“I don’t give a damn who he was.”
I never would have guessed. The post WWII conservative renaissance began with essentially two men, Russell Kirk and William F Buckley. Kirk wrote the first major book of the movement in 1953, ‘The Conservative Mind’ and in 1955 he helped Buckley found National Review.
” If Kirk negated the fundamental importance and uniqueness of Negative Rights, then hold your hat and sit down - I disagree with him. “
He didn’t. You seem to have drummed up the idea that he did all on your own.
“And repeating his name with an aura of breathlessness and showing contempt for someone who doesn’t share your codependency is NOT an argument. “
You’ll have to describe how breathlessness manifests itself in online posting, I’m sure it will be interesting.
It used to be that the conservative reading public had a rudimentary knowledge of heavyweights among conservative thinkers, many of whom had written for National Review. Kirk was one, James Burnham another. You’re evidence that that era is long gone.
You parse away context from my postings, and you do not supply your own words and thoughts - only idol worship. You speak as a collectivist, holding up the names of leaders you demand others agree with outside of any particular issue you personally support, explain or hold yourself. You also directly lie about specific issues, namely the one I refuted, the Doctrine of Negative Rights, which your hero did indeed attempt to diminish quite pointedly and at length as a subsidiary and pre-existing issue - which