Noted & Quoted

Output-Buffering and Extensible WordPress Plug-Ins

Contrary to my tentative conclusions of a month ago, I now understand at least one good reason to use output-buffering while writing WordPress code. Indeed, I now anticipate using the tool frequently.

Read more ›

Posted in Using WordPress, WordPress Plug-Ins Tagged with: , , , ,

Comment Elsewhere: To @BurtLikko under “How to Fix a Broken Elephant: Prologue”

@Burt Likko

You write as though you have determined that the primary sin, the sin of sins, is “Othering.” So, of course, you have to turn your back on politics, since the defining political distinction or the distinction that defines politics remains “us” and “them,” “friend” and “enemy,” collective “self” and “other.”

The left-liberal notion is that politics is about “policy” for the good of all – “all people created equal” and so on – but no left-liberal [or any other] politics is able to address the good of all immediately, or to whatever extent it might it passes over into the apolitical or politically irrelevant: Read more ›

Posted in Comments Elsewhere, Political Philosophy, Politics Tagged with: ,

Jacksonian Neo-Isolationism 2

Put more simply: The failure of the neocon project led to, as a practical matter seemed to require, the replacement of neo-imperialism with xenophobia in Republican conservative rhetoric. To those capable of setting aside their judgments of the American approach to the world, the psychology involved may resemble the familiar pattern of unrequited love. Those on the Left will be constitutionally predisposed to put the idea in almost any other way, and may also operate under the belief that they or their constituencies are immune to the syndrome.

Posted in Neo-Imperialism, notes, Politics

the biggest best most unbelievable beautiful stink bomb ever

Jonathan Chait’s new explanation for the rise of Donald Trump – or for the failure of analysts to predict it – is appealingly simple:

Here’s the factor I think everybody missed: The Republican Party turns out to be filled with idiots. Far more of them than anybody expected.

Chait concedes that to say as much is “gauche,” but stands by the argument to the end:

As low as my estimation of the intelligence of the Republican electorate may be, I did not think enough of them would be dumb enough to buy his act. And, yes, I do believe that to watch Donald Trump and see a qualified and plausible president, you probably have some kind of mental shortcoming. As many fellow Republicans have pointed out, Donald Trump is a con man. What I failed to realize — and, I believe, what so many others failed to realize, though they have reasons not to say so — is just how easily so many Republicans are duped.

Read more ›

Posted in notes, Politics Tagged with: ,

Conservative Neo-Imperialism vs Jacksonian Neo-Isolationism

As for Trumpism vs. Bushism, one will be no less dependent on “populist nationalism” than the other, to whatever extent it is also successful: In a mass electoralist national system under popular sovereignty, the winner will always be the truest national populist, by definition, if not necessarily the purest one according to some external or merely intellectual standard.

What remains, then, is Trumpism. Which is also, in its lurching, sometimes insightful, often wicked way, a theory of what kind of party the Republicans should become, and one that a plurality of Republicans have now actually voted to embrace.

Ross Douthat
“The Defeat of True Conservatism”

The Republican coalition as an effectively neo-conservative coalition was able to bind itself together, or bind citizens to its project as constituents, in opposition to perceived external threats – militarism, fascism, communism, Islamism – that were mirror reverses of its precepts. For conservatives under the most politically effective articulation of their premises, American Idea and American Identity could be conjoined, with whichever war at whatever temperature serving to fuse otherwise contradictory ingredients, while melting away the rough edges of unresolved disagreements and irresolvable frustrations. Though the articulation is most readily identifiable as Reaganism, Reaganism can itself be seen, and is perhaps best understood, as a re-capitulation from the right both of and integrally within an inherited framework. Similarly, Reagan’s loyal progressive and so-called liberal adversaries could not stray too far from the same premises without losing their ability to compete and therefore to govern on the national level.

Read more ›

Posted in Neo-Imperialism, Politics Tagged with: , ,



Posted in Philosophy Tagged with:

On My Grand Strategy on Grand Strategy (Interim Book Report or Tour of a Tour of Tours of Tours)

I have had an essay on American Grand Strategy – working title: “Pacific War: Strategy and the World-Historical State” – on the back feedburner for going on a couple of years now – and I still feel it needs better grounding or precautionary backgrounding, or perhaps fortification, vs. recent writings on the general subject. I find myself with the same self-skeptical position on a more recent addition to the In Progress pile, “Si Vis Bellum,” which began as a short response to a blog comment on the unreliability and misuse of the terms “militarism” and “interventionism,” but which in the writing and re-writing turned into another mini-magnum opus attacking some of the same targets in somewhat the same way.

