• About
  • Blog (Ext.)
  • Books
  • Contact
  • Education Resources
  • News Links

PERRIN LOVETT

~ Deo Vindice

PERRIN LOVETT

Tag Archives: philosophy

BOOK REVIEW: A Theory of Europe by Daria Dugina

30 Friday May 2025

Posted by perrinlovett in Other Columns

≈ Comments Off on BOOK REVIEW: A Theory of Europe by Daria Dugina

Tags

A THEORY OF EUROPE, book review, Daria Dugina, philosophy

A Theory of Europe by Daria Dugina

 

Commonality. Your reviewer has discovered that just like England and America, Russia has its fair share of Francophiles. Setting aside warfare, economic and political differences, and religious doctrinal minutiae, there is a great shared history among the many European peoples, divergent, of course, though still linked together by a great overarching predominance that transcends language, local culture, and assorted ethnic heritages. Western Europe, France included, has fallen into disarray. Eastern Europe, while in turmoil, still stands, particularly where it stands under the Russian aegis, as a coherent civilizational state. In a book that examines the questions of Europae Restitutio, one particular Russian looks hopefully, through a unique Russian lens, albeit one curated by classical Greek-derived philosophy and copious cross-cultural experience, primarily to France and the emerging, evolving legacy of the Nouvelle Droite. It is an academic’s approach. It is, as the title suggests, a theory, or an amalgam of theories. However, it is also an optimistic lure of promise and potential and a fascinating, thought-provoking disquisition.

*Dugina, Daria Platonova, A Theory of Europe: A View of the New Right, London: Arktos, 2024 (Kindle edition)

Daria Platonova Dugina was the rising star of Russian intellectual thought, a powerful philosopher and gifted writer, artistically talented, who loved life and honored God. She was the daughter of Alexander Dugin and Natalya Melentyeva. On August 20, 2022, she was murdered by Western-backed Ukrainian Nazi terrorists. This is my third Dugina book review, following Eschatological Optimism (review) and For A Radical Life (review). A Theory of Europe is a masterfully-compilled set of lectures, essays, discussions, and interviews that move forward as one well-threaded narrative. For readers familiar with Daria Dugina, postmodern European political thought, and views that surpass mere “left” or “right”, it will serve as a wonderful summary of approximately half a century of studied rebellion against the prevailing rot. As with any work bearing the standard of Dasha Platonova, it contains new surprises and revelations to interest any mind. And as with Miss Dugina’s previous works, as posthumously translated into English, I heartily, even sternly recommend A Theory of Europe. Please obtain a copy from Arktos or Amazon. Herein, I examine just a few higher points for the reader’s edification.

The tone of the book is set in the Forward by Professor Dugin, who wrote of his daughter, on page 10, “Dasha believed in the New Right and was inspired by their views on the need for a great restoration of primordially European values—classical, ancient, and medieval.” Most or much of my usual audience is either European, European descended, European adjacent, or otherwise at least tangentially interested in Europe. Those in Europe and of European descent now face an epochal change, a choice between enduring or, by postmodern default, diminishing or even disappearing. One hopes Dugina’s take on the restoration of European values inspires them as well. 

She gets right to the heart of the matter on page 16: “…the French Nouvelle Droite represents a Traditionalist, cultural, conservative revolution. The New Right might be called the new encyclopaedists or the new European “Enlightenment”—Enlightenment 2.0—but in the reverse.” The original Enlightenment, one of the most persuasive con jobs in history, broke the traditions of Europe and Western European Civilization by insidious design. It represented the end of the traditional monarchies, the end of meaningful Western European Christianity, a recalculation of the Greco-Roman legal and philosophical legacy, and the alteration of the organization of European nation-states and polities. Going in reverse means ending the charade and lies of the past five hundred years and reestablishing the old order of Christendom.  

Reestablishing the lost order might require a coalition of what could be labeled strange bedfellows. In order to affect both politics and culture, those on the right need to consider at least tactical alliances with some groups on the left, including labor, the ecology-minded, and more—groups not frequently thought of as conservative allies. “For [Carl] Schmitt, politics is always a confrontation between different political units (groups and collectives of various scales) and presupposes a permanent multiplicity, which Schmitt calls the “pluriversum””. A Theory of Europe, page 24. Such a multiplicity counters the artificial universal hegemony imposed by liberal globalism. “[T]he modern West masks the pursuit of its agenda under the aegis of “establishing democracy” and “defending human rights”, Id., 25, while destroying both. By pursuing or pushing individuality as its primary subject, “Liberalism denies collective identity and proclaims abstract human rights, which leads to focusing only on the isolated individual.” Id., 43-44. So liberated from his traditions and culture, the individual finds himself in a vacuous state of self-destruction.

Another link the New Right, particularly Alain de Benoist, encourages and seeks to establish is that between Europe and the Third World. While such a proposition might initially sound strange, it makes sense as both populations, albeit in different ways, are victims of global modernity. Opins de Benoist,  “We are united in our common revolt against the hegemony of the West.” Id., 48. Europeans in both Europe and places like America and Canada should carefully consider this option, both out of deference to the aspect of tandem rebellion against the status quo and out of geographic convenience—whereas Europeans may find common ground with those in the Third World, they will also find those from the Third World already living among them. For those in America, perhaps particularly in Dixie, Dugina’s treatment of things like the 2017 Charlottesville, Virginia torch rally, page 117, might be of interest.

Dugina also examines the cooperative nexus of various religious elements. Europe (and America) rose under the auspices of Christianity. Many still consider Europe and America Christian, Christian majority, or Christian sympathetic. To some extent this is correct. However, vast swaths of the various European populations have delved heartily into atheism, cultism, heresy, and nihilism. The lingering Christian remnants, of whatever size, may have to make do with other allies previously unlooked for. To that end, Dugina notes the predominance of paganism in the echelons of the New Right. “There are rather many neo-pagans among the New Right, practically 90% of the movement.” Id., 66. She also hints at the previous East-West divergence in dealing with pre-existing folk (pagan) tradition: incorporation versus elimination. “Orthodox Christianity absorbed a rather large mass of ancient East Slavic beliefs. We have tighter ties with Indo-European tradition than Catholics do. Moreover, Orthodoxy is closer to Hellenic culture as it was preserved in Byzantium up to its latest eras.” Id., 67. Somewhat related to the idea of holistic incorporation of multiple cultural facets, she observes the close links between the New Right, de Benoist, and others, and her father’s Fourth Political Theory. 

She also explores the philosophies of America and how they have come to dominate much of European thought and economic-political discourse. While she labels the American way, “pragmatism,” Id., 84, others, like Dr. Michael Hudson, have bluntly dismissed America (and other post-Westphalian Western nation-states) as being nothing more than an agent for the international financial class (whose concerns, while generally cold and plausibly irrational in strategy, certainly are pragmatic as to the ultimate goals of enslaving mankind and stealing everything). 

