Cliff: No, don’t buy that.
Look through that Bailey piece again:
“A year ago, I asked Kristol after a lecture whether he believed in
God or not. He got a twinkle in his eye and responded, ‘I don’t
believe in God, I have faith in God.’ Well, faith, as it says in
Hebrews 11:1, ‘is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of
things not seen.’ But at the recent AEI lecture, journalist Ben
Wattenberg asked him the same thing. Kristol responded that ‘that is a
stupid question,’ and crisply restated his belief that religion is
essential for maintaining social discipline. A much younger (and
perhaps less circumspect) Kristol asserted in a 1949 essay that in
order to prevent the social disarray that would occur if ordinary
people lost their religious faith, ‘it would indeed become the duty of
the wise publicly to defend and support religion.’”
Here we have a guy who plainly doesn’t believe in God, but who thinks
that well-padded intellectual elitists like himself ought to evade the
issue in public for fear of demoralizing the proles and perhaps
jeopardizing some padding thereby. I can’t think of anything nice to
say about that; and in fact, the only things I CAN think of to say
would not be suitable for a family website.
I can’t see the parallel with your argument. Infinity is whatever it
is, and whatever can truly be said about it, is true. I might indeed
take different tacks in explaining it to different persons; but if I
thought that P were a true proposition about infinity, I should not
affirm P in the privacy of my chambers, while denying or evading it in
the public square, which is the kind of thing Kristol & Himmelfarb are
doing. A noble lie is still a lie.
These are the people who are pushing “intelligent design” in the
conservative movement. Not only am I glad and proud to have spoken
out against this preposterous hoax, I wish I had done so more
forthrightly. These are people filled up to their meritocratic
nose-holes with contempt for ordinary people. That’s conservatism?
Ptui, I spit.






Comments