I may yet join the two together. Or: Maybe that should be my strategy. Specifically: Though I would not seek nor even contemplate an engagement with all the the best and brightest thinking from a vast and heterogeneous defense, history, international relations, and political science governmental, academic, and volunteer army of armies built up and extended over generations, or centuries, or millennia, I feel that I should at least be conversant on the main questions as discussed in recent non-specialist works. To that end, I added three books to my reading list: I recently finished Barry Posen’s Restraint (2014, a “defining treatise”), am currently reading Lawrence Freedman’s Strategy (2015, “magisterial”), and I have Hal Brands’ What Good Is Grand Strategy? (2015, “simply one of the best and most useful books on grand strategy”) to get to next and last. Read more ›

Posted in Books, International Relations, War Tagged with:

Noble Liars 2: “Clearly the world has disappointed him”

“He is a brilliant guy, but he has a real problem with what I call the assignment of bad faith,” one former senior official told me of the president. “He regards everyone on the other side at this point as being a bunch of bloodthirsty know-nothings from a different era who play by the old book. He hears arguments like, ‘We should be punching Iran in the nose on its shipments of arms, and do it publicly,’ or ‘We should sanction the crap out of them for their ballistic-missile test and tell them that if they do it again we’re going to do this or we’re going to do that,’ and he hears Dick Cheney in those arguments.”
Read more ›

Posted in Neo-Imperialism, notes Tagged with:

…so who are the “noble liars” now?

When I asked whether the prospect of this same kind of far-reaching spin campaign being run by a different administration is something that scares him, he admitted that it does. “I mean, I’d prefer a sober, reasoned public debate, after which members of Congress reflect and take a vote,” he said, shrugging. “But that’s impossible.”

Source: The Aspiring Novelist Who Became Obama’s Foreign-Policy Guru – The New York Times

Posted in Neo-Imperialism, notes, Political Philosophy Tagged with: , ,

“described fairly”

[T]hese days American self-government is indistinguishable from self-incrimination. Our domestic policy is a nest of rent-seeking corruption, our social insurance system is an act of theft against posterity. And our foreign policy, described fairly, resembles the last weeks of a bloodthirsty crime family, led to its bitter end by demented octogenarians.

Source: Michael Brendan Dougherty: Trump vs. Clinton is a verdict on America

Posted in Neo-Imperialism, notes Tagged with:

On the matter of your moral inferiority…

A self-serving moral judgment is always implicit in any political judgment, for the simple reason that a politics without morality would be the physics of randomly colliding human atoms, of no meaning to anyone, or not authentically political at all.

Ramesh Ponnuru (in “Hate Trump Voters? You’ve Got a Problem. “) attempts to draw a simultaneously moral and political distinction:

Living in a democracy often means thinking that millions of our fellow citizens are making a big mistake, and saying so. That doesn’t have to mean considering them our moral inferiors. To the extent my fellow anti-Trump conservatives are adopting that mindset, they are making a depressing political season even more so.

I think I understand what Ponnuru wants to encourage – forgiveness, empathy, balance, wise strategy, among other things – but on the central question I believe that he is wrong: Thinking that our fellow citizens are “making a big mistake” does and must mean considering them our moral inferiors, in relation to the particular matter if not others, and, when I say so, I cannot help but also imply or  confirm that I believe that in this way, on this question, Ponnuru is my “moral inferior.”

Read more ›

Posted in Politics Tagged with: ,

To o-b or not to o-b (output-buffering in WordPress) – UPDATED

(Note: See “Output-Buffering and Extensible WordPress Plug-Ins” for an update to the below that substantially revises my conclusions.)

I asked the following question at Stackoverflow today: “PHP output buffering: When/whether to use for different kinds of real existing sites and applications?

So far, I’ve gotten one answer tending to confirm my general inclination not to use it for the kinds of scripts in which I’m interested.