Concerning the international rentier leeches, in Dugina’s included interview with de Benoist, after discussing how the system reduces man to a mere consumer, he remarks of (financial) capitalism:

Capitalism is a system of world government, a system that is driven by limitlessness, infinitude, and always needs more—more profit, more markets, more goods. The slogan of this tendency is: more is always needed. This means that in order to turn the planet into a gigantic market, it is necessary to eliminate all political, social, and cultural barriers, which means eliminating all differences. Id., 182

Summarizing the final effects of the Enlightenment, of the philosophy obsessed with “the end of history”, Dugian notes: “To sum up, today the West is dead. European culture has died. French culture has died along with it.” Id., 254. She ends the book by discussing how Russia’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine has thrown a wrench into the machinations of the luciferian globalists. Sadly, her life was stolen not long after the SMO began. Still, her early observations have proven prescient. Russia’s martial retaliation, along with the greater economic and geopolitical war waged by the sovereign world majority against the globalists, has demonstrated various glimpses, for those who can or will see them, of solutions to many of the quandaries scrutinized in A Theory of Europe. Huge parts of the world have already learned great lessons from the late rebellion. It remains to be seen, in full, if Europe and its New Right, along with associated movements elsewhere in the fading Combined West, will follow suit. Russia, China, et al have, at least, given anti-liberal dissidents a little breathing room and bought time if nothing else. Perhaps the gentle reader of Dugina’s fine treatise might make a positive difference in that regard. If nothing else, it will set the gears and wheels of the brain in motion. And as with any great book, it pays dividends just to read it. Kindly do that soon.

*I would be remiss as a reviewer and friend if I did not thank Professor Alexander Dugin for his excellent heartfelt commentary within A Theory of Europe (and for gifting us the author), Constantin von Hoffmeister for his editorial prowess, Jafe Arnold for his translation skills and his Preface, and Daniel Friberg of Arktos for permission to utilize the foregoing quotations. Thank you, gentlemen.

Deo vindice.

Plato AND Aristotle

27 Thursday Mar 2025

Posted by perrinlovett in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Plato AND Aristotle

Tags

Alexander Dugin, Aristotle, philosophy, Plato

Usually, and to the extent they’re ever discussed anymore in the West, it’s OR, not AND. Professor Dugin provides an interesting Russia based study.

Plato for Russian civilization and equally for Western traditional civilization is as important as Upanishadas for India or Confucius for China. Christian theology is based on Plato. Without him, his theories, his terms, his language nothing is comprehensible in our heritage.

By the way Islamic philosophy, Sufism (In Arabic and all the rest) and Shia doctrine (above all red shiism) are constructed on Plato also. Some were called peripatetics but in reality relied on Neoplatonism. Plato is central to Islamic intellectual tradition in its highs.

Jewish Kabbalah is nothing else but Neoplatonic doctrine introduced in Middle Ages into Judaic religion. Scholem argues that it was alien to previous traditional Judaism where almost no trace of emanations theory is found. Except some mystical groups (may be influenced earlier).

Plato is metaphysical foundation of our civilization. But that doesn’t mean Aristotle is to be abandoned. Proclus, Simplicius and other neoplatonists have included Aristotle in platonic context. Correct reading of Aristotle is that of Alexander of Afrodisias and Brentano.

It’s okay to be Aristotelian, Platonically speaking.

REVIEW ESSAY: Alexander Dugin, The Great Awakening, And Russian Higher Education Reform

22 Friday Nov 2024

Posted by perrinlovett in Other Columns

≈ Comments Off on REVIEW ESSAY: Alexander Dugin, The Great Awakening, And Russian Higher Education Reform

Tags

Alexander Dugin, college, education, Great Awakening, multipolarity, philosophy, Russia

Alexander Dugin, The Great Awakening, And Russian Higher Education Reform

 

I originally envisioned this article as a review of five semi-randomly selected books by esteemed Russian Professor Alexander Dugin. However, as my experience with mass surveys has sometimes proven murky, with me feeling like I give short shrift to someone or some part of the analysis, I decided to take a slightly different approach. Accordingly, herein I strongly recommend a set of books by Dugin, about Dugin, or associated with Dugin. After a brief discussion of theories, I then focus on one particular work, The Great Awakening vs. The Great Reset, a book that centers on more actionable facets of (post)modern life and society. Many people, especially people in the West, like hands-on orientation and examples. While the particular project is of a distinctly Russian character, it concerns a universal necessity, thus making it of inspirational interest to many parties worldwide. I think it would be most valuable to consider what’s going on in Moscow if one wants to enbetter similar systems elsewhere.

The five Dugin books are The Fourth Political Theory, The Rise Of The Fourth Political Theory, Political Platonism, Ethnosociology, and The Great Awakening vs. The Great Reset. All of my citations herein come from the EPUB digital editions as published by Arktos; a full bibliography follows at the end. 

I was tempted to include at least one book or argument critical of Dugin, but I found most of them to be disingenuous at best. The fact the Professor and his voluminous works are banned from Amazon tells those within and without the West all they really need to know. There is a reason why Dugin has been targeted with sanctions and worse: the Western globalist elites fear him. But why? Anyone who has watched his interviews with Tucker Carlson, Larry Johnson, or other journalists is left with the impression of a rational, pleasant, and ordinary man, albeit one gifted with extraordinary intelligence, intellectual capacity, and the willingness to use his ideas for the greater good. Therein lies the answer: the rulers of the West, being forever at war with God and man, cannot abide honest ideas or any pursuit of the truth. 

Dugin And The Fourth Political Theory

Alexander Dugin, PhD, aka, the Philosopher, is a doctor of philosophy, sociology, and political science. The author of dozens of books, and the speaker of perhaps as many languages, he currently serves, among other capacities, as Director of the Ivan Ilyin Higher Political School at Moscow’s Russian State University for the Humanities. Yes, the center’s name has stirred minor controversy. Dugin has been known to make a few waves—the stern delight of traditionalists, horror for liberals. He is the father of Daria Dugina. He is a Russian institution and a global figure—both feared and sought after. He is also a man unusually capable of using his extraordinary talent for the betterment of mankind and the Glory of God.

Dugin is renowned as a philosopher, a theoretician, and a thinker. Not infrequently, such men are sometimes criticized for having, as we call it, a “pie in the sky” vision. Yet, as demonstrated herein, Dugin puts his ideas into common practice and thereby brings them to life. Many are the misconceptions about Dugin and his work, many of them intentional, demeaning, and deceptive. For instance, he is repeatedly referred to by the Western establishment as “Putin’s brain” or “Putin’s Rasputin” (usually by people who couldn’t tell the difference between Grigori and Valentin). Vladimir Putin is obviously gifted with great intelligence, as are the people in his administration. The concurrence of Dugin’s ideas and the direction of twenty-first century Russia is an interesting phenomenon. Whether his notions become general policy or if there is merely a commonality of interest and intent, it is undeniable he is at least helping shape public perception and policy. Herein, I will examine in more detail one such policy example concerning higher education.

Many people, particularly those whose traditions have been hijacked or muted by modernity, have fallen into the trap of expediency and simplicity, looking, essentially, for easy answers and turn-key solutions. There are solutions, and Dugin provides a roadmap to them, but they and their application vary according to the problem and the society or nation where the problem manifests. In this regard, or in answer to these kinds of misgivings, utilizing Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory might be well analogized to selecting the proper wrench for the adjustment of a particular mechanical part. With socio-political issues, the application of the Theory will necessitate consideration of the special needs and traditions of the subject society. 

The beauty of the tie-in concept of multipolarity is that it allows each civilization to assert itself independently—in contravention of the liberal, globalist West’s current one-size (fits none) mandate—in accordance with those needs and traditions. What works for Russia might be slightly different than what works for Iran or China. What works in those three civilizational states might be different from what is needed in Europe, Brasil, or South Africa. Dugin’s roadmap is valuable as it allows, via theoretical and practical political reorientation, a chance for the rediscovery of tradition and character, things that may have been lost or hidden in certain cultures. But just like selecting a wrench and using it, the process of turning political theory into practice requires commitment and effort.

