Book Reviews, Charles, Conservatism, Political Discussion & Analysis, Post-Liberalism, Third-Party Participation, Wars To Come
comments 14

A World after Liberalism: Philosophers of the Radical Right (Matthew Rose)

A review by me of this book has been published in the excellent journal IM-1776. The first paragraph, and a link to the entire review, and the journal itself, can be found below.

A World After Liberalism: Philosophers of the Radical Right offers political advice to Christians. The problem is, it’s not good advice. The author, Matthew Rose, ably profiles five Right philosophers of previous generations — but fails to link this past thought in any meaningful manner to today. He instead uses this historical survey to lecture Christians they must anathemize today’s fast-growing post-liberal Right, while ignoring that all present attacks on Christians come from the modern left, the final form of liberalism. Rose can’t bring himself to criticize the left, so his book fails to provide prudent political guidance to Christians.

. . . Read more at IM-1776!


  1. Charles- what does any form of Christianity offer Men who must become Men and fight at all? When Pope Urban II wanted to take the long project of Cluny to scale where did he turn?
    The concept of Holy War is so antithetical to the first 1000 years of Christianity that it is difficult to understand. War was murder, the warrior had to do penance for mortal sin.
    Never mind Holy War.
    Urban II so completely stole Holy War/Jihad from Islam there’d be a Tort copyright case today- he stole Islam’s core operating system code. The first Crusade was more than a success- it was a Social Revolution in Europe and the emergence of Europe.

    There’s a contemporary context; Christianity has become extremely effete and may ultimately be the root of our fatal feminization in the West. Certainly the 19th Amendment, Prohibition and Civil Rights (which has given us the AWFL- affluent White Ladies and now Commissar Karen) these are all Christian and Protestant women movements.

    I was raised Trad Catholic, but as you grow unto manhood an objective eye can see this is a religion really for women and raising children. It has not been a religion of masculinity since perhaps my childhood, and those working class Priests are old or dead.

    Christianity’s relationship to masculinity is Islam’s relationship to Femininity- both circumscribe holistically. Islam smashes and suppresses feminine expression, Christianity in the hands of women (placed there by Martin Luther) has utterly outlawed it in the West. Masculinity is Toxic by law, or law in all but name. Certainly custom. This did not just happen since the 1960s.

    There is no way to live as Christian because its no longer a formula for survival. You die.
    Fed to criminals and trannys instead of Lions.

    He counsels them to purge their fighters, of course he does. He really means castrate your sons and husbands. The latter are slaves by law in all but name.

    Guess what happens when a soldier who’s a warrior has a kid?
    Do you need to guess?
    Half of them we can’t use anymore. They have “responsibilities “.
    The other half are divorced but still fighting.
    If they remarry its not an American girl.
    We can’t trust them.

    Want a model?
    Its been noticed; Chad Taliban.

    Go to a Muslim’s house?
    The man is God, his sons worship him, the women are not his master.
    And they’re winners, aren’t they?

    Now do we need to convert?
    We need to imitate success.

    • Charles Haywood says

      That article is an interesting blend of modest, but incomplete, insight, combined with rank stupidity and bad history. (Nobody disputes, for example, that “well-regulated” means “adequately equipped and trained,” in the meaning of the time.). But he’s not, broadly speaking, wrong, of course.

      • Asking a bit much for a liberal to think regulated could mean anything other than controlled by government.

        You can’t explain this to them.
        The most narrow minded anachronistic people in human history, they analyze the ancients in terms of racism and women’s rights.

  2. Thomas Arthur says

    Imitation is the greatest form of flattery.
    Flattery in itself is wasteful exhibition of a hopeless state. The Holy Land is in Islam’s Hands.
    Our present Papa doesn’t clear the air.
    Christianity in America won’t provide a darn thing in support of A foundational post-liberal future. Nevertheless I believe Charles puts Christianity in the box but not within the framework.
    Spirituality has proven to be a force generated by the individuals freedom of free wills expression in reflection to our consciences. Christianity (spirituality in general) strengthens our hearts resolve while suppressing fear of death.
    There is a correlation between our societal decline and feminist legal culture.
    Revolutions aren’t fought with crucifixes, or women’s movements. There is a vein of warrior blood in the shadows. But if it’s not put to good use soon…..after all…war, like a viral attack is a numbers game.

  3. Thomas Arthur says

    Charles’s awakened belief in Orthodoxy has little to do with his expressions signaling a foundationalist philosophy to fill the growing vacuum of a post-liberal future.
    His is a recognition of a universal truth that order is necessary for a flourishing society, a worthy society to allow for continued growth of humankind.
    Stagnation results in all instances wherein a society ignores Gods gift to Man, that he can and will strive to recognize and utilize the goodness of Universal Truths.

    The totality of our spatial framework here in this remote Outland sector of a spiraling Milky Way galaxy may only be incrementally unencrypted and explored. As it is nearly incomprehensibly distant to Man’s intellect.
    Comparing every ideological model we find none, over time, NONE; that can match the centripetal force religiosity offers. With it Mankind maintains itself on a reasonably predictable track, so as to use every aspect of universal Truth available, deflecting the great Evil force we all know exists existentially in our minds and materially in Gods blueprint.
    Man’s action is the freedom that unlocks our intellect. Man’s action unlocks the chest of possibility to grasp worthy and good purpose.
    Charles is, simply put, a sapper unwilling to cease and desist from undermining unworthy ideological folly.
    A worthy cause for Mankind. He’s not blinded in the urgency of obsession.
    Don’t be redirected towards stagnation by making purposeful and worthy action unmitigatedly futile.