The following is the full text of my “question”:

Read more ›

Posted in Using WordPress, Web Design Tagged with: , ,

Or Maybe “Demopathy”

“Demopathy” is a term used previously, as far as I can tell from a Google search, by a few anti-democratic (and highly illiberal) polemicists of seemingly no great note. I find it expressive for a larger tendency that interferes with the Republican Party’s ability to handle the Trump challenge, and to govern its own affairs and argue its own case consistently and coherently, yet at the same time may justify the existence of the Party as a vehicle for a conservative understanding of the American system.

Read more ›

Posted in Political Philosophy, Politics

On Ignorocracy (Own Comment at Ordinary Times)

Dan seems to be arguing that the process – in all of its heterogeneous glory – may be thoroughly legitimate, but still remain vulnerable to abuse and misuse, including by a known demagogue who plays upon a common type of incapacitating civic ignorance that he himself seems to share to a large degree – not only with his supporters, but with a large number, perhaps the majority, perhaps the overwhelming majority, of observers.

To the majority, if the majority insists upon equating its ignorantly simplistic and parochial concept of democracy with the democratic concept as understood throughout Western and specifically American history, with all of the virtues but few to none of the defects of the latter concept attached to the former one, then all of us will be obligated to join in, in other words compelled by majority decision of that same type in favor of compulsory majority decision of that same type, and so on, as illimitedly regressively as required until minority opposition is exhausted.

So, we seem to have – or our polity or pseudo-polity in this period appears to be constituted as – an ignorocracy: rule by an ignorant majority ignorantly insisting on its own peculiarly ignorant concept, resulting in a system among whose defining characteristics is the imperviousness to criticism of the ignorocrats’ own self-serving but mostly sincere self-concept.

Comment replying to “Art Deco” at: The Republican Nomination and the Language of Popular Democracy | Ordinary Times

Posted in Political Philosophy, Politics Tagged with: ,

Heckling Baby Hitler (Notes on a Twitter Discussion)

Writing after an extended exchange of views on Twitter, Justin Tiehan (@jttiehan) – professor of philosophy and notorious curator of the Tweet-list of (ca. 80?) explanations for the rise of Donald Trump – summarized his position as follows (Twitter handles removed):

To clarify my version of the argument, 1. Most agree it’s morally permissible to kill baby Hitler.

2. Heckling raises fewer moral concerns than baby killing.

3. Most should agree heckling is morally justified in some cases.

4. Most should agree that liberalism, in issuing blanket prohibition against heckling, is in error.

The discussion between Professor Tiehan and myself had begun in relation to a blog post entitled “There’s no good argument for the liberal prohibition of heckling,” by Carl Bejier. My initial question to Tiehan, who had referred to “more than a grain of truth” in one of Bejier’s explanations for that “liberal prohibition,” was to ask for a definition of “heckling.” I then also requested a definition of “liberalism” or “modern liberalism” as we were to understand Bejier was using the terms.

Read more ›

Posted in Political Philosophy, The Exception Tagged with: , ,

Plug-In Away… and the Iron Law of Irony

Didn’t mean to go on blogging hiatus, but I started converting a set of functions that produce the note-and-quote “linkage” table currently showing on this blog-page into a real live WordPress Plug-In, then decided that the simple version was too specific to my own uses for it.

Read more ›

Posted in Meta, WordPress Plug-Ins Tagged with: , ,

Citizen Trump’s Path of Least Resistance to a Classy Profitable Exit

Should Trump, facing unfavorable and deteriorating political prospects, seek to humiliate himself leading a fractured Republican Party to an “epic” defeat in November? Should he prefer to “do all he could to destroy Cruz and the GOP” – turning himself into a hated loser and maker of losers? How would either alternative profit him – or preserve and burnish his all-important brand – at all?

Rich Lowry is convinced that Trump, whether he loses at the RNC or in the Fall, is going to destroy the Republican Party in the process:

Events can always intervene, and Hillary Clinton certainly has her own weaknesses, but every objective indicator is that nominating Trump would mean a divided Republican party loses in the fall, perhaps badly, maybe even epically.

Probably the most favorable non-Trump scenario is that Ted Cruz beats him on a second ballot at a convention and has enough anti-establishment credibility to take the edge off the inevitable revolt of the Trump forces. But surely Trump would do all he could to destroy Cruz and the GOP in retribution for denying him the nomination.

