Tag Archives: david p goldman

No-one’s life matters

“Emil Durkheim’s 1897 diagnosis of “anomic suicide” describes the Columbine perpetrators as well as the 2016 San Bernardino attack by Muslim fanatics, the “right-wing” shooter in El Paso and the “left-wing” shooter in Dayton. They are individuals cut off from society, destabilized by change and despairing of their own place in the world. Such monsters always have been among us. But now we are cultivating such monsters by destroying the ties that bind us to each other, to our past and to our future.” —David P. Goldman

Via PJMedia

Killing discourse

From David P. Goldman at PJMedia:

“The liberals have redefined the term ‘racism’ to include any reference to obvious and undisputed facts that might reflect badly on ‘people of color,’ for example, the fact that countries like Somalia are hopelessly ungovernable whirlpools of corruption and chaos–just as Trump said. Because Somalis are non-white, the liberals declare, it is ‘racist’ to call attention to the fact that their country is a revolting mess. Of course, Somalia’s problems have nothing to do with the skin color of its inhabitants, but rather with Islamic fundamentalism—but to mention that is ‘Islamophobic’, and therefore also ‘racist.'”

Convenient, eh?

Why we can’t appease Iran

“Dying civilizations are the most dangerous, and Iran is dying. Its total fertility rate probably stands at just 1.6 children per female, the same level as Western Europe, a catastrophic decline from 7 children per female in the early 1980s.

“Iran’s present youth bulge will turn into an elderly dependent problem worse than Europe’s in the next generation and the country will collapse. That is why war is likely, if not entirely inevitable.”

Read it all here.

Via Instapundit.

Bring it on

Spengler, at least, is ready and waiting for an Israeli bombing attack on Iran. He thinks regional war is inevitable and it might as well begin sooner than later in response to an Israeli attack.

Of course, he has the luxury of not sitting at ground zero. Or does he?

“An Israeli strike on Iran that achieved even limited success — a two-year delay in Iran’s nuclear weapons development — would arrest America’s precipitous decline as a superpower.”

I doubt the decline would continue if Obama is defeated in November. If he is re-elected, a two year delay wouldn’t be long enough. But regional war, Spengler (David P. Goldman) says, would resolve these looming problems:

  • A nuclear-armed Iran;
  • Iraq’s continued drift towards alliance with Iran;
  • An overtly hostile regime in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood government will lean on jihadist elements to divert attention from the country’s economic collapse;
  • An Egyptian war with Libya for oil and with Sudan for water;
  • A radical Sunni regime controlling most of Syria, facing off an Iran-allied Alawistan ensconced in the coastal mountains;
  • A de facto or de jure Muslim Brotherhood takeover of the Kingdom of Jordan.
  •  

    Rather daunting list there. Only problem I can see is that wars (and their results) are always unpredictable. The new arrangement could be worse.

    But neoconservatism, the moderate alternative between appeasement and war, certainly seems to be dead. Obama has tried appeasement and gotten a dead ambassador and trashed embassies. Being an ideologue, he may try more appeasement. But Spengler is right. War is inevitable.

    Those three loud votes no

    It fit with the longtime anti-Christian and anti-Israel narrative of their Hollywood and news media pals when a sizable number of Dems tried three times last week to shout down restoration of the words god and Jerusalem to their party platform. But it still shocked me. Why had they been deleted in the first place?

    David Goldman, a recently-returned modern Orthodox Jew (a minority within a minority), wasn’t surprised:

    “The cultural divide in the United States is now almost absolute; Democratic Party liberalism, which once embraced devout Catholics and observant Jews, cannot conceal its contempt for religion.”

    But the no votes also concerned recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, something some Arab-American Democrats (and surely many non-Arab American delegates, judging from the volume) vigorously opposed. Which bothered PJMedia’s Roger L. Simon more than a little:

    “A sizable and serious claque on the Democratic National Convention floor was shouting and applauding against the Jews.”

    If Goldman saw it that way, he didn’t mention it. But the video, whose maker focused on two Arab-American delegates, could be so interpreted.

    So the line between the two political parties has been drawn sharper than ever. No longer just over abortion or gay marriage or more welfare and higher taxes vs social conservatism, free enterprise and individualism.

    But now over Israel and religion. And we’ll see if the Democrats have correctly interpreted the American mood or put their heads in a noose.

    And, oh, by the way, if you think the post-convention polls showing Obozo ahead by 2-3-4 percentage points are accurate, remember they similarly showed Carter ahead in September-October 1980—until Reagan trounced him by winning 44 states.