    Catholicism is a process, from birth to death.
    At no point can it be segmented and unencrypted in its parts. Religion like life is communication with the one God. We will never be literate to God’s language.
    We can only use the awareness of its Universal Truths to bolster our battles against the Universal Force of evil.

  4. Thomas Arthur says

    Islam has a unique characteristic separating its adherents from other Theocratic, and or Autocratic regimes.
    Islam’s Believers practice it’s tenets willingly. There are exceptions, yet even the radical sects maintain legitimacy from its subscribers willingly. The simplicity of its monotheistic inception, created from a mosaic of regional pre-existing faiths is admirable. It’s not our mortal enemy…but why take the chance, we have to limit its expansion within our borders and sphere of influence. At the same time, not close off bridges in need of mutual repair and construction.
    We can argue this of course. Regardless, Islam has lasted a stretch of time and seems not to be ready to sink beneath the sands of time.
    Islam isn’t like Marxism or Virions, and mRNA Spikes.
    Islam is clearly defined and does not recreate itself to infect good worthy societies. It conquers them with brute force. Islam doesn’t imitate goodness to do so.
    Marxism has to recreate its approach every time it’s evil head emerges from the demonic fog.
    We cannot treat Islam on a level playing field because of its inherent tendency to Conquer; as Charles has so spelled out.
    All of the social crusaders and egalitarian freeloaders will eventually bump heads like the three stooges. Until then we either pounce from Forrest passages or remain idle waiting for Columbus, preferably a Caesar. Remember, Henry the Navigator wasn’t a Caesar, he was the overly active brother of a bankrupt Spanish Monarch.
    My money is that the collective ‘we’ generations will wait.

  5. Thomas Arthur says

    Closer or farther from correct?
    Horseshoes and hand grenades.
    Giving guns to American colonialists and then citizens only made it more economical for governance to stick to business at hand….not liberal legislation aimed at neutering male children while celebrating Grizzlies. Consummately empowering women disinterested in having children.
    During reconstruction the country was too vast to invest hordes of Dudley do-rights across it to pacify it. The indigenous/Mexico situation made gunslinging a necessary behavior for all Americans.
    We can song and dance around human nature but human nature has untamed itself frequently. Liberal enlightened rulers tend to their gout and troves of coin compulsively while Gun rights blew out canyons of opportunities for the individual pursuits of monumental achievements without government tutelage .
    You West Coast Great Northwest Lodge intellectuals living in log cabins and digging your own landfills in the forest are simply holding onto your own interests.
    That’s what the aristocrats and commercial classes did when Vesuvius erupted. They ushered their servants to carry their wealth down into sub street level vaults where they lavished prior to suffocating on volcanic ash and gasses. Pliny the Elder was perhaps the only unselfish Roman in the south. He perished heroically attempting to save citizens.
    Three states, a block of blockheads.
    It’s beautiful country but as Charles would say “it’s still California”.
    Apologetics for a reformed liberal scared to death by BLM AND ANTIFA MARXISTS.

  6. I respect Islam.
    I fought there.
    I cannot say the same for Christianity.

    • Assuming you are US military you probably are referring to Iraq or Afghanistan. If Iraq, you were in a mostly westernized country that didn’t have much in the way of Islam dominant, so you wouldn’t have seen its biggest problems. If Afghanistan you are willfully ignoring the enormous cultural evils Islam left there, among others an actual rape culture.

      • Iraq is a mostly Westernized country…
        I wish Americans had 1% of the sand of the Iraqis but No. if we did we wouldn’t need to have any of these conversations.
        I didn’t see Afghanistan and don’t care.
        But…and I still don’t care.

        To return to the point of this article and my point ~ Christianity gelds men.
        Islam checks women.

        Islam fights and wins.

        Christianity can’t even defend their Children from Child Predator Grooming in Schools or the Boy Scouts. The point about Rape Culture is Hilarious. We have our own Rape Culture for decades ~ we call it Sex Education, we call it Gay Rights when they sued their way into the Boy Scouts in the 90s and now just sued them for $800 million in damages from traumatized children who were raped by the same Gay Scoutmasters.
        So Islam has guns, we have geldings and lawyers.

        Actually Mullah Omar (our guy BTW) made his bones and won the “culture war” by executing same Pederasts and ending by death Bachi Bazi. Islam did not bring Rape or Pederasty to Afghanistan- it inherited it.

        Just as the Spanish did not bring Rape Culture to Latin America, its a Tribal thing.

        We don’t need Christians ~ you are worse than useless. We need Mullah Omar’s.

        • Charles Haywood says

          You confuse Christianity with, as I note in this piece, the fake Christianity that is the result of Left hijacking.

  7. Have you read Matthew Rose’s Death of God Fifty Years On, in First Things Magazine a few years ago? I don’t want to jump to conclusions, but it may provide insight into his perspective on what seems to be Rose’s biggest thrust—that the hard Right has a theme that is anti-, not just un-, Christian.

    • Charles Haywood says

      No, but I have now. I don’t see the linkage. Rose’s article is a good exposition of (what appear to be) very bad thinkers. I mean, Altizer’s theories about the Incarnation? Please. Of course, this is just one manifestation of twentieth-century thinkers believing they have something new and brilliant to say, in opposition to two thousand years of far greater minds, when in reality they are clowns. Bonhoeffer was wrong, too, and obviously and pathetically so. No doubt modern Protestantism is dying, and modern man does not want much to do with God, but God, and traditional ways of thinking about God, are what is going to remain when all this silliness is forgotten. The only real challenge here is Nietzsche’s, something I struggle with as well–but medieval Roman theology and practice, and in a different way Orthodoxy for its entire history, pretty much address what Nietzsche has to say, which again suggests that the alien thing, that cuts against the grain of humanity, is modernity. QED.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *