The decade that has passed since the hysteria surrounding the completion of the Human Genome Project has shown us how little the genetic code tells us about any living organism, and even less about complex ones such as you and me.


John Podhoretz sums it up: “…there’s the small matter of those forty-plus years of British querulousness with Europe and the fact that so many people for so long a time had warned of the consequences of integration and had been proved prescient by the undemocratic behavior of the mandarins at European Union Central in Brussels, and then by the Greek collapse, and then by the migrant crisis. There was a history here, a long and sustained history of argument and reflection made by brilliant men and women who love their country. And that argument won.” That’s from here. Finally, use your Commentary subscription to read this damning indictment.

The Words Are Forbidden Speech — Even In The USA

The current flap is over whether US politicians in high positions in the federal government — or contenders for those offices — shall be permitted to refer to any version of Islam as “radical Islam”. The One Leader is trying to prevent Democrats from even thinking in the politically incorrect language. The reason: Islam is not the enemy of Western Civilization, and the support of many profoundly Islamic states is needed in the attempt to crush military opponents such as ISIS.

The problem with this reasoning is that US opposition to Islam is normal, natural, and required. It is mandated by the USA’s constitution.

Having “allies” like Saudi Arabia is, in other words, an excruciatingly difficult situation. And the USA has a president who considered it proper to bow to the Saudi king.

In fact many if not most of the outrages against decency and humanity committed by ISIS are supported by the sacred texts of Islam. Further, many Muslim men consider Muhammad a role model; if you think that is a decent concept, read an accurate account of Muhammad’s behavior at The Battle of The Great Ditch; then recall that he was quite properly accused of incest (until he had a revelation that told him true prophets could commit that breach of ethics at will).

It is politically incorrect to point out that while there are millions of peaceful Muslims in the world, many more live in repressive states that follow the holy books of Islam slavishly. Siding with those states is very much like siding with Hitler against Stalin.

While the US State Department wrestles with this problem and the president tries to find an acceptable vocabulary to use with all Muslims, the average US citizen realizes that his blood enemy is not just “radical” Muslims, but all Muslims who follow the rules as the creator of mankind gave them to the Archangel Gabriel to convey to Muhammad. Those rules define and mandate an Islam that is not at all moderate by the decent standards of the twenty-first century.

Repeating: Islam is a good six centuries younger than Christianity, and it is not ethically mature. While many Muslims have achieved an enlightened state of ethics, many more have not. This will take time.

The Mass Murderer And The FBI

The worst mass shooting in US history was not an instance of Islamist holy warfare. The Florida killer was investigated, interviewed, and subsequently ignored by the FBI; that conclusion to the bureau’s inquiry was professional, accurate, responsible, and proper.

To this newsletter, that is a huge relief. Federal law enforcement is tasked with the discovery of religiously motivated killers who are at war with Western Civilization. In this tragic case, the FBI did its job admirably well.

The last thing the nation needs is a federal law enforcement agency (with the power, resources, training and dedication of the FBI) that undertakes the vetting of people for their mental health — and predicts who just might act violently in response to sexual conflicts, passions, and failures.

If you cursed the FBI for letting this killer go rather than initiating his deportation, you erred fundamentally. Understanding that is essential.

Those in the grip of sacred teachings are grist for the FBI’s mill, but they are not mad — they are sane and rational believers who have enlisted to wage a holy war. Islamic warriors, like kamikaze pilots, cannot be “cured” by psychotherapists.

Some authorities will insist that entire cultures can be “psychotic”, or that belief in a personal deity is symptomatic of potentially dangerous delusion. The identification of belief systems as “mental health problems” is humbug disguised as the healer’s art. Even the Hitlerian agenda was not insane — it was subsumed by genuine existential evil.

The USA’s November Election

Pessimism is already rising. Says Stephen Kruiser, an individualist (as this newsletter refers to “conservatives”), “…I was one of those red, white, and blue optimists who firmly believed that the United States could survive damage done by whatever idiots an apathetic electorate put in charge. I terribly underestimated two things: the Democrats’ contempt for the Constitution and the Republicans’ commitment to losing, even when they win”. (Source)

It’s going to be a long, hard slog, and many politically interested folks stand to lose a lot of their optimism before it is over. The best this newsletter can think to mention about the coming ordeal is that if the voters want to pick good leaders, they might benefit from a close look at bad ones.