As for that last part, however, what makes Lowry so “sure”? Though Trump has campaigned in a political suicide vest, threatening to take as many people with him as possible when he finally trips the trigger, why exactly should we believe the threat?

Maybe Lowry, after the events of the last year or so, is just primed to expect the worst… Read more ›

Posted in notes, Politics Tagged with: ,

If the Trump Roast Is Done, Give the Crucians Some Credit

Polls with Cruz surging, Trump flat at best, are reinforcing a general sense – once a hope, now an expectation – that Wisconsin next week will be Trump’s electoral Stalingrad. As I put it on Twitter a few days ago:

Read more ›

Posted in Politics Tagged with: ,

Mattis: Not Ike, but the Right Shape

It is perfectly normal, and beyond that it is natural and altogether archetypical, for human communities in times of crisis to look for and seek to rally behind a commanding figure. The American electoral process is in many ways already the institutionalization of crisis even in the normal course of events, and this year, with one of the two major parties struggling to fight off a hostile takeover by a crypto-fascist and his movement, has had more of that character than usual.

220px-Mattis_Centcom_2010About retired Marine General James Mattis I know little beyond the rough biographical outlines as provided in a recent Daily Beast column by John Noonan – “This Man Can Save Us From Trump – and Clinton” – promoting his potential presidential candidacy and comparing him to Eisenhower.

The first part, the part about knowing relatively little about him, is how I do know at least that the Eisenhower comparison is way off, since, at the time that “Ike” was nominated by the Republican Party, he was one of the most famous men in America. In the latter regard he somewhat resembled a certain Donald Trump, except that he earned his fame by commanding the combined armies of a victorious globe-spanning alliance, not by hosting a television show or placing his name on gaudy buildings. Perhaps Mattis should be better known than he is, but he is known presently only to a relative few. If he has a catchy one-syllable nickname, I do not know it. Unlike Eisenhower, a candidate or nominee Mattis, or his backers, would have to seek recognition.

I do not doubt that that task could be achieved, virtually overnight if need be, but until we know what he would stand for politically, and with whom, we cannot hope to understand the shape or potential of his candidacy.  Read more ›

Posted in notes, Political Philosophy, Politics Tagged with: , ,

Did Cruz Just (Finally) Cancel “The Pledge”?

Speaking of the Pledge, did Ted Cruz just cancel it?

Amid the furor, Cruz appeared to soften Friday on his pledge to support Trump if he’s the Republican Party’s presidential nominee.

“I don’t make a habit out of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my family,” Cruz said.

He might need to write it in block letters and pastels, several times, to get Democrats to stop trolling him on the point, now a point d’honneur. For unclear reasons, despite the opportunity to seize the headlines while standing up to the “GOPe,” neither Cruz nor Kasich nor any of the past candidates has chosen to seize upon whichever latest ample pretext – unless Cruz now finally has done so.

Meanwhile, at least one of Trump’s habitually highly incorrect endorsers is signaling second thoughts. More to come?

Public Domain image from Wikipedia

Posted in Politics Tagged with: ,


State of the Discussion

Wade McKenzie
Comments this threadCommenter Archive
+ Thanks for referring me to this piece of yours. I was inspired by your reading Lord Mahon's Life of Belisarius. I read my fair share [. . .]
+ I'll make a note of that one. You might like, as complementary on the broader subject, As for ancient warfare, six or so years ago [. . .]
World War Zero brought down mystery civilisation of ‘sea people’ – New Scientist
Wade McKenzie
Comments this threadCommenter Archive
+ I've given a little more thought to your citation of the Roman aqueducts, and I realize that I missed something important about it--it posed far [. . .]
An Ancient Peruvian Mystery Has Been Solved From Space – IFLScience
+ Well, as we know, we can find an occasional voice in favor of oppression and slaughter, but for the most part "oppression" is another word [. . .]
Comment Elsewhere: To @BurtLikko under “How to Fix a Broken Elephant: Prologue”
+ Would you say that, based on your interpretation of "the political" as inherently othering, and the related view that it cannot thus inherently be bad [. . .]
Comment Elsewhere: To @BurtLikko under “How to Fix a Broken Elephant: Prologue”
Wade McKenzie
Comments this threadCommenter Archive

Just in case anyone's interested, I've read a fascinating book that bears on this subject (bronze age warfare). Here's the Amazon blurb:

World War Zero brought down mystery civilisation of ‘sea people’ – New Scientist

Extraordinary Comments (in development)

In Progress


Support This Site?


