Here’s the second half of my reflections on the crunchy con manifesto.

Let’s take each part in turn…
6. Small, Local, Old, and Particular are almost always better than Big, Global, New, and Abstract.
Many people have taken this as a criticism of Wal-Mart like big box stores, and they are right. They are wrong when they start to take this to mean that it is the only choice that crunchy cons would like. As Rod Dreher notes here, “Yes, our family shops at Wal-Mart. It’s not our first choice, but sometimes you need to go there; no need to feel guilty about that. When we can, though, we patronize the mom and pop shop, as a matter of principle.”

This is something that cannot be stressed enough. Crunchy conservatism is a matter of principle. While some want a “Crunchy Con Platform,” most do not. Crunchy conservatism is a call to conservatives to not simply go after conservative policies, but to actually live what we advocate. Something that some people have forgotten. Indeed, libertarian policies would actually be easier to enact if more conservatives lived the crunchy lifestyle.

7. Beauty is more important than efficiency.
I think this could be proved empirically. Which part of the following dyads do you prefer:
A) Homecooked dinners
B) McDonald’s

A) Monet (or even Manet)
B) Paint by numbers

A) Handsewn quilts
B) $10 quilt from Linens n Things

You probably answered A to all of the above, and you did it because they are nicer. Sometimes we don’t have a choice for financial or other reasons, but we ought not do things simply because its quicker and easier.

8. The relentlessness of media-driven pop culture deadens our senses to authentic truth, beauty, and wisdom.
What was the last program on Fox that made you feel more like saying a prayer of thanks? When did listening to Eminem - or most country for that matter - lead you closer to living the good life? It has been my experience, at least, that on the pop-culture saturated college campus most students become more cut off and spiritually dead, so that Faith cannot lead them to Truth, from which flows an understanding of beauty and wisdom. (At least that’s my opinion ;))

9. We share Russell Kirk’s conviction that “the institution most essential to conserve is the family.”
Does any conservative disagree with this?

10. Politics and economics won’t save us; if our culture is to be saved at all, it will be by faithfully living by the Permanent Things, conserving these ancient moral truths in the choices we make in our everyday lives.
The relationship between politics, economics, and culture is covered by point four. However what its important here is the emphasis on preserving the Permanent Things through “the choices we make in our everyday lives.” Critics of CC need to pay more attention to this line, because it is pregnant with meaning. If we accept that government coercion in the extreme - through regulation, among other things - eliminates choice, than coercion in its gentler forms also decreases choice, simply less so. It seems that government action cannot be the way to implement CC. Instead, this is a call to get off our asses and get out there to preserve things. Go volunteer at a soup kitchen, plant a tree, support a local farmer, etc. But it must be of choice, not oppression.

GrassrootsPA:

John McIntire: You’re okay with the morning after pill?

Bob Casey, Jr.: Yes. I’ve supported that because it’s about birth control and family planning. Not abortion, and I’ve always drawn the line at abortion

-Transcript from Casey on KDKA’s the John McIntire Show in December 2005

Wherever you stand on the UAE/American Ports issue . . . this is a must see.

H/T Redstate.

WaPo article here It is entitled “Prejudice Wins” and it is a scathing attack on the Faculty of the Arts and Science college that forced out Summers. As has been noted elsewhere, if a former Clinton cabinent secretary is too conservative for your organization something might be wrong.
(Note to all Harvard folks, when the lefty Washington Post thinks you are radical fringe leftists and other papers make jokes about “lunatics running the asylum” something is terribly, terribly wrong)

Though it was mentioned earlier here, I do no think the proper outrage has been expressed regarding the jailing of David Irving, the British author imprisoned for his offensive remarks regarding the Holocaust.

The whole story seems reminiscent of 1984, Orwellian predictions coming to pass. This commentary on the subject provides an interesting point of view which is not being put forth very widely.

Why is it not outrageous that someone could be thrown in jail for making statements contrary to accepted historical thought? As the article states: “Today, you may be imprisoned or fined for dissenting from the accepted Holocaust history in the following countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, New Zealand, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Switzerland. ”

How is it acceptable for European newspapers to produce offensive and degrading cartoons mocking the Islamic faith and causing worldwide tension and poltical unrest, while holding others to a different standard depending on the issue? Freedom of speech seems to be moving into antiquity amid a wave of modern political correctness. The Danish papers had every right to run their cartoons; just as Irving sought to advance his version of history. Both were unquestionably aimed at ruffling feathers and easily viewed as irresponsible, but that shouldn’t govern the legality of their speech. An oft quoted Voltaire quote comes to mind, but I will settle for asking: Where is the outrage?

Why do I not believe Bush Would Veto Any Bill Halting Dubai Port Deal? Maybe because he has never actualy vetoed a bill. Not one. Zip, zero, nada. Would he really make a stand on this issue. Seems like a waste.

I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards to avenge even a look that threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone. That of sophists, economists and calculators has succeeded; and the glory of Europe is gone forever.

-Edmund Burke

I quoted this a few days back, as it is probably my favorite quote because it so sums up my conservative philosophy and intense disdain for the French Revolution. I think though that many people missed out on the context. Here Burke is writing about the French Revolution and the killing of the Dauphiness of Versailles. In the old Europe, chivalry (civilization) would have presented such barbarism. But now the age of sophists (ones who play with words), economists (one who plays with money), and calculators (one who plays with numbers) are the enemies. They are the ones who have sought to rework the rich tapestry of society in their own image, forever marring and destroying it.

Europe was great because of its heritage, its castles, its tradition, and its cultural. Sadly, too many people today say America is great for its wealth. We should strive to be like the old Europe, not in the political sense, but in the cultural sense. Infused with the tradition and living it out. Is this a romantic notion? In some sense, but that doesn’t make it an incorrect one. Money and material wealth don’t bring happiness in any real or sustainable sense. Happiness is erected from ones family, faith, friend, and surroundings.

The effect of liberty to individuals is that they may do what they please: we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we risk congratulations.

-Edmund Burke

The problem we face today is we have stripped away the vaneers of civilization for the machinery of economics and social control. We’ve replaced the beautiful tapestry of western civilization with its intracicies and ins and outs with the cheap smattering of money. Is money evil? Of course not. Are business men evil. No! They are what America is built out of. They are essential and prime, but its not their money that makes it so. Its their ingenuity, their drive, their self-reliance, etc.

If we command our wealth, we shall be rich and free; if our wealth commands us, we are poor indeed.

-Edmund Burke

If America was poor could she be as great? Yes. If America was more rich could she be as great? Yes. Our cultural value is rather unrelated to our material well being. For my money I prefer Bach, Monet, and others to Spears and the man who put a crucifix in urine. Whine and gripe all you want, but the Europe of old exported the former, while we export the latter (+ Baywatch).

What makes america great though is her ideals: freedom, liberty, limited government. These have made a world of difference on Earth. But let’s not turn our souls over to sophists, economists, and calculators. Let us draw swords in protection of our lady, America. Chivalry demands it.

Manners are of more importance than laws… Manners are what vex or soothe, corrupt or purify, exalt or debase, barbarize or refine us, by a constant, steady, uniform, insensible operation, like that of the air we breathe in.

-Edmund Burke

A recent poll has revealed that a majority (90%) of South Korean youth would be against the United States if uses a military option to topple the North Korean regime. Nearly half would want South Korea to side with the Communist North. A mere 12% would want the South to side with the US during such a war.

The poll, conducted Feb. 16-19, surveyed youths between 17 and 23 years old who will be old enough to vote in next year’s presidential election. The margin of error was plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

The youths named China as South Korea’s most important partner for maintaining friendly relations, at 39.5 percent, followed by the United States and North Korea at 18.4 and 18 percent, respectively.

So we are polling .4% ahead of Kim Jong-Il? That is nice, but why do we bother being so damn humane if could behave like that animal and still come up smelling like kimchi?

Two important questions: Do we have a policy for dealing with North Korea’s nuclear status? Why are we spending millions of dollars per year to station troops in South Korea when a majority of the nation (I realize this poll only includes 17-23 year olds, but other age groups tip the balance against the US) doesn’t want us there? These troops should be moved to Japan or Taiwan, countries where we have true friends.