Austin Ruse on Rod Dreher's Writing

Which, as we know, isn't journalism strictly speaking, since it is mixed with his opinions. 

Rod Dreher and His Endism by Austin Ruse

I don't disagree with the criticisms directed against Dreher's writings, and if there is an ad hominen aspect to the article, maybe that should have been handled privately. But regarding Dreher's writing, I think Ruse is just noticing what is a general trend. Maybe only those "progressives" who comment on his articles would disagree, because they are more interested in reading Dreher being critical of Trump or "conservatives" or some other group to which they are opposed. (And not surprisingly, many of them think that Dreher is not critical enough.)



For example, there is this post Dreher wrote yesterday: Weimar America and the Michigan Mob

I am glad they can still show up armed like that at a government building in Michigan, as Michigan does not have laws against open carry, though some are agitating for such laws now. It's the last remnants of Anglo-American political liberty and the high-trust society upon which it depended. Politicians should be reminded that there are limits to the state, even if the state would like to have no limits, and that they will be opposed. Such displays wouldn't be permitted or tolerated in Canada (whose soy PM is pushing for laws banning "assault weapons"), the UK, or Australia, not to mention China.

Now a small group might be criticized for making a spectacle of themselves, but who is in a position to determine if that is the case, or to know if they are just bluffing without follow-through? Who is reaching out to these people to dialogue with them? Not Dreher or other critics of the cuckservative variety, probably. Trump is:

Trump calls protesters who carried guns into the Michigan Capitol 'very good people' and says the governor should 'make a deal' with them

God knows how much support they have among normal red Michiganers.

Some think that such displays of open carry are "impolite" or "uncivilized" or even "scary" for children and some adults. Those people need a reminder that republicanism entails the armed defense of the community against all forms of tyranny and domination, both within and without, and if they cannot bother with that duty or having others exercise that duty, they don't deserve to live in a republic.

As for such displays not being good optics for the "public," is this in part because some of those involved are not photogenic and look like extremists? Maybe it's time for the photogenic to show their support, then, to remind red America where they should stand. Such protestors may not be looking to persuade those who cannot be persuaded because of emotion (fear of guns, for example), but to rally support. It is more of a rhetorical appeal to those on their side, and to boost morale, maybe. What if it is too late to inspire red Americans to greater participation in self-governance? Then maybe some of Dreher's doomerism is warranted, though not his solutions.

Dreher cannot acknowledge that "America" is being transformed from high-trust to low-trust societies thanks to urbanization, immigration, and identity politics, and that he is contributing to that transformation with his public displays of phobia.