Read The Headlines, And Be Confounded

The British electorate prefers to withdraw from the embrace in which continental Europe tried to hold the island kingdom. Yes, that’s a bit of a shock, but it’s not cause to fear for Europe’s future. Those with a modest sense of history will recall that a very non-united Europe clawed its way out of virtually total destruction after World War II, and, thanks to the policies of Konrad Adenauer, a Germany with distinct borders created a better future. As talk of economic cooperation increased, nations tried to find ways to help each other, and general growth eventually led to freer trade and genuinely European advances. Border crossings were made infinitely easier, and the rules of conduct were made nearly universal. Then, quite late in the game, Great Britain signed on, and what some thought of as a United States of Europe appeared.

None of this was based in slavish obedience to former assumptions about trade and economic development. A new generation had taken control of the regulatory agencies, and was shaping them to look beyond borders. The Chunnel made it easier to bridge the cultural and geographic gap that still separated Great Britain from the Continental nations, and it seemed as if all the impulses for change were pushing in the same direction.

Then the British experienced a genuine epiphany: this melding with the Continental economies, regulatory agencies, cultures and futures that dominated Europe was perceptively alien. It was dynamic and innovative, but it was not at all British. While it adapted quickly, it did not understand or even particularly respect British traditions and mindsets. The reader will recall, for instance, that the British monarchy is distinct from its Continental cousins in that the Queen is a legislative entity, not constitutionally like her relatives in Europe (see this book review). Indeed, there are myriad differences, many of them unimportant to Europe’s technocrats and post-industrial visionaries, that distinguish a Briton from a European.

So Great Britain has called a halt to the rush to obedient sameness.

The impact of the Brexit has hit no one harder than it has hit the world’s news business. Everywhere one looks, there are headlines and “reports” that have yet to express the essence of the matter. (See the next Item for some examples.) In fact no thoughtful person will mistake the media noise for signs of genuine distress. In fact Great Britain has voted its heritage, which means it has recognized that it is not European and never will be, no matter how much it might change.

Of course there is a slight sense of unreality to the Brexit. It barely passed, so some will decry it as an election that, if held in another two weeks, would produce a different result. That suggests a degree of dishonesty, if not fraud, and that implication serves the interests of the losing side. While some ask, “Did we really do it?” others insist, “This dooms Great Britain”.

Doom? Nonsense. The British have stood alone before, and they are not alone today. To hint that the island nation will lose its way because it has acknowledged its unique status is mischievous. (Use your Commentary subscription to read this insightful view of the situation.)

Great Britain will survive and prosper as long as it clings to two traditions: first, it is immensely flexible; in fact its history is a chronicle of brilliant adaptive measures (anyone who can emerge British in spite of being subjected to prolonged French rule must have unique qualities). Second, it is a nation of genius, not a nation smothered by tradition or stifling bureaucracy. As long as it encourages the individual and honors his Liberty, it will always be in the vanguard.

That does not mean that the future could not look better; improvements are in order. Britain’s socialism has been the one cultural pattern that has harmed the nation most. If that antique fantasy were replaced with Continental Austrian economic practices, Great Britain would be leaner and stronger.

Some US Press Headlines Regarding Brexit

The Los Angeles Times: “BRITAIN FACES UNCERTAIN REALITY AFTER EU VOTE”, “Britons reel over vote to leave EU”.


The New York Times: “British Politics in Chaos As Vote Result Sinks In, Sidelining Key U.S. Ally”.

The Wall Street Journal: “U.K. Vote Sets Off Shockwaves”, “U.K. Vote Sparks Political Turmoil”, “EU Tumult Ripples Through Markets”.

Link Courtesy Of The Tramp Abroad

Oops. Hillary waxed just a bit too optimistic….

Ordinary Links

Newt provides the results of a survey on sharia, immigration, and law enforcement.

This is a thought-provoking look at the state of Western Civilization a few days after the British abandoned the European Union. Recommended.

So how are things going with the new USA – Cuba tourist trade? Not so great: the prison island’s guards are not quite ready to let US Congressmen in. The Cuban government is a Commie holdout in a world that failed to make that antique system work, so maybe Obama should have sent Squaw Liz Warren along with the Solons as an interlocutor.

Here’s a tale of the Brexit, tax policy, counterproductive governance, dual citizenships, and politicians. It’s instructive.

Don’t worry about carbon dioxide levels and global increases in heat. Everything relevant is explained in a book you do need if you are fretting about temperatures. For an enjoyable introduction to the book, read this graceful essay.

On June 26, 2016, the Libertarian Party selected its candidates for the top of the executive branch of the US federal government.

An encomium to ecological one-upmanship is in order.

After Brexit, will there be a Nexit? Geert Wilders, a favorite of this newsletter, is planning to arrange it. But why? What’s gotten him upset?This.

The One Leader’s cute little federal elves and pixies would not deceive you, now would they? YES, they would. And they did. It was about crime statistics, and why they did it is enlightening.

Poland today.

The masthead includes a quote from the works of Raymond Tallis.