Recent Posts

A Correct Answer on the Pledge to Support

"Donald Trump has provided ample justification for any of us to extricate ourselves from that commitment, which was entered upon as a matter of honor between individuals devoted not just to the name of the Republican Party, but to its principles. At this point, however, the question is no longer relevant. After all I have said, and have still to say, about Mr.Trump, what meaning could my 'support' for him as eventual nominee possibly have?"[...]

Conservatism and the Plainly Visible

The political problem for American conservatives in this era seems to me more complex, but at the same time less intractable, than a simple juxtaposition of the visible (or "envisionable") vs. the unseen.[...]

Defense and Defense Mechanisms

Diehl assesses the Obama Doctrine, or Jeffrey Goldberg's Obama's Obama Doctrine, as, in a word, neurotic - as much a psychological construct or defense mechanism as a policy - enabling the President minimize the importance of any setbacks, the alternative being emotionally intolerable.[...]

Finding Lost WordPress Widgets after Core Upgrade

Just a quick note on fixing problem affecting one of my favorite WordPress Plug-Ins in use at this site, and possibly affecting many others as well.[...]

Übertrolls - Leftwing Edition

...mounting the barricades in his mind and shouting down all within hearing - moving, in undeniable if also undeniably trivial form, by sheer necessity, from the denunciation of competing perspectives to the proscription of those about whom, as he avers with conspicuous pride, but disproves in acting to prove, he could not possibly care less.[...]

Add Amazon Affiliate Tags to WordPress Posts and Comments Automatically

A helper function extending the WordPress Amazon Affiliate Tag (Amazify) plug-in to Comment as well as Post text.[...]

The Melancholic Anti-Interventionist

If the systematic application of the desired policy leaves even its proponents bitterly unsatisfied with and haunted by the tragedies and catastrophes it either produces or does nothing to avert, then its prospects may be dim. The main question may be which will prove intolerable first, the growing dissatisfaction, or the next catastrophe.[...]

Philip Stephens: Fatalism taints the Obama doctrine -

"What is missing from the Obama doctrine is a strategic view of the role of US leadership in sustaining global order. Analysis drifts into an excuse for paralysis, but inaction carries as many dangers as intervention. Mr Obama’s realism bleeds into fatalism. To observe that the US cannot solve every problem in a disordered world should not be to conclude it is powerless. Disorder is contagious and does not respect neat lines drawn around core national interests."[...]

The Egological: Notes on Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit by Martin Heidegger

"The essence of the universe, at first hidden and concealed, has no power to offer resistance to the courageous search for knowledge; it must open itself up before the seeker, set its riches and its depths before his eyes to give him pleasure."[...]

Federalist, Libertarian, Conservative, Republican, or Insensate?

Opinions may differ as to whether "keep[-ing] options open" is not already the classic strategic sin of dividing one's forces in the face of the enemy. On the other hand, if the conservative moment already possessed the unity of command necessary to make and implement any singular and exclusive decision, or a single general or general-in-waiting head and shoulders above all peers, then it would not be in so much trouble.[...]

The Negation of Bush to Equivalent Effect: TC Wittes on the Obama Doctrine

"It is a tragic irony: A president elected and reelected on a platform of ending wars in the Middle East has reproduced, at the end of his presidency, the very situation he inherited, decried, and swore to avoid: an escalating war against a vague terrorist enemy, with no geographic boundaries, no clear military or strategic objectives, and no principles or policies that might stop the slide down this slippery slope."[...]

Goodbye, Reaganism, too?

The further question concerns the American Republican, or conservative, or rightwing concepts - separately or all together - in relation to the evident crisis of the Republican Party. The coalition that appears to be deconstructing itself before all of our eyes - conservative intelligentsia and base disgusted at their mirror reflections, each other - is not just the Bush coalition, but the Reagan coalition.[...]

