Graham Lake; near Mallorytown, Ontario.
Peter Hitchens: A Truly Lost World
Ed West: Libertarians and conservatives – an odd couple; London Metropolitan University and student visas: the Government is doing the right thing on immigration
James Delingpole: David Cameron, renewable energy and the death of British property rights.; Frankie Boyle: national treasure; ‘Wind farms cure cancer, save kittens, create world peace’ says new wind industry report; Nicholas Stern – the most dangerous man you’ve never heard of
Fred Reed: Soap Opera Over Kabul
Thomas Fleming: Clint and the GOP
Aaron D. Wolf: Mormon Apocalypse, Pt. 2, Mormon Apocalypse, Pt. 1
Patrick J. Buchanan: Last Recourse of Failed Presidents
Clyde N. Wilson: The One Over the Water
Kathy Shaidle: Feminism’s Rotting Corpse
Paul Gottfried: Leading From the Front of the Bus
Jim Goad: The Night They Punched His Lights Out in Georgia
Nicholas Farrell: Is Fascism Innately Anti-Semitic?
John Derbyshire: Eat the Rich?
Taki: High Above the New Barbarians
Hannes Wessels: Bloodbath in the Rainbow Nation
The Editors: A Zero-Watt Affair
Matt Forney: Only Democrats Can Be Sexy
Brett Stevens: Displacement; Christians, Republicans cannot appeal to leftists with leftward drift
Unleash The Beef: The Whooping Of The Tards
Jack Donovan: The American Conservative Explores “Thug Life”
Mark Steyn: Dog-Whistling Past the Graveyard
Rod Dreher: Alasdair MacIntyre Says ‘Don’t Vote’; View From Your Table; South Toward Biscuits; Atheist Schism; Britain Needs A Castle Law
Noah Millman: The Kids Are All Right; Which Is To Be Master; The Stratford 2012 Season; An Aged Man, A-Standing On A Stage – Christopher Plummer’s A Word Or Two At Stratford
Jack Hunter: RNC or WWE?
Bad Catholic: Why It’s Okay To Speak Religiously in the Face of Tragedy
Mark Shea: If It’s Not True It Should Be; New Atheists Face Various Problems; In the future, everybody will be Hitler for 15 Minutes; Leroy Huizenga…; Zero Tolerance Policies Are For Lazy Stupid People Who Refuse to Think
Thomas L. McDonald: Sr. Boulding: “Grace was there first”; “We did not make ourselves”; Borja Fresco Now a Tourist Attraction; Google-mapping Ancient Mexico; St. Augustine Asks the Hard Questions Atheists Don’t Ask; Should Autism Be a Death Sentence?; British Veterans Discover Remains of Ancient Soldier
Rev. Karl Hess: Great in the World and Great in the Kingdom of God
Bruce Charlton: What is the modern medicine focused upon? Giving the people what they don’t want; Four barriers to being a reactionary: atheism, democracy, kindness, and the sexual revolution; The necessity of picking sides: pro- or anti-Christian; Can we have common sense without God? (No we can’t. Another reason why the secular Right fails); Technology and the arts; Peer review makes modern science relativist, but not subjective
Gerry T. Neal: How the Gnostics Destroyed Civilization
The Occidental Traditionalist: You did not build that!; Alt Right bickering: Catholicism and Paganism; “Hold down the fort” is racist; Dressed in Black Uniforms; Western “civilization”
Alan Roebuck: “At What Point Does One Become Entitled to an Opinion?”; “The Other Iranian Revolution”
What’s Wrong With The World: More joys of feminism?
