Two responses to a perplexing situation: One can attempt to retreat to the former known situation or one can overcome the present situation and move out into a new situation which is only known once one has emerged into it.

The retreat however is never a genuine return, because what characterized the situation prior to the perplexity was ignorance of contrast. To attempt to return to the past means to return to a state defined against the possibility of some other state: the innocence one once had is irretrievably lost. One will suffer from the irritable conscience of the reactionary conservative who consciously preserves the outward forms of truth which have already lost their essential persuasive force.

The only innocence the conservative still has is his mistaken belief that this willful dishonesty is faith.

*

We cannot return to the womb. We can only realize that we are eternal embryos, living in a world of nested wombs, always preparing to emerge again into the next vision of life. An active spirit is always the son of his last self, and humanity as a whole is always the son of the last incarnation of man.

*

Few people realize this, but the deep political fight – the one that is taking place beneath the symbol-hacking manipulations (which even the Democrats are finally embracing as a necessity of democracy) – is the struggle between the Straussians and the Pragmatists. Neither are viable, but of the two, the Straussians are probably more profound. If only they weren’t conservatives in the worst sense(s). My prediction is that this situation will reverse once the Pragmatists overcome their eudaimonistic tendencies, and consequently become more pragmatic.

*

In politics, nobody is permanently of first rank. Strength makes a person stupid, and stupidity eventually makes a person weak, but weakness makes a person become strong, etc. You can count on it: the first will be last, and the last will be first.

*

What is a liberal? A participant in the ugly process of birthing the next conservatism.