Multipolarity is the opposite of the failed unipolar world domination by the United States and the Western liberal, financial capitalist, democratic system that emerged, in full, after World War Two, and that haughtily posited itself as “the end of history” after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the end of bipolar era. Multipolarity or, rather, multipolarization, is already underway, essentially becoming a bifurcation of the world into the West and the Rest. 

The Western globalist model is the fulfillment of the first political theory, Liberalism. Communism was the second theory, Fascism the third. The subject or main principle of Liberalism is the individual. While the idea has a certain libertarian appeal, it is and was a trap that allowed the atomization of man and his subsequent enslavement and torture. (You’re different. Just like everyone else. Now get in the cage…) The subject of Communism was class and the subject of Fascism, depending on who implemented it, was the nation-state or race. Liberalism defeated Fascism in 1945 and Communism, for all intents and purposes, in 1991. Now Liberalism’s time is up, at least for those who see through its dead Enlightenment ideology of control, slavery, and death. As Dugin writes of his own country’s experience, “…Russia needs a new political idea. For Russia, liberalism does not fit, but communism and fascism are equally unacceptable. Consequently, we need a Fourth Political Theory.” Dugin, Alexander, The Fourth Political Theory, London: Arktos, 2012/2018, p. 8, EPUB edition.

Dugin’s Fourth Theory may be summarized as a rebellion against Liberalism, its “enlightened” modernity, and the underlying anti-human satanism at its heart. Here, for Western, especially American, readers, “liberalism” is discussed in the macro sense, about that hideous progressive development since the eighteenth century (with, of course, older roots). It encompasses what Americans consider Democrat-left liberals, Republican-right conservatives, and even libertarians. Most politically minded people in the West operate under some assumption of macro liberalism. This is why the wise minority among them now shun the conservative label, instead merely calling themselves traditionalists or something similar. Russian conservatives, some of them, get a pass as they are, in fact, truly concerned about preserving tradition and have actually conserved it. The Fourth Theory is a grand return to tradition, a concept that is different within each culture. The new principle or subject is society-focused Dasein, the German term popularized by philosopher Martin Heidegger meaning existence or total, holistic being. Dasein is a uniquely human abstraction that integrates the individual with his society, encompassing all relevant areas of life and culture. This is the polar opposite of Liberalism, which ultimately seeks to replace human existence, literally destroying humanity. The Fourth Theory merges, replaces, and overcomes as necessary the subjects of the previous theories. A brief outline of the Fourth Theory, taken by Dugin from his book, may be read in the Arktos Journal. A continuous working exposition of the Theory may be found on Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory website. 

What the Fourth Political Theory is, in terms of what it opposes, is now clear. It is neither fascism, nor communism, nor liberalism. In principle, this kind of negation is rather significant. It embodies our determination to go beyond the usual ideological and political paradigms and to make an effort to overcome the inertia of the clichés within political thinking. This alone is a highly stimulating invitation for a free spirit and a critical mind. I do not really understand why certain people, when confronted with the concept of the Fourth Political Theory, do not immediately rush to open a bottle of champagne, and do not start dancing and rejoicing, celebrating the discovery of new possibilities. The Fourth Political Theory, p. 24.

Much or even most of the world appears ready for new possibilities. Writing in April 2024 on his Dzen account about late martial developments the world over, and what they portend for the future, Dugin noted, “…the world will already be irreversibly multipolar.” It probably is now, with or without champagne. 

Dugin’s Rise of the Fourth Political Theory focuses more on the present and future of Eurasian existence through, naturally, a somewhat Russo-centric lens. Therein he continues to dismantle Western Liberalism, challenges it, and asserts the unique virtues of differing values not necessarily in line with, or under the thumb of those of the liberal globalists.

Why, properly speaking, did humanity adopt the values of [Liberal] freedom and democracy, human rights, the market economy, social progress, and technological development as universal? This is a fundamental question, which is practically never posed by the Western press. After all, if we look at the number of people living today on the planet, we will see that the great majority of them hold entirely different values. The market and democracy, for instance, do not emerge from the social and political history of Indian society, where even today the caste system is preserved. There are billions of such people. These values are not at all characteristic of the Chinese tradition, but there are another billion people in China. A billion Muslims have absolutely their own view on what to consider the highest value (here what is most important is fear of God and following of religious instructions, and only then everything else). The same can be said of the peoples of Africa, the East, and for that matter Russia. The values of the market, liberal democracy, and social progress in the sense in which the West gives them, are not at all self-evident for Russian history and Russian society, since in the vast majority of historical stages (as before the Revolution, so after it) Russians held to absolutely different value arrangements.

Values that seem universal to the contemporary European or American are absolutely not so for the contemporary Chinese, Indian, or Russian. They might be attractive or repulsive, but the main thing is that they are not universal. Nothing in the history of the greater part of mankind, excluding the experience of Western countries, testifies that these values grew everywhere independently and were not imposed in a colonial manner, practically by force. Dugin, Alexander, The Rise Of The Fourth Political Theory: The Fourth Political Theory Vol. II, London: Arktos, 2017, p. 127.

Whether it was a pre-existing Western plan for the next phase of “universal” progress, or whether it was a tactical reaction against the bubbling global uprising of indignation, the scheme of the so-called Great Reset became patently obvious over the past decade or so. The adversaries of mankind literally and openly admit their intentions for the rest of us. “You’ll own nothing and be happy,” is a real quote taken from a 2016 World Economic Forum video presentation. More accurately stated, we’ll own nothing, have nothing, and be nothing, and they will be happy. It would represent a great reset to absolute, miserable dystopia. This is beyond madness; it is pure evil. But the people of the world, bless them, are not so easily corralled and culled. “The Great Awakening is the spontaneous response of the human masses to the Great Reset.” Dugin, Alexander, The Great Awakening vs. The Great Reset, London: Arktos, 2021, p. 22.

The Great Awakening vs. The Great Reset

(© 2021, Arktos)

In this short, very readable, and action-inspiring work, Dugin early on explains the nature of the Great Reset:

The main idea of the Great Reset is the continuation of globalisation and the strengthening of globalism after a series of failures: the conservative presidency of anti-globalist Trump, the growing influence of a multipolar world — especially of China and Russia, the rise of Islamic countries like Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and their withdrawal from the influence of the West. The Great Awakening vs. The Great Reset, p. 5.

In explaining the rising counter force against this dark vision for humanity’s future, Dugin notes, on page 20, that too many ordinary people the world over “have suddenly realised, like cattle before the slaughterhouse, that their fate has already been decided by their rulers and that there is no more room for people in the future.” 

