point in opposite directions. Enrolling is relatively easy and normal, that is, social pressure will tend to direct you that way even if you yourself are indifferent or slightly opposed. Actually completing a degree is (somewhat) more difficult, requiring effort and tradeoffs towards that goal that merely enrolling does not.
By way of analogy, if we want to know how many people are serious about exercising more, and we have data on how many people have gym memberships along with how often those people go to the gym, the latter is probably a much stronger signal than the former. If those two indicators conflict, you should probably listen to the latter.
Thanks for your comment. I distinguish between social pressure and individual commitment. Maybe if you don't graduate, that shows a lack of individual commitment (although there could be other things). But if you're worry is that blacks discourage education as "acting white," you would expect that to affect enrollment a lot, and graduation not so much. So I see it as a good sign that the social pressure is to try to get the education (or at least not discourage it).
Thanks for the response! I agree with separating pressure and commitment, although I think social pressure drives individual commitment a great deal, as well as supporting it when it is at a low ebb. If the social pressure to finish college is low we would expect to see people with strong personal commitment only finishing; it doesn't take strong social pressure to simply enroll I should think.
Rod Dreher has written both about Hungary (after 3 months there) as well as Afghanistan. His recent book has been translated into Italian, and he notes some popularity with other Fantasy Intellectuals
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/live-not-by-lies-in-italy/
"I would point out too that though I wrote the book for my fellow Christians, <i>Live Not By Lies</i> has developed a following among non-Christians, including the Orthodox Jewish commentator Dennis Prager (I’m headed out to L.A. next month to film a PragerU spot for it), the liberal Jewish writer and anti-woke activist Bari Weiss, and anti-woke left-wing secularists Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying. This book and its message is for all of us who want to live in freedom."
It was Rod who got Tucker Carlson to visit Hungary and interview Orban.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/why-hungary-matters-to-american-conservatives-viktor-orban/
Here's 7 reasons Orban should be looked at:
He values localism, particularity, and sovereignty, believing that each nation should have the right to decide its own way of life, in accord with its own values
He understands the Realpolitik of the current moment, and the barely-concealed illiberalism of liberals
He grasps clearly the threats to social cohesion and societal thriving from racial and gender politics
He defends the traditional family, and supports it with policies encouraging family formation
He believes in the free market, but will not defend its claims at the expense of the common good
He understands immigration as a potential threat to the stability and cultural continuity of the nation
And in all these things, he is willing to fight hard for the things he believes in
Funny sad how a few of them, especially localism, also apply to the Taliban.
Glenn Loury had a lot to say about the Roland Fryer accusations on his podcast a while back
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T0M78G4f06Y
"It depends on what you measure. Loury’s correspondent looks at college degrees obtained, and there black women do not lead. But Gray apparently cited an analysis that looked at current college enrollment rates, where black women do lead. And I think that current college enrollment rate is certainly a legitimate indicator of the degree to which education is valued within a cultural group."
I am curious as to your reasoning here. I would think that more weight should be given to obtaining degrees as an indicator as compared to enrolling, particularly if they point in opposite directions. Enrolling is relatively easy and normal, that is, social pressure will tend to direct you that way even if you yourself are indifferent or slightly opposed. Actually completing a degree is (somewhat) more difficult, requiring effort and tradeoffs towards that goal that merely enrolling does not.
By way of analogy, if we want to know how many people are serious about exercising more, and we have data on how many people have gym memberships along with how often those people go to the gym, the latter is probably a much stronger signal than the former. If those two indicators conflict, you should probably listen to the latter.
Thanks for your comment. I distinguish between social pressure and individual commitment. Maybe if you don't graduate, that shows a lack of individual commitment (although there could be other things). But if you're worry is that blacks discourage education as "acting white," you would expect that to affect enrollment a lot, and graduation not so much. So I see it as a good sign that the social pressure is to try to get the education (or at least not discourage it).
Thanks for the response! I agree with separating pressure and commitment, although I think social pressure drives individual commitment a great deal, as well as supporting it when it is at a low ebb. If the social pressure to finish college is low we would expect to see people with strong personal commitment only finishing; it doesn't take strong social pressure to simply enroll I should think.