If Obama Had Followed Through (Hof on the Red Line)

"...[H]ad it laid waste to Assad’s air force, field artillery, Scud missiles, and rockets, the strike would have emptied Assad’s victory speech of substantive content. Yes, the chemicals would have remained in place, and perhaps so too the Assad regime. But instruments of mass terror would have been neutralized, the migrant crisis afflicting Europe might have been averted, and tens of thousands of people now dead would still be alive."[...]

Linkback Your Xpost: A Simple WordPress Filter Function

Line-by-line on how to write a WordPress filter function utilizing the "the_content" filter hook.[...]

Understanding American Interests (Steven Heydemann in Washington Post)

"It is sadly ironic that the president’s commitment to inaction has undermined his vision of an international system in which military restraint and a smaller U.S. footprint would produce a more stable and peaceful international order."[...]

"no good options" (Obama Doctrine Notes)

"No good options" at some point becomes a rule of moral abdication - a declaration of incapacity to distinguish between worse and better, or of paralysis. Obama himself seems to oscillate between the two views: On the one hand, since there is no good option, judgment has to be suspended, but on the other hand he wants to view or wants us to accept inaction or maximal distance as the better option, so "as good as we can get if not perfect."[...]

"incredibly piss poor leadership" (Obama Doctrine Notes)

Obama seemed to be hoping that a legacy of American "credibility" on such threats would be sufficient to make this one work, without acknowledging - perhaps according to all the best and latest political scientific critiques of "credibility" - the possible damage to American credibility that his own policies had reinforced.[...]

On Obama Doctrine Thesis #4 (The world cannot afford...)

The world cannot afford the diminution of U.S. power, but U.S. power is diminishing.[...]

Plus fascistique...

Trump is many ugly things, but he’s not a very developed ideologue. In a way, that might even make him more authentically fascist than the fascists, who merely talked about power for the sake of power and about the rejection of intellectualism.[...]

The Pathos of the Rational Leader: Goldberg's Obama

How can a nation survive, can its institutions function, can it prosper and triumph, can the People experience or aspire to satisfaction without recourse at some point to such “tribalism”? The President cannot answer, because no one can.[...]

Yes, Tragically: The Pledge to Support Even Trump

With the meaning and true possession the Republican Party radically in doubt, the meaning of any pledge of support from within it will likewise be put radically in doubt. The nominal nominee of the nominal Republican Party would be the actual nominee of an actually different Republican Party, or of a Republican Party revealed never to have actually been a party. Forgiving a candidate for not having tried to explain the above in 30 seconds, on national TV, should not be too hard.[...]

Enabling WordPress Press This for HostGator Sites

Solution of a problem for bloggers who want to use WordPress Press This on their "shared hosting" accounts at HostGator and possibly at other aggressively security-conscious web hosts.[...]

You're Welcome and Rightbackatcha

I learned a lot WordPressing at OT, and wish the best to everyone over there - a group that as a matter of fact still includes me, if in a much-reduced role. So, you're welcome, and right backatcha.[...]

A theory of theories of Trump

Trump is finance fully self-invacuated, in a full-length gilt mirror, a Medusa transfixed by its own refracted self-admiration; at the same time, he is the return of the annihilated masses, as mass nihilism.[...]

Neo-Imperialism and the 2016 Campaigns (Reply to Marchmaine)

Notes on understanding the 2016 presidential campaigns in world-historical context.[...]

The League vs Trump - Super Doomsday Open Thread and Twitter List

If we need a clearer definition of our mission - as I think we do - we could do worse for a starting point than "Negation of Trump," but that thought also implies that it's significantly our fault that Trumpism is on the verge of taking over the universe...[...]

Sow They Say

As we approach the last Republican Debate before Super Tuesday, it's "reap just what you sow" day from the Left across the Center and all points beyond the movement conservative right.[...]

Addendum: What if Trump Just Subsides Instead of Exploding Trumpastrophically?

I had the wayward thought last night that the Trump bubble, which many of us have been expecting to pop with an audible sound, in one typically Trumpastrophic moment, would just deflate on its own[...]

The Party Deconstructs

In times such as these, party loyalty raises the question of what a party is at all in America 2016 - or at least what it means to be a Republican, if Trump is one, and potentially the standard-bearer.[...]

Who or What Is Using "Commenter Archive" and "commenter-thread"?