The Pittsford Perennialist: My Younger Brethren; American Exceptionalism, Old and New; Old Testament Anarchism; Phil Ochs Performs “Joe Hill”; Why Conservatives Are Duped By Warmongers; Church and Statism; Hookup Culture; Baby Gramps and the Akron Family Perform “Cape Cod Girls”; Kodachromes of FDR’s Internment Camps; Neighboring Vermont Leads the Way
Jehu: Alaska: Weird, But Sane; Christianity And Political Degrees Of Freedom; On The Army Of Darkness; The Philosophy Of The Three; Sign of the Times Regarding Concealed Carry
Strange Herring: NYC Public Schools Relax Discipline: Garrotting a Substitute Teacher No Longer Grounds for Suspension; Attention Skeptics Who Deny the Existence of Heaven; A Strange Review: Cosmopolis; A Strange Review: The Campaign; Director Ridley Scott’s Son Set to Stun; “Cosmic Origins”: Neither Creationism nor Materialism; Reagan Hologram “Disinvited” Due to Fears It Would Prove More Substantial Than Romney; Bank Fires Man for Stealing 10 Cents 50 Years Ago, Tells Him to Think Bigger; Three Powerful Arguments for Women as Pastors and Elders; NYC Subways Lose Garbage Cans Because There Was Too Much Garbage; Chinese Steal My Idea for Mind-Controlled Drones. *Again.*; Starbucks to Turn Old Muffins, Coffee into Detergent and Plastics. Unclear What They Were Fresh.
Chris: I better not travel via the US.; Comment at Dalrocks.; Wilful and enforced blindness.; The mortality rate is…; Notes from the trenches.
CL: Tits or GTFO (a.k.a. How Women Ruin Everything)
Free Northerner: Government’s Lack of Mission; Hanna Rosin: Feminists and the Hook-up Culture
The Gods of the Copybook Headings: Reaping the Whirlwind; Fade to Blue; Honour Among Traitors; A New Kind of Liberal
The Society of Phineas: Red Pill Ministries; If We Are The Body
Feminism is Empathological: Disillusionment and Reality; The Game of Risk; Is there hypocrisy?
Quit Playing Church: What Happened in the Garden of Eden?
The Woman and the Dragon: Freaky Friday: Father of the Year; Sunday Supplications: The Ubiquitous NIV; Discrimination or a Lucky Break?
Unmasking Feminism: If You Don’t Hold a Door Open for a Woman, then “You Must be Horrendous in Bed”
Oz Conservative: Shulamith Firestone: making sex not matter
Vox Day: Mailvox: the bonfire of the brights; That didn’t take long; Free society or political equality; Science names the Hamster; The malice test; It never ends; Divorcing the State; The logical fallacy of female attraction
The Elusive Wapiti: Latter-Day Bra-Burners; Run-Hide-Fight: Mixed Thoughts About A Vid for Sheeple
W.F. Price: Montana Forces Feminist Rape Propaganda on Students; Presidential Campaign Devolving into Rape Accusation; Thoughts on the Convention; Why the PUA Lifestyle is Never Going to be Common; MGTOW and Game: Both Have Something to Offer; Rape Accusations Fly at DNC
Prof. Mentu: The Manosphere; Welcome to Jurassic Farce: Tale of the V-Rex; Enjoy your weekend. Class is back in session on Tuesday.
Prof. Ashur: Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Roissy: How To Do Anniversaries The Alpha Way
Alkibiades: Prison America
Danny from 504: Can’t We all Just Get Along; Meet Stephanie. And She’s SINGLE!!! OOOOH!!!!
Mojo: It’s almost like nature intended it that way.
Francis Begbie: Poolside
El Bastardo: I guess college girls just can’t “pay their way” anymore in this economy?
Grit Artisan: Divorce and Employment; Feminist Fiat
Steve Sailer: “Few African Americans at Burning Man”
The Counter-Feminist: Hey! Don’t Bogart!; Slogan for the Day
NO MA’AM: What’s In a Name? Civil Unions and Shared Parenting; Bonecrcker #124 – Women on Online Personals Are Just Wasting Your Time; Pook #47 – If Life Seems Hard and Unhappy, Read This!; Bonecrcker #122 – The Advantage The Big City Has Over The Small Town; Bonecrcker #121 – Women Only Have What Rights Men Give Them; Woman’s Characteristics — Folk-lore of Women — by T.F. Thistelton-Dyer; Zenpriest #16 – The Gender War; Zenpriest #15 – Regarding the Marriage Strike; Why Women Do Not Wish The Suffrage — by Lyman Abbott, The Atlantic Monthly, September 1903; Zenpriest #14 – If a Man Speaks in the Forest, and There is No Woman There to Correct Him, Is He Still Wrong?