It is not an exaggeration to claim or notice that the elites and the demons behind them do not want human beings anymore. Or, at least, they do not want beings still in touch with their human nature. In addition to bolstering their power over others, they seek to ruin and claim souls for their master below. “The Great Awakening against the Great Reset is humanity’s revolt against the ruling liberal elites. Moreover, it is the rebellion of man against his age-old enemy, the enemy of the human race itself.” Id., p. 22

Brief yet excellent attention is paid to how different groups are fighting back in different ways. The reader should remember this was written in 2021, before Russia began its military retaliation against the NATO Nazis, before the rise of the BRICS+ alliance became obvious to many, and before the hideous genocide in Gaza caused many more to critically rethink their world. Things are changing fast. But as usual, Dugin is ahead of the curve. And even when he’s not necessarily out front, he synthesizes, organizes, and labels various phenomena so as to give them clarity and a greater sense of applicability. He then delves deeper into the mission, strengths, and needs of his Russia:

Of course, even today’s Russia does not have a complete and coherent ideology that could pose a serious challenge to the Great Reset. In addition, the liberal elites entrenched at the top of society are still strong and influential in Russia, and liberal ideas, theories and methods still dominate the economy, education, culture and science. All of this weakens Russia’s potential, disorients society, and sets the stage for growing internal contradictions. But, on the whole, Russia is the most important — if not the main! — pole of the Great Awakening.” Id., p. 28 (double emphasis mine).

In the Appendixes one finds a section, “Theoretical Principles of the Great Awakening (Based on the Fourth Political Theory),” which lists twenty-one points of both theory and action. Point Fifteen concerns the “new educational project”:

Finally, we need to act — to put these considerations (if you share them, if you agree with them) in some kind of practice. And the most important and central practice is in education. Because it is through education that liberals penetrate our society, pervert our children, destroy the very principles of cultures and countries, destroy and dissolve identities.  

The main struggle should be at the university level. Id., pp. 50-51 (emphasis mine).

Point Sixteen lists three types of people addressed by the proposed education reforms, three kinds of students in need of liberation from the prevailing liberal madness: 1) the philosophically inclined minority; 2) the political elites, activists, and warriors; and, 3) the majority of mankind, the good, ordinary countrymen and women. While the approaches for reaching and salvaging each type are necessarily presented in a broad brush fashion, the strokes paint a good and reasoned methodology, along with repeated specific justification for reform. All of it is a clarion call to dispense with liberal, anti-human indoctrination and corruption. 

My discussion continues with the first type Dugin seeks to reach, the “philosophers of the world.” As-is, they are generally starved for true tradition, philosophy, and education. 

We need to promote this traditionalist education — including metaphysics, theology, medieval tradition, as well as non-Western systems of thought. And all kinds of philosophical tendencies that formally belong to the modern West, but that are different from it — for example, German classical philosophy starting with Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, or Nietzsche, Heidegger, the Conservative Revolution, traditionalism, Italian thought, artistic realms less affected by the modern Western capitalist and liberal principles…

All that should be saved and transformed into something accessible to the people throughout the world. Why is it so important? Because in the Western type of education, precisely these things are disappearing before our eyes. Today, there is no classical education in the best high schools and universities. They are losing this heritage. They are more and more involved in the cancel culture. They are trying to cancel everything in education. Id., P. 51.

As for the sad proxy that passes for education in the West, I assert Dugin is 110% correct that what is currently offered is hollow and lacking at best. Liberals have succeeded in destroying just about everything of value. Most American schools, long devoid of Latin and Greek, are now losing English literacy and basic numeracy. Any fundamental understanding of grammar, logic, rhetoric, and mathematics has largely departed the schools at virtually all levels. The West might benefit from emulating or, at least, studying any successful reformation in Russia. By chance, Professor Dugin is ahead of this curve too.

Russian Higher Education Reform

Under President Vladimir Putin, the Russian Federation, society-wide, is being reconstructed to place utmost emphasis on families and children. Children are, of course, the driving factor in determining whether any nation will continue to exist. Excellent education, as excellent as possible, is critical in making their lives better, more liveable, and more beneficial for them and their society. This year, in May, Leonid Savin penned a great article at Pogled about Russian intellectual standards and calls for refinement in keeping with Russian tradition and sovereignty. He pointed out that during the 1990s, under Western interference, existing Russian structures and curricula lost meaning, being replaced with debased nonsense. Savin also noted Dugin’s work as head of the new (as of 2023) Ivan Ilyin Higher Political School, Training and Scientific Center, at the Russian State University for the Humanities (RSUH). The Center’s purpose is “the development and implementation of a new approach (a new socio-humanitarian paradigm) to the domestic teaching of humanitarian and social disciplines, aimed at the formation of the worldview of students based on the Russian civilizational identity and traditional Russian spiritual and moral values.”

In January, Dugin remarked at RSUH’s Transformation of Humanitarian Education Seminar, “There has been a catastrophic degradation in Western historical science. …. This is evidenced by gender problems, postmodernism, and ultra-liberalism. We can study the West, but not as the ultimate universal truth. We need to focus on our own Russian development model.” It appears work is underway toward the needed restoration. In July, writing in the Arktos Journal, Dugin boldly proclaimed:

By the way, we are canceling the Unified State Exam (USE) and the Bologna system. That is the right decision. But who introduced these systems? Who forced them upon us, breaking the backs of dissenters in the process? Did they implement themselves? And why have we forgotten the names of those responsible? What positions do they currently hold? This same lack of accountability applies to many other issues as well.

More recently, Savin echoed the progress in an interview given to the Turkish outlet Adimlar: 

But now we have a good chance because the unipolar era of American hegemony is over. We are now in a multipolar period that needs to be corrected. And we have a chance to strengthen our strategies and policies against the neoliberal order by respecting our traditions. Education is very important, so we must bring new curricula for our schools and universities and reorganize the educational process under our own umbrella, rejecting the Bologna process and all the destructive practices of student exchanges, Erasmus program, etc.

Dugin also had ardent support for his tradition-based educational ideas, and, I suspect, more than a little input, from his beloved daughter Daria:

If it depended on me, I would approve a strategy for education where a person would first be obliged to properly study, research, and understand their own tradition and only then turn to others. Already in school, it is necessary to fully acquaint oneself with Russian culture. And this should be continued at university. And only then, once a person has traversed this difficult path far enough, do they have the right to study others. Otherwise, they will remain halfhearted, they won’t understand their own traditions, and they will only pick up the surface of another. Dugina, Daria, Eschatological Optimism, Tucson: PRAV, 2023, p.117.

I Wonder: Things To Consider?

It appears to me that the new Center and Ilyin School fulfill part of Dugin’s twenty-one points from The Great Awakening vs. The Great Reset, perhaps especially pertaining to the philosophical class or, as he calls them, the “Brahmans.” Earlier this year, speaking at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, he described the liberal infiltration in social education as a “total occupation.” I wonder about specific developments or achievements in dislodging the occupation, asking, does the Center develop new curricula and standards, (re)educate educators, or both?

If my understanding is correct, Russian military education is already of very high quality and effectiveness. Still, I wonder if there is a similar effort underway concerning the second “warrior” class, as well as the third category, the countrymen.

RSUH’s main website asserts: “International cooperation is an important part of the internationalization strategy at RSUH. It is aimed at strengthening the university’s competitive ability in Russia and abroad and its integration into the global education and research space.” I wonder if the meaning of this statement has changed, or will change, with the departure from the Bologna/Western system and perhaps a greater embrace of BRICS+ countries and the Global South.

Concerning President Putin’s Decree No. 702, on the admission of oppressed traditionalists into the Federation, I wonder if anyone has foreseen a near or long-term increase in Western student participation in Russian college education. And, if so, does anyone foresee any related challenges?

I understand that Russia’s economy is substantially different from America’s. Yet in America, loans for college education contributed to the mass financialization of the US economy from roughly 1950 to the present, including ridiculous increases in tuition prices (~10,000%). One effect of the US loans is that they inhibit family development (which we know is of critical importance in Russia). I was surprised to read this article from Moscow One about the potential development of such loans in Russia. I wonder if this is a growing trend of necessity. If so, I wonder if it is a wise or sustainable solution.

