In a recent podcast (here) with Alex Aragona of The Curious Task, I noted that those we might classify as ‘post-liberal’ are obsessed with elites and, in particular, replacing elites and/or replacing the ideas of elites.
The right had a dominant intellectual apparatus 30 years ago. That's all gone now. Those intellectuals who haven't abandoned the political right have turned themselves into pitiful hacks, abasing themselves before Trump and similar demagogues. Most recently seen with the Federalist Society, which has found itself not servile enough. Trump is indicating that he wants reliable votes from the judiciary, not fancy ideas about originalism.
Cofnas is hanging on to one shred of this: "scientific" racism as espoused by Herrnstein and Murray in the Bell Curve (Murray's subsequent career illustrating the descent into hackery). But it's absurd for anyone on the right to claim the endorsement of science while accepting the idea that climate science, vaccines, renewable energy and so on are the product of a gigantic conspiracy in which virtually all scientists are complicit.
There's still a residual demand on the right for people who can use big words, as there was for Heidegger and Schmitt under the Nazis. But in the end, the right doesn't need them. as both Heidegger and Schmitt found out.
My conclusion is that their is no longer any value in engagement with the intellectual right, or analysis of their views. What matters is to untangle the mess of resentments that motivate the rightwing base and try to separate as many of their supporters as possible.
FWW: Cofnas is explicit in distancing himself from conspiracy theories about vaccines. (I have no idea about his other views.)
As I told another friend, who wrote me privately: say I were a genuine intellectual right-winger (non-Libertarian, non-classical liberal) why would I want to be associated with the thugs and hucksters that operate on the contemporary political right?
I hadn't checked until now, but Cofnas is a science denier, making arguments that ought to embarrass an undergraduate. He's cited here by Jonah Goldberg who now appears (surprisingly to me) to be on the path away from the right. The link is broken because of the demise of the Weekly Standard, part of the general intellectual collapse of the right
Yes, even in 2017 this kind of outright rejection of climate science was on its last legs, and the super-hot years of the recent past have killed it completely. What we mostly see now are bogus economic arguments against solar and wind, along with rural NIMBYIsm
The right had a dominant intellectual apparatus 30 years ago. That's all gone now. Those intellectuals who haven't abandoned the political right have turned themselves into pitiful hacks, abasing themselves before Trump and similar demagogues. Most recently seen with the Federalist Society, which has found itself not servile enough. Trump is indicating that he wants reliable votes from the judiciary, not fancy ideas about originalism.
Cofnas is hanging on to one shred of this: "scientific" racism as espoused by Herrnstein and Murray in the Bell Curve (Murray's subsequent career illustrating the descent into hackery). But it's absurd for anyone on the right to claim the endorsement of science while accepting the idea that climate science, vaccines, renewable energy and so on are the product of a gigantic conspiracy in which virtually all scientists are complicit.
There's still a residual demand on the right for people who can use big words, as there was for Heidegger and Schmitt under the Nazis. But in the end, the right doesn't need them. as both Heidegger and Schmitt found out.
My conclusion is that their is no longer any value in engagement with the intellectual right, or analysis of their views. What matters is to untangle the mess of resentments that motivate the rightwing base and try to separate as many of their supporters as possible.
FWW: Cofnas is explicit in distancing himself from conspiracy theories about vaccines. (I have no idea about his other views.)
As I told another friend, who wrote me privately: say I were a genuine intellectual right-winger (non-Libertarian, non-classical liberal) why would I want to be associated with the thugs and hucksters that operate on the contemporary political right?
About your concluding paragraph: we disagree.
I hadn't checked until now, but Cofnas is a science denier, making arguments that ought to embarrass an undergraduate. He's cited here by Jonah Goldberg who now appears (surprisingly to me) to be on the path away from the right. The link is broken because of the demise of the Weekly Standard, part of the general intellectual collapse of the right
https://nypost.com/2017/07/14/climate-change-fearmongering-has-turned-totally-unhinged/
I think this is the piece that is being referred to (it was republished elsewhere): https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/?p=1489797
I think 'science denier' is not quite the right term. But thank you for letting me know about his views on climate change back in the day.
Yes, even in 2017 this kind of outright rejection of climate science was on its last legs, and the super-hot years of the recent past have killed it completely. What we mostly see now are bogus economic arguments against solar and wind, along with rural NIMBYIsm
Reading the full article you linked, it's worse than science denial. Full-on conspiracy theory, with anti-semitic guilt by association thrown in.