Foseti: Review of “Platform” by Michel Houellebecq
Half Sigma: The burning question
Masculine Style: A Note to Photographers; Shameless Masculinity; 1588 World Map
io9: How copyright enforcement robots killed the Hugo Awards [UPDATED]
Patriactionary 
Mojo
September 5, 2012 at 8:21 am
1. Thanks much for linkage
2. It was actually Francis Begbie who wrote Poolside.
David Collard
September 5, 2012 at 8:31 am
Winter’s End, you mean …
Sucks to be in the Northern Hemisphere.
Will S.
September 5, 2012 at 11:19 am
@ Mojo: Hey, you’re welcome. I had realized that, but I’ve now made it clearer. Cheers.
@ DC: Not winter here! 😉 Not for some months yet…
Sis
September 5, 2012 at 7:15 pm
Sorry to bother you guys with this, it has nothing to do with your post, but I figured you were the ones to ask. Have any of you ever heard of Aristotlean Household Codes and how Paul when he was speaking in Eph 5:21-22 was actually changing the idea of male patriarchy to men sacrificially loving their wives? This makes sense to me, and I’m not sure what a good defense is. If you’re busy, don’t worry about it, I’ll figure it out eventually.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2010/10/nlq-faq-the-bible-and-male-headship-part-2/
Will S.
September 5, 2012 at 9:01 pm
Bah, I have no interest in anything the Freejinger / Ex-Quiver movement has to say on anything, even if I have some minor agreement about the Duggars and their ilk going too far.
Christ loved / loves the Church sacrificially – yet did / does He give into His people’s every whim, let them steer His direction? Does He tolerate them arguing with His doctrines? Or does He desire their love and submission and service? He forgave and forgives, but loving sacrificially AND male patriarchy are NOT mutually exclusive; the Bible enjoins women to submit to their husbands, even as their husbands are to love them sacrificially. What does that mean, practically (what should it mean)? It means husbands go out and work their asses off, to provide for their wives and children, knowing that they have loving wives at home who make it worthwhile, who show their love by being submissive, not argumentative and competitive.
Those are my thoughts. The Ex-Quiver people go too far, as usual, and end up embracing feminism. Don’t listen to them, they have nothing of value to say. Zec’s critique of that chick’s essay is spot on:
Damn right.
Click on the writer’s name, you’ll see that she’s become a ‘mainline’, or liberal, Christian, which is to say, not a Christian at all. I have no interest in anything she has to say.
We believe in paterfamilias, here; the pagan Greeks and Romans were not wrong in their understandings of ideal family dynamics, and Christianity was correct to endorse their models.
Those who don’t like it, don’t have to read what we have to say, if it offends them; they can go elsewhere.
Fuck those chip-on-shoulders ex-Quiverers / Freejinger types. They’re worse than useless.
David Collard
September 5, 2012 at 10:18 pm
The coming of Christ modified but did not abolish family patriarchy. The husband is still the head of the family. This has been the consistent teaching of Christian tradition. No offence to Protestants reading, but half this problem with “re-interpretation” would go away if sacred tradition were given its due. Otherwise every man (or woman) with a bright idea seeks to explain away the clear and traditional meaning of scripture.
Pope John Paul II covered some of this in Mulieris Dignitatem (1984), which was written, as the name implies, to assert the diginity of the woman and wife. But as then Cardinal Ratzinger and JPII himself in Familiaris Consortio made clear, the headship and authority of the father and husband are not negated by the concept of sacrificial headship.
That is a Catholic “take”. Will puts it very well from a non-Catholic perspective.