Concluding Matters and Bibliography

The following books are highly recommended reading material: educational, eye-opening, and mentally entertaining:

  • Dugin, Alexander, The Fourth Political Theory, London: Arktos, 2012/2018;
  • Dugin, Alexander, The Rise Of The Fourth Political Theory: The Fourth Political Theory Vol. II, London: Arktos, 2017;
  • Dugin, Alexander, Political Platonism: The Philosophy Of Politics, London: Arktos, 2019;
  • Dugin, Alexander, Ethnosociology: The Foundations, London: Arktos, 2019;
  • Dugin, Alexander, The Great Awakening vs. The Great Reset, London: Arktos, 2021;
  • Millerman, Michael, Inside “Putin’s Brain”, Montreal: Millerman School (Independent, via Amazon), 2022;
  • Dugina, Daria, For A Radical Life: Meditations By Daria Platonova Dugina, Tucson: PRAV, 2024;
  • Dugina, Daria, Eschatological Optimism, Tucson: PRAV, 2023, and;
  • Savin, Leonid, Ordo Pluriversalis: The End of Pax Americana and the Rise of Multipolarity, London: Black House, 2020.

I would be remiss if I did not thank Daniel Friberg of Arktos for granting quote permission and for publishing Professor Dugin’s works in English.

Бог – наш защитник (Deo Vindice)

Seen first at Geopolitika.

Also at:

Alexander Dugin’s Substack (more on “my” substack later);

Nova Resistencia (BRA-POR); and,

The 4th Political Theory

A New Code for a New Media

11 Monday Nov 2024

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on A New Code for a New Media

Tags

Dugin, media, philosophy

Professor Dugin calls for a revised media code for the advancing Sovereign world.

During the “Unified Cultural Media Code and Transnational Media Projects” session at the CIS forum “Media Development in a Changing World,” Dugin stated that, in his view, the CIS countries currently lack a unified media code, though one is necessary.

“So let us, colleagues, journalists from all our CIS countries, Eurasian Union states, and friendly republics, draw not only from the past but also from the future. Let’s create this unified cultural media code of ours,” the philosopher said at the media forum at the “Russia Today” multimedia international press center.

Being from a totally failed part of the world, and ever a media outsider, myself, I’m not sure exactly what he’s after, though as with many of his ideas, I appreciate the direction. Literally anything would beat the current Western system of lazily taking copy from intel agencies or artificial stupidity bots.

In related news, Alexander Markovics has a new review of Dugin’s book Politica Aeterna. I will, soon, have something similar of my own. Stay tuned.

Peak America, Newton, and Calculus

29 Sunday May 2022

Posted by perrinlovett in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Peak America, Newton, and Calculus

Tags

calculus, math, military, philosophy

Read THIS.

We’ll discuss this – and much, much more – on tomorrow’s show.

Voxiversity 001: Immigration and War

26 Monday Feb 2018

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, Other Columns

≈ Comments Off on Voxiversity 001: Immigration and War

Tags

history, immigration, philosophy, Vox Day, War

This is huge (especially for being just under 16 minutes). Please watch Vox Day’s inaugural Voxiversity video:

Vox Day/YouTube.

You can tell it’s effective truth by the way the SJW Stasi attacked it immediately. Ignore the idiotic “warning.” And I hope you’re in an area where this can be viewed easily. (Banned in: Austria, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Czechia, Germany, Estonia, France, United Kingdom, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Croatia, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Latvia, Martinique, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Poland, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Reunion, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, French Southern Territories, Wallis and Futuna, Mayotte). Hopefully there is a VPN or other workaround for that.

This is an outstanding work of history and philosophy drawing on the reliable past and exploring what it means for our present and for the near future.

Please spread the word. Learn more at Vox’s site; donate if you’re able.

Nisi Deus ad Plagam!

Meditations, Contemporary and Classical

19 Thursday Jan 2017

Posted by perrinlovett in Other Columns

≈ Comments Off on Meditations, Contemporary and Classical

Tags

books, Kindle, Marcus Aurelius, philosophy, Vox Day

This morning I was lucky enough to get an email from James Altucher that I could turn into an easy post, here. Then, I got an email from Sergey with the Obama/Merkel transcript. Now, I have a trifecta.

Vox Day responded to a request for a philosophy book:

Musing on meditations

Someone on Gab asked me if I would write a book of philosophy, and suggested something similar to one written by one of my intellectual heroes, Marcus Aurelius. His Meditations have been a significant influence on my thinking since high school, particularly this deeply meaningful piece of advice, with which he began Book Two in the Staniforth translation:

Begin each day by telling yourself: today I shall be meeting with interference, ingratitude, insolence, disloyalty, ill-will, and selfishness—all of them due to the offenders’ ignorance of what is good or evil. But for my part I have long perceived the nature of good and its nobility, the nature of evil and its meanness, and also the nature of the culprit himself, who is my brother (not in the physical sense, but as a fellow-creature similarly endowed with reason and a share of the divine); therefore none of those things can injure me, for nobody can implicate me in what is degrading.

That got me thinking about Meditations. If you’ve not read the Emperor’s notes, then you’re not really well-read in the classics. If that’s the case, take heart! The royalties on the old book ran out 1,700 years ago and there’s a free version available on Kindle (just click!)!

41wi9rtv0zl-_sy346_

Amazon / Kindle.

Meditations contains some of the finest, calmest, well-bred Stoicism every written. And I’ve always been struck by the compatibility between the Stoics, including Aurelius, and Christianity. Simply put, not only will you enjoy the lessons, but you will be able to relate to most of them.

Many thanks to Vox for yet another excellent idea. And I hope he cranks his book out sooner than later. Thanks to Kindle and Amazon for a wealth of free classics. And thanks to all of you for reading this rambling. Now, click that link!

The Allegory of the Cave

15 Tuesday Dec 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Other Columns

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Allegory of the Cave, classics, education, Glaucon, intelligence, Jesus, philosophy, Plato, reality, Socrates, UGA

Sometimes one finds after trials that what one wants isn’t really what one needs. The unknown need is often what should be desired. So it is with both the lesson behind The Allegory of the Cave and in my method of discovering it.

Long ago I wandered aimlessly but unintrepidly into the University of Georgia. I was convinced I was destined to study business and become a real life Gordon Gekko or something similar. I have yet to make millions or be investigated by the SEC. I have experienced some very attractive women and sunrise on the beach, so it has not been a total loss. Whatever.

Back in Athens, entering my senior year, I found myself faced with a host of required elective classes. I had essentially finished my business education which did turn out to mostly be a total loss. Hoping to get out into the “real world” as fast and as easily as possible I signed up for what I thought would be the easiest classes offered. I loaded up on philosophy and classical studies.

These I did find easy and I earned above average grades. However, my ease of completion, my excellence, derived from my immense enjoyment of the subject matter. Only at the end of my tenure did I discover the misdirection of my education.

Plato, being one of the greatest minds of all history, was required reading in one or more classics courses. Plato’s thoughts and methodology have influenced scholars since, to include Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, More and Kant.

Deep inside Plato’s Republic one will find The Allegory of the Cave. It is a metaphorical conversation between Socrates (Plato’s mentor) and Glaucon (Plato’s brother). Ancient philosophy frequently featured dialectic parables to stimulate thought about the conveyed concepts. The Cave is such a story about human experience and education.

