Skip to comments.No Country for Old Politics (How to Define the Right in a Left World)
Posted on 07/17/2014 10:46:53 AM PDT by mojito
The task before me is explaining with appropriate distinctions and qualifications What is right and what is left? For those who wish to avoid the harangue of an activist, let me assure them that I do not equate conservative with Republican or with the viewing habits of FOX News devotees. Being a Republican and dutifully reciting party talking points is for me no sign of being on the right; nor is a disinclination to do either indicative of being on the left.
A classical or essentialist Right is hard to find in the contemporary Western world, where journalists and other assorted intellectuals rush to denounce its bearers, or even partial bearers, as fascists. That may be one reason that such types rarely come into public view, outside of certain European parties that have been able to survive in a multi-party electoral system. Being on the essentialist Right is deadly in an academic or journalistic milieu that is shot through with quintessential leftist values. There are isolated intellectual groups in the US that exhibit evidence of a right wing gestalt, but these groups are usually cut off from the movement-conservative mainstream lest they endanger conservative institutes or publications by expressing improper anti-leftist ideas. This is entirely understandable, given the prevalence of leftist influences in Western societiesand given the extent to which the establishment non-left has absorbed leftist values and attitudes that come from existing in a predominantly leftist environment.
(Excerpt) Read more at traditionalright.com ...
h/t David Warren.
Any reason why you didn’t post the entire essay?
The owners of this site encourage posters to excerpt and link, as it makes for friendlier relations between FR and the sites were the stories posted here originate.
That isn’t what I’ve read.
JR.—”But our readers are mostly interested in reading relevant posts in their entirety on FR without having to click to an unknown outside website where who knows what kind of cookies or tracking devices may await them.”
“If you would like to see your blog make it to the big times, and you have great news or great ideas to report, post your blog articles in their entirety to our Bloggers Forum on FR, and then join in on the fight for Liberty that follows!! If our readers like what you’re posting, you may quickly become an accepted, trusted FReeper and you may start enjoying hundreds of new hits per each of your posted articles from FReepers who wish to see what else you may have to offer.”
“Excerpting is more polite...”
Is that like saying blogpimping is a good thing?
Pinging the expert.
Well.. here’s that Jim Thompson guy expressing an opinion on it:
“I have no complaint if a good conservative blogger posts his own material to FR, not as an excerpt to drive hits and discussion back to his blog, but rather to impart useful information to OUR readers and to promote and join in on the discussion and conservative activism HERE on FR.
If a blogger cant or refuses do that, and if he constantly complains or fights with our participants over it, then Id just as soon he doesnt post here. Its not my job to make his content or his presentation or cooperation acceptable to our readers. Thats his job. And if he cannot do it or refuses to do it and continues posting brief excerpts only and obviously attempting to draw away our participants while loudly complaining about it, then I have no sympathy for his complaints and the more apt I am to ban his account and blog.”
That is incorrect.
I don't have blog, nor do I have an affiliation or financial interest in the articles I post on FR.
But I do believe that authors whose work I share on FR - because I think they have something interesting to say - should be able to reap the benefits of their work by having FR traffic directed to the site where their work was originally posted, as some of those authors are compensated by how much traffic their articles generate.
Polite and responsible people excerpt and link.
And they don't hijack threads.
I don't have a blog.
It’s a blog, you excerpted it.
If it isn’t yours, then that’s all you need to say.
The very fact you posted an unnecessary excerpt is why this thread was hijacked.
Had you posted correctly, this thread might have had promise. Had I not questioned you, this thread would be at 1 - maybe two replies.
I'll continue to post in my way, and you can continue to hijack threads, since what other people do is of more interest to you than what the article has to say.
And Paul Gottfried is not a blogger:
Proudly powered by WordPress
It's a blog.
I’ll continue to post in my way
- - - -
You might want to consider the words of Jim Robinson and the Admin Moderators on the subject. Excerpted of blogs is going to continue to cause you grief.
Just got back from my property. The mosquitoes were thick out there, too...
The right wing of the American Revolution saw itself as restoring traditional English rights of Americans. The left wing believed in universalism. I side with the Federalists like Washington over the Jacobin lovers.
It’s not a blog. It’s an online magazine, with serious writers. It’s publishing platform is irrelevant.
Proudly powered by WordPress
It's a blog.
The right wing of the American Revolution saw itself as restoring traditional English rights of Americans.
I agree - but I think they understood themselves to be accomplishing that end by means of creating a form of government that was new, albeit leaning on English common law and informed by history. If "American conservatism" means anything, it means conserving that then-new creation.
See post #9 - JR, the owner of this site, is explicitly against excerpting for the purpose of driving hits to the original site. His house, his rules.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.