Sis
September 5, 2012 at 10:32 pm
Hahaha, your reactions are priceless. It’s good to be able to count on you, thanks! I appreciate your ability to cut through the words and see the truth.
Will S.
September 5, 2012 at 10:36 pm
@ DC: Confessional Protestants, like Lutherans, Reformed (my tradition), and Anglicans / Episcopalians (at least, those of traditionalist conservative bent, as opposed to the more numerous* liberal mainliners), do recognize the value of tradition, and do not encourage private, individual interpretation of Scripture.
The problem is both liberal, mainline Protestantism (in which anything goes has become the prevailing norm, and really has left Christianity altogether) and non-confessional evangelicalism and fundamentalism, which, while sticking more closely to intended Biblical meanings, has a problem in its ahistorical, tradition-denying nature, which alas encourages private interpretations, and you see this in the million ‘John Smith Ministries’ organizations that have sprung up, and call themselves churches, without vetted ministerial credentials; any Joe can set up a ‘ministry’, and declare himself head of it, and gain followers, because evangelicals and (to a lesser extent) fundamentalists are not as moored to their heritage, as confessional Protestants are.
(Not that this doesn’t also happen in the Reformed world to a lesser extent – e.g. Douglas Wilson and his Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, I’d accuse of being guilty of this (Wilson has carved out an empire, with unique takes on baptism (CREC churches vary, church by church, as to whether they hold to convenantal, infant baptism, or believers-only baptism) and paedocommunion, outside of historic Protestantism), and also people like Mark Driscoll, who doesn’t seem connected to any historic Reformed tradition, and whose take on several Calvinist points of doctrine is, well, his own. But generally, for the most part, the Reformed tradition does not suffer this empire-building as much as evangelicalism does.)
* in the West, that is; unlike the Anglicans of the Third World, who remain much, much more orthodox.
Will S.
September 5, 2012 at 10:43 pm
@ Sis: Hey, happy to help. 🙂
David Collard
September 5, 2012 at 11:00 pm
Thanks, Will, interesting. As you can imagine, my understanding of American Protestantism is limited. I am more interested these days, but there are many nuances that escape me.
On paedocommunion, this has not been the practice in the Latin Rite side of Catholicism, but it is practised among Eastern Rite Catholics. I have been a bit interested once or twice, because one of my daughters is autistic and I have wondered if communion might be acceptable for her, despite her not having an adult understanding. She has been baptised of course, but nothing more.
Will S.
September 5, 2012 at 11:44 pm
Indeed, David, Protestantism is highly nuanced, much more so than many outsiders appreciate.
Paedocommunion has never been historically practised amongst Protestants, but some Reformed and Lutheran churches have arisen that embrace it, as can be seen in my link above.
BTW, I just found something you’ll find as amusing as I; a church I never heard of before now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Lutheran_Catholic_Church
I’ve encountered Lutherans of the ‘Evangelical Catholic’ persuasion before, who reject the label of Protestantism, but never before have I found any who identify with Anglo-Catholicism before; how absurd…
David Collard
September 6, 2012 at 12:48 am
Thanks, Will. I love these obscure churches and traditions. They sound fascinating. Have you read much about John Henry Newman and the Oxford Movement? He tried hard to interpret Anglicanism in as Catholic direction as possible, but ultimately and famously left Anglicanism for Catholicism.
Will S.
September 6, 2012 at 1:12 am
Yes, I am well aware of Cardinal Newman.
Chesterton, too, started out Anglican but ended up swimming the Tiber.
Incidentally, the Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church’s ultimate goal is first bring Lutherans worldwide into itself, and then into full communion with Rome. Interesting…
Imagine that, ‘Anglo-Lutheran Rite’ Catholics…
Will S.
September 6, 2012 at 1:16 am
Here’s another one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutheran_Orthodox_Church
That one ordains women, though. Ick.
Will S.