Socrates and Glaucon discussed a cave where were chained a group of people. The prisoners sat in a row facing a smooth black wall at the back of the cave. None had ever lived outside; their imprisoned condition was all they ever known. However, they were not without entertainment.

Behind the chained men burned a fire. Someone would regularly hold in front of the fire but behind the prisoners a series of shapes and models. These forms were representations of real things from the outside world. The shapes cast shadows on the wall. These were viewed by the captive audience. The shadow figures were the only substance ever viewed by the captives. As they viewed the apparitions the men would murmur sounds. Over time they came to assume these sounds came from the images and, thus, emanated from them. This spectacle provided a multi-dimensional element to life in the cave.

1165

http://www.ancient.eu.

Still it was a false life, a fantasy. None had ever experienced reality. What they knew were only representative approximations of actual reality. Immersed in this setting the men assumed the shadow forms to be all of existence.

Suppose one of the captive viewers broke free and ventured back to where the models resided. Suppose he escaped the cave entirely and saw, for the first time, the real world. Given his shadow education he would eventually correlate those images to their real forms. Given a little longer he might come to appreciate his whole world view had been a mere theatrical production, a myth.

Initially, such a man would experience confusion and perhaps fear. Then what? Depending on his disposition, intelligence, and fortitude he would either become ecstatic in his newfound freedom or else he would shun reality in favor of his former imaginary life.

Suppose this escapee went back to the cave to teach the other prisoners about the truth. How would they receive his message? If history is a guide, then the reception would be cool at best. Intelligent people are frequently seen as crazed by their simple contemporaries. The ignorant are generally suspicious of the enlightened. Sometimes they persecute them. See the examples of Socrates, Archimedes, Galileo, and Jesus.

Art imitates life. The Matrix movie is the space age telling of Plato’s Cave. Neo barely overcomes his desire to remain in fantastic perfection over entering the more sober real world. He needed convincing too.

Life imitates art. Today many live out the allegory, not in a cave but in the comfort of their homes. The chains are mental rather than physical. Modern electronics have replaced the fire and shadow show. The allegory of the television.

P on Pols Cover

FREE e-book!

In a way, by taking those elective classes I stumbled out of my own cave. What’s that? The allegory of the allegory? Years have passed and I still battle to convince myself of reality. It’s not always the most pleasant of places. I imagine you, dear reader, face similar dilemmas. Realization does not, by itself, breed happiness. It is however close kin with freedom. I’ll take that over being chained in the cave.

Anarchy Is Better Than No Government At All

30 Monday Nov 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Alan Watson, anarchy, attorneys, chaos, crime, education, evil, freedom, Golden Rule, government, J.R.R. Tolkien, law, legal theory, libertarians, life, Natural Law, Natural Rights, Perrin Lovett, philosophy, political science, politics, UGA

Some years ago I landed in what for me was probably the perfect legal position of employment. I took a job out of law school as a law clerk with a Georgia court. Law clerks review case file, do research and make recommendations to their judges.

My tenure went far beyond the norm. I was afforded the opportunity to wear many hats – each of which fitted me perfectly. I was able to indulge in a great breadth and depth of research with some publication to boot. I was granted the more prestigious title of Staff Attorney. I was also a registered lobbyist, working occasionally in pursuit of projects concerning the judiciary. I even filled in a few times on the bench.

Gravitating naturally towards research and writing and having almost total freedom with my time I began to explore additional opportunities of academic nature. My great interest is in freedom in and out of legal and political systems. I am a theorist. I learned towards some hybrid between legal theory and political philosophy.

The American Bar Association views a J.D. as the equivalent of a PhD for teaching purposes. Most non-law schools hold a different view. I realized I might benefit from another, specialized graduate degree. My choices as I saw them were either a Master of Law or LLM (in law a Master’s degree comes after the doctorate – yes, backwards) or a PhD in poly sci.

My school of choice, based on both reputation and logistics, was the University of Georgia. I had my own strict criteria concerning any entry into these programs.

The only LLM program in the world which interested me was at UGA. It was a directed study of comparative legal theories under the esteemed base master of such philosophy, Dr. Alan Watson. The only PhD I would consider was in political theory or philosophy and, with a concentration in natural law and libertarian/anarchist views.

I demanded, or would have, freedom to explore my own paths. I also included teaching experience as a must have.

My quest never got very far. In short order life dictated I abandon my beloved job and move to a less than desirable locale, practicing less than desirable law. Thus began my professional “downfall.” I ended up, for a brief time, a miserable prosecutor. When I could no longer stand that I entered private practice. Several were my shinning moments but I never regained even a shadow of my former fit and happiness.

Everything happens for a reason. Today, through my writing, I am finally able to pick up where I left off nearly a decade ago. This time, it’s my way on my own by necessity. One, I doubt there is any organized poly sci department in America which would or could house me. That’s fine – times have changed. Today we have YouTube and Udemy. Two, Alan Watson retired and took with him the last vestige of true legal study in the country. Again, I’m on my own. Autodidact or die …

I visited Watson’s office a few times back the. It was my intention to interview him and to be interviewed myself to check compatibility. Per my usual laziness I always showed up unannounced. He was never in. I have never met the man. Perhaps that all was a sign. My little daughter did accompany me on one visit – we had a great time – as such the trip was anything but a waste.

The political science department did receive me for an arranged visit. I toured the facility and we had a good discussion. There was a real chance things might have worked out. Nearly all the faculty members were “liberals” but they seemed to tolerate my extremism rather well. They were open to my ideas of a very loosely structured curriculum and my desire to teach while I worked. They also deemed an attorney in the department a plus. But, as I said, life intervened.

On my afore-mentioned tour I passed many faculty office doors. Many were closed. One was covered in signs and stickers. One of the stickers read: “Anarchy is better than no government at all.” That stuck in my jumbled mind. I think I used it as a title once …

“Anarchy” has various meanings to different people. Of late the term has been used to describe somewhat disruptive protestors of modern socio-economic life. These, to me, appear more like pro-communist or anti-capitalist activists than anything else. Communism is in my mind the polar opposite of anarchy. Then again, I don’t have a monopoly on the word. I suppose this crowd is descended from the mad bomb throwers of yesteryear.

Tolkien, a hero of mine, described his own political philosophy as anarchism. The specifically rejected the bomber disposition; rather, he merely wanted to leave others alone in exchange for equal treatment. This position is as close to my own as any.

Anarchy and “no government” as the door sticker alluded are often used synonymously. However, I don’t think they are one and the same.

Many consider anarchy the equivalent of chaos. To them it is the complete absence of any controls, political or societal, and could only lead to pandemonium. Their views are understandable. For 10,000 years we have been trained to accept some degree of authority outside of ourselves and over us. As society has evolved (or fallen) government and society have also become synonymous. They are not.

One can speak of the American or French or Japanese cultures and traits without the slightest regard for their respective governments. Government did not create the beauty of the natural world. Nor does it bring happiness to small family gatherings. Though they might claim otherwise, politicians had nothing to do with the development of symphony, football, pizza or the quiet enjoyment of an evening cigar.

Anarchy does represent a form of governance. It is one that stems from the natural freedom of association between civilized people. Heavy-handed policies, tactics, and laws are most unnatural. Too many repeat the phrase “government is a necessary evil.” At least they acknowledge the evil but the institution is just that – evil but unnecessary.

