I don’t get it

How comeanarchotyranny
only appears 39 times in the Google index?

UPDATE: Good news: “anarcho-tyranny” appears 15,000 times. Still not enough, but better than 39!

To expand on the topic a little, the expression—however spelled—refers to a state of society in which government goes after nontraditional offenses like racism more vigorously than traditional offenses like theft and assault. It’s an inevitable consequence of post-60s understandings of social justice. The attitudes and connections that constitute a people with generally orderly and moral habits define what it is to be a good member of the community and so define some people out. Since they’re inevitably exclusionary, they are now understood to violate human rights and social morality.

Once authoritative public institutions have been taken over by post-60s types the law-abiding and traditionally moral majority therefore becomes the main public enemy and is treated as such. The people has to be destroyed as a people and turned into an aggregation of isolated individuals who carry on all serious aspects of their lives solely through formal public institutions that can be supervised and kept in compliance with social morality as now understood. It’s worth noting that the process has gone farther in countries with a tradition of respect for public authority, like England, than it has in the United States.

3 thoughts on “I don’t get it”

  1. I Don’t Get It
    Dear Fellow Readers,

    Mr. Kalb perhaps has hit accurately on the idea that we are close to or under a tyrannical government. The government imposes the idea that preferring one’s race or culture to another is evil or criminal or both. A single tyrannical pattern does not necessarily mean we live in a tyranny. So we must rejoice and actively oppose to Mr. Kalb’s targets.



Leave a Comment