September 6, 2012 at 1:21 am
The world of non-Protestant, non-Roman-Catholic, non-Eastern-Orthodox, non-Anabaptist churches is indeed quite fascinating, esp. the Old Catholic Churches, the Polish Catholic Churches, and the weird Lutheran-Catholic types…
David Collard
September 6, 2012 at 2:07 am
And then there are the Liberal Catholics. I knew a maths lecturer at a local tertiary institution who was a bishop in the local Liberal Catholic Church. Despite their name, they are actually an esoteric church, with gnostic beliefs. They capitulated on women priests a few years ago.
I have also come across some Western Orthodox churches on the Internet. Maybe the Lutheran Orthodox church is one of them.
I used to be on a Catholic Internet discussion list, and chaps would come on claiming all sorts of titles; abbacies and bishoprics and so on. The moderator would ask them for details, and they would typically storm off in a huff.
Will S.
September 6, 2012 at 3:25 am
Interesting! I never heard of the Liberal Catholic Church, before now.
Western Orthodox, I had heard of.
There are ‘all kinds’, eh?
chesterpoe
September 6, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Thanks for all the links Will. You must have a lot of free time I am guessing. 🙂
Here is a hilarious video. Looks like trouble in club freak.
Will S.
September 6, 2012 at 1:50 pm
@ CP: You’re welcome; cheers.
Yeah, I have lots of time on my hands. 🙂
I don’t feel like spending 20 min watching that, though; glancing at it, it looks like an intra-Left fight. Good. The more of those, the better…
chesterpoe
September 6, 2012 at 2:29 pm
I could only watch a few minutes of it – it was too painful. Apparently, a guy with boobs is claiming he is just as much a woman as the actual women; who happen to be lesbians. The lesbians object and the gay guy with the hat is claiming everyone there is disenfranchised.
Will S.
September 6, 2012 at 2:37 pm
Ha! That’s kinda funny.
Will S.
September 6, 2012 at 11:32 pm
BTW, why should the fake boobs of a non-real-female, i.e. the ‘manboobz’ of a born-male female, merit censorship? Not that I want to see them, but being not natural boobs, even less natural than those of silicone-injected sluts, is it really necessary for them to be censored by YouTube? Just saying. 😉
Chris
September 7, 2012 at 1:38 am
Thanks for the linkage.
David, the difference between the confessing churches and the free churches is that the confessing churches have explicit doctrinal standards. There is therefore a standard teaching can be tested against: although there is no magesterium there should be an assembly or consistory that monitors each congregation and ensures that there is no straying from the gospel.
This structure was first used by Calvin and Zwingli in Geneva. It sort of did not work then… as people chafed. But it is a reasonable structure if you are not going to have bishops.
Unfortunately, we have found that, over the last few decades, that no matter how firm the advice from the central body is and how firm the structure, liberals will come in and scrawl graffitti anyway. It has been seen in the Catholics, the Lutherans, and the Reformed / Presbyterians.
Which is why we anll end up comparing notes.
Will S.
September 7, 2012 at 2:31 am
Hey Chris, you’re welcome.
Indeed, that is the reason why confessing churches are different; they are grounded by their confessions / doctrinal standards, whereas evangelical churches are much less so.
One interesting trend to note, though, is that with the internet making churches having their own websites almost a ‘must’, evangelical churches that would ordinarily (in times past) say ‘no creed but Christ!’ have page-long doctrinal statements on their church sites; kinda necessary, since people will wonder what they stand for, without them (gotta have an About or FAQ page, of course).
So evangelical churches may end up slightly more grounded, in spite of themselves, over time – esp. if they make use of such statements as teaching tools for their own people, and not just outsiders perusing the Web…
David Collard
September 7, 2012 at 3:46 am
Thanks, Chris. I have followed the moral debates in worldwide Anglicanism with interest. A common pattern is for liberals to “prophetically” ignore dicta from centralised authority. We Catholics saw this with altar girls. I saw booklets on how to serve mass with girls depicted, and a girl used as an altar server, before Rome issued a permission for the practice. The Pope reversed his policy. One of his less wise decisions.