Think of anarchy as “Golden Rule” government. Each affords the other respect and vows not to violate the other’s rights and freedoms. Anarchy is freedom. Freedom is happiness.

Yes, not all people are civilized. Criminality is a continuing cost of original sin. Somewhere in time someone postulated the state’s main purpose was to protect the good people from the bad. History shows this premise is a total failure. Governments are typically the worst violators of freedom and dignity. They also have the nasty habits of coercing decent people into supporting and paying for their depravity and of criminalizing private attempts to disrupt real criminal activity.

In the absence of such retarded controls the free would be able to – individually or in concert – using their strength and conscious – shame, disrupt, or terminate undesirable elements.

Other things government is supposed to do, but which it can’t do well and did not invent, are better left to private cooperation. Roads, schools and defense are all possible without state intervention. And they all predate government.

Many a good, libertarian man I know have said to me (almost in desperation) “you have to have some government!” No, I do not. I have reached a point where I am content to manage my own affairs and relations. Perhaps they real mean “they have to have government.” They don’t. It’s the conditioning of 10,000 years at work which convinces them otherwise.

Anarchy isn’t better than no government. It is the best government.

2000px-BlackFlagSymbol.svg

Google.

Note: I realized upon finishing this one that it’s as much about me as my pet philosophy. The two seem intertwined. Funny. I don’t care much for structure and tend to live out a life of personal anarchy. I have to admit that for all the foibles it works out pretty well.

Constitutional Law

13 Wednesday Mar 2013

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

16th Amendment, abortion, activists, America, anarchy, Anti-Federalists, Articles of Confederation, attorneys, Bill of Rights, case-law, Coca-Cola, commerce clause, Congress, Constitution, Constitutional Law, Courts, dissent, Dred Scott v. Sandford, drones, due process, equal protection, Federal Reserve, First Amendment, freedom, General Welfare Clause, Germany, government, Jacobson v. Mass., Japan, John Marshall, judges, law, law school, legal education, Liberty, liberty interests, Max Tucker, McCulloch v. Maryland, Michael Bloomberg, murder, National Security, Natural Law, Necessary and Proper Clause, New York, Ninth Amendment, ObamaCare, patriotism, philosophy, professors, Rand Paul, republic, rights, Roe v. Wade, science, scrutiny, Second Amendment, slavery, States, stict construction, students, Supreme Court, tariffs, taxation, taxes, Tenth Amendment, The People, United States, voting, War Between the States, Washington, wheat, Wickard v. Filburn, World War II

This article is an extension of my recent columns on The Constitution, https://perrinlovett.wordpress.com/2013/03/08/the-united-states-constitution/, and Legal “Education,” https://perrinlovett.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/legal-education/.  One would think that the matter of Constitutional law would have been covered in my article on the Constitution itself – unless one also read my treatise on law schooling.

Oddly, in my experience, the Constitution itself is not required reading for Constitutional law classes. Rather, some imported parts of the document are set forth in the text-book used by the professor. This strikes me as intellectually dishonest and unwise, akin to using a dangerous power tool without first reading the directions. Herein, I briefly cover the usual course material from such as class. The professors, many of whom have never been in a court, let alone argued for or against the Constitution, regurgitate the rulings of different courts regarding a limited number of subjects. While there is an occasional discussion of the reasoning behind the opinions, they are generally viewed as sacred, unswerving law. Rare instances where history has determined the rulings to be invalid (i.e. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)– slavery is okay pre war between the States) are swept under the proverbial rug, written off as mistakes made due to the prevailing thoughts of the cases’ times.

tribe conlaw

(Prof. Laurence Tribe’s ConLaw Book.  Google Images.)

As I have written elsewhere, no reference to Natural Law is made and no critical thought is given to the “why” behind the laws. As Max Tucker wrote recently, any student who dares to pose dissenting views or arguments is detested noticeably by the other students and the faculty. Rarely, student are given the opportunity to delve into the deeper meanings of the cases they study. I was fortunate to be able to write a short essay on the effects of Scott, in which I decried its universal sadness and the role it played in the schism in our nation circa 1861. Part of my essay was read aloud to the class by our professor – another rarity, a former practicing attorney. My points were well accepted. Of course, I had the benefit of over a century of progress on my side. Other topics, which require hypothetical deconstruction, are roundly ignored.

As with all other areas of the law, Constitutional law has degenerated into a study of the constantly shifting case-law which arises under the Constitution.  By the way, I always capitalize the “C” in Constitution out of reverence for the document and its place in our Republic (I do the same for “Republic” too).  I have explained my philosophical troubles and doubts about the Constitution but, due to my sworn allegiance to it, I am honor-bound to defend its ideals.

Case-law study is important and has a valid place in the legal practice.  After all, most attorneys make a living pushing various issues in courts through individual cases.  Each provision of any law is subject to some interpretation as part of its application to the circumstances of the real world.  The trick of “strict construction” application of the Constitution is to adhere as closely as possible to the text and plain meaning of the old parchment.  I follow strict construction as my approach to most laws, in and under the Constitution.  The first fork of any analysis is to determine if the issue scrutinized is compatible with the underlying law.  If the two are compatible, then the analysis shifts to application of your set of facts to the law.  If there is an incongruity, then it is necessary to decide whether the law is improper or if the facts are insufficient for action.

Here’s a brief, over-generalized example, ripped from the recent headlines!:  Mary lives in New York City; she is an avid consumer of Coca-Cola beverages, particularly in large volumes.  Mary went to the corner store in Hell’s Kitchen and ordered a 40-ounce frozen Coke treat.  She was informed by the clerk that a drink of such heft was just outlawed by the wise and magnanimous mayor of NYC, Michael “Soda Jerk” Bloomberg.  Mary, offended and hurt, contacts an attorney in order to take action against the mayor and the city.  Her attorney files a lawsuit seeking an injunction or some other remedy to force the city to curb its policing of soft drink size.  Upon reviewing the case, a judge decides that NYC’s ordinance is too vague to be enforceable and strikes it down accordingly.  Mary happily continues on her guest for obesity.  This represents proper application and analysis of the law and the facts – in this case Mary’s freedom to drink liquid sugar in peace.

Had Mary had a more pressing cause – say a desire to legally and permanently rid herself of a troublesome in-law and she requested her attorney file a similar action to invalidate New York’s statute against murder, her attorney would have likely declined the case.  If he was a fool, and filed an action anyway, the attorney would lose as any court would side with the law irregardless of Mary’s malicious desires.  While it is proper to allow peaceful people to purchase and consume products of their desire, it would be improper and an affront to Natural Law, to allow someone to kill another person without good cause (i.e. self-defence). 

These examples are extremely simple, but they demonstrate my core points.  The problem in the law has arisen from the over deference to certain laws as applied to the real world.  Today, the Constitution is not interpreted as strictly dictated by its own terms or by my previous explanation of the powers it grants.  As I noted before, a few select clauses have been given immortal omnipresence to the extent the entire document has been rendered a nearly lost cause.  All of these clauses give extra, unintended authority to the government to regulate and control everything.  Through various cases over the years, the courts have essentially made up the law or, at least by their interpretation of the laws, have allowed over-reaching actions of the government to stand as legitimate.