If any of you human beings have anything to say on the major uptick in use of these commenting features, please let me know. The spiders and robots don't answer questions directly.[...]

The Coordination Solution, Property, and the Exception (Comment)

The necessary transtemporal and social re-construction of the identity of the individual is a process we conventionally define as a matter of “religion,” and a common materialist explanation of religion refers precisely its utility as coordination solution, and so we’re back to where we began, with the littlest possible story, of one person and his or her desires and needs somehow to be related to the self-organization of a global mass of 7 billion souls, via political theology.[...]

The Libertarian Praxis Problem: Part 1

Libertarianism and the Left, and the more general problem for metaphysically individualist liberalism.[...]

The Argument for Reparations, and the Question of Justice

Coates vs Sanders... and Lincoln[...]

Why Discuss Anti-Modernist and Anti-Democratic Literature?

If we are willing to admit that there are social and political problems that we do not yet seem to have solved, then an examination of other-than-democratist and other-than-modernist thought may not be merely interesting to a few, but useful for the many, or even necessary.[...]

Star Wars VII and the Ultra-Real

The cinematic rather than merely narrative objective of Star Wars VII is to persuade by being overwhelmingly Star Wars VII.[...]

Case Closed: On Quotation Marks and Hyperlinks

Case closed: Quotation marks should be made part of the hyperlink.[...]

Use Spell-Check, Save Lives

Do not be a danger to self and others: Check your spelling.[...]

Still Doing It (the Animated American Way of War)

...highly prescient, from the vantage point of 1943, regarding the American reliance on technological solutions to political and military challenges.[...]

Only the Right Believes in Class Conflict Anymore

Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren may still keep alive the embers of Old Left workerism, and the latter is still barely detectable in traditional Democratic Party rhetoric and residual connections to organized labor, but in American politics today class conflict as the engine of history seems now to be a concept mainly of the Right.[...]

How to Do Backlinking Footnotes

At the point in the post where you want the number-link to appear, type a space then opening double parentheses. Place the text you wish to appear in the footnote after the double parentheses. Close the footnote with closing double parentheses.[...]

Ordinary Fonts (Updated)

These are all free fonts, mostly from Google Fonts (hardly the only foundry, but free and highly functional, and easy to use). I've also thrown in a few "web safe fonts" - fonts everyone has and a lot of people still use - so don't be embarrassed if you find yourself liking the most generic font there is, the one you just got through saying you never wanted to see again.[...]

1 Space: Awesome. 2 Spaces: Awful - A Test for a Certain Mr. Nosis - UPDATED

Good 1-space people may wish to avert their eyes.[...]

Testing Xpost - #2 - OTC Post at OT Xposted to CK Mac's

An old plug-in possibly of interest to some OTers and for future general development of the site, but not, apparently, fully adapted to a multisite environment.[...]

Testing Xpost - #2 - OTC Post at OT Xposted to CK Mac's

An old plug-in possibly of interest to some OTers and for future general development of the site, but not, apparently, fully adapted to a multisite environment.[...]

Testing Old Crosspost (Xpost) Plug-In

Testing an out-of-date but potentially still useful plug-in.[...]

In This Galaxy, Now

The Alt-Right is criticizeable in many ways, and is undoubtedly full of unpleasant people given to saying repugnant things and taking pleasure in doing so, but the Alt-Right is not wrong to point to a transformation whose existence is obvious, but whose significance is difficult to discuss. The denial their statements receive may in turn reflect a determination on the part of a type of true believer to accept the narrative as a kind of sacred truth, rather than as an even conceivably debatable proposition.[...]

Get Your Featured Images in Landscape Proportions

At OT, we want landscape-proportioned images generally, and especially for featured images, and exra-especially for Top-Featured Images. Note: NOT the Author's fault - no one told him. Plus I should have taken care of this when I first noticed he'd used a small/square image. In fact, I thought I had taken care of this. (Not one thing: 1000 others.)[...]

How to Make a (Basic) Ground Lizard Chili (Blogs in the Social Media Epoch)

It's OK to be a lizard in an age dominated by insects.[...]

Cats and Tags Living Together

General instructions and a status report on using post Categories and Tags at OT. If there's a topic you think we need, you can add it yourself, or suggest it to the rest of us.[...]