Popular of late is the criticism of “activist judges” who take on the role of a legislator in their quests to rewrite the laws of Congress.  Some courts have gone so far as to divine new rights and powers mentioned nowhere in the Constitution.  Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) is a poster case for such activism.  In Roe, the Supreme Court opined that abortion of unborn children is a right of pregnant women.  This right stems, allegedly, from the women’s “liberty interest” in their own bodies.  While not found in the text of the Bill of Rights (or elsewhere), this right does exist and should be protected.  However, the right, like all rights, has limits.  The high Court did not adequately consider the rights of the unborn children to be secure in the integrity of their own bodies during its decision.  Instead, the Court issued an incomprehensible psuedo-scienticifc approach to determined when a life becomes a life.  Medical science has definitely answered any related questions in favor of the unborn.  However, as is, about 1 Million children are murdered every year thanks to the Roe decision.  This was a case of improper balancing of competing interests under the umbrella of the law.

I do not roundly condemn “activists.”  Sometimes it is advantageous for a jurist to heavily scrutinize the law if the law actually impinges on protected rights.  The New York soda decision is a good, if oddly worded, example.  Problems happen when judges do not universally review the impact of a law, standing or undone.  It is also impermissible in a Republic for a court to institute new law – the domain of the legislature only. 

I will herein briefly explain a few of those key clauses and ideas of the Constitution which have given the federal government unlimited power over your lives.  These are the basis for Constitutional study in law schools.  In summary it suffices to say that they can and do anything they please, without hinderance.

The General Welfare Clause

This clause purportedly allowed Congress to use its defined powers for the betterment of all people.  It has been held it “has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United States or on any of its Departments.”  Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905).  However, in conjunction with other provisions, the clause has been used to justify countless spending sprees directed towards the profit of a select few, often at the expense of the People.

The Commerce Clause

Congress has the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” Courts and commentators have tended to discuss each of these three areas of commerce as a separate power granted to Congress.” Constitution, Art. I, Section 8, Clause 3.  Rather than regulating commerce between the listed entities, this clause has been egregiously abused to empower Congress to regulate anything which can conceivably occur wishing any of the stated territories.  The poster case of the clause is Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) in which the Supreme Court declared that wheat grown by a farmer may not necessarily be used privately by the farmer because such use (bread baking) might negatively affect interstate commerce, the ability of bread companies to sell the farmer bread.  While defying belief, this case and its ilk are recited as if dictated by Jesus by law professors coast to coast.  The Commerce Clause saw minor setbacks in the 1990s but it remains as the basis for most criminal and civil statutes enacted by Congress.  Arguing against commerce connections in court is as successful as herding alley cats.  I know this from personal experience.

The Necessary and Proper Clause

This clause, known also as the “elastic clause,” appears in Article I, Section 8, Clasue 18.  It provides that Congress can authorize the steps required to implement their other enumerated powers.  The Anti-Federlists argued against this provision, fearing it would allow the central government to assume endless power in the name of affecting those valid programs instituted under the named authorities.  Turns out they were right.  In conjunction with the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper clause has been used to justify federal intrusion into everything.  It was necessary and proper to prohibit farmers from utilizing their own crops to preserve commerce, and so forth.

National Security

“Patriotism” is regarded as the last refuge of a scoundrel.  Frequently, it is the first.  There exists an idea that an allegation that a legal measure is warranted in order to preserve security or defeat some enemy regardless of any other factors.  Frequently, the government will assert this as a defense in a court case in order to avoid any discussion of the underlying subject matter (torture, internment of citizens, etc.).  This tactic usually stops the case dead in its tracks.  In a true emergency such a policy might serve a valid purpose.  However, as we now are told we live under perpetual threat of all sorts of impropriety, the argument is used as a universal repeal of our rights.  History indicates that “emergencies” never go away.  For instance, 68 years after winning World War II, we still station troops in Japan and Germany.  We also have a portion of our incomes withheld prematurely for taxation purposes – this was supposed to be a temporary war-time measure of WWII.  History also shows that a government will do anything to maximize its power under a security “threat,” including the manufacture of threats from nothing.

Taxation

“That the power to tax involves the power to destroy; that the power to destroy may defeat and render useless the power to create….”  Chief Justice John Marshall, McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819).  Governments have proven themselves able to destroy just about anything, they create next to nothing.  Originally, our government was funded by tariffs and import fees and simple requests to the States for assistance.  The advent of the 16th Amendment gave Washington awesome power to take as much money as the need from the people’s labors.  The illegal Federal Reserve scheme allows them to create additional monies at will.  The courts have constantly upheld the power of taxation even when Congress didn’t know they were implementing a tax.  See: The Obamacare decision, Slip Opinion 11-393, June 28, 2012.  Taxation gets its own law school class – where it is worshipped like a god.  Dissenters are frowned upon as heretics (I know…).

A Few Rights

Over the years, several levels of scrutiny have been assigned to several pet rights.  I am suspicious of each of these levels and will not bore you with their application.  For the most part they apply rights based on classification of persons and against the backdrop of government “interests.”  It is interesting that usually deference is given to a particular law; the law is presumed Constitutional absence some showing that it is an abuse impermissible under one of the abstractly devised levels of scrutiny.  I would prefer deference to the Liberty of the People, with the government left to prove conclusively their law does not infringe that right or that any infringement is necessary in order to secure greater liberties for all.

Most Constitutional law teaching about “rights” center on the First Amendment.  There is usually a class devoted singularly to the subject.  The First is worthy of great attention.  However, too often the cases studied thereunder tend to regard outrageous acts.  Rather than securing rights to fundamental speech for example, such as protesting abortion, educating potential jurors, and protecting free speech during an election, the courts have wasted much time protecting things like naked dancing and wearing offensive sloganed t-shirts. 

Voting rights, due process, and equal protection in general have also received great review.  However, given the steady deterioration of fundamental due process and equal protection, it is obvious there is a systemic bias towards the government over the free people.  For example, Rand Paul’s protests aside, next to nothing has been done in response to the President’s plan to murder Americans in America using drones and no legal process.  The scheme is likely to survive (hopefully unused) due to deference to vague assertions of “national security.”

The rest of the Constitution is left in the dark void of undecided law.  It is either taken for granted that such matters will be resolved in due course by the courts or simply that the provisions have no effect.  In law school I was bluntly told that the Second, Ninth and Tenth Amendments didn’t exist.  I found this hard to believe.  Now, with several positive court cases to lean on, the Second has been given some legitimacy though many “scholars” still remain grounded in the ancient, misdirected past.  On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 I will attend a symposium on the Second Amendment, replete with reference to these lost interpretations.  I have several questions sure to generate discussion and maybe laughter among the gathering.  Join me if you will.

If you teach Constitutional law, incorporate the actual text into your class. It could be a prerequisite, covered at the beginning of the semester and then referred to during the subsequent discussion of cases.  Attorneys need to familiarize themselves with the text of the Constitution, everyone else should too.

Together, each of us acting as we may, we may be able to slowly restore a rational teaching and application of the Constitution.  Perhaps someday we will return to the looser confines of the Articles of Confederation, allowing the member States of the Union (closer to their respective citizens) to affect policies towards the People.  With an eye towards ultimate freedom, I can envision an even less restrictive society.  I am reminded that “anarchy is better than no government at all.”  I’m not sure society is ready for that level of responsibility yet.  Someday…

← Older posts

Perrin Lovett

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

Perrin Lovett at:

Perrin on Geopolitical Affairs:

Archives

  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • June 2012

Prepper Post News Podcast by Freedom Prepper (sadly concluded, but still archived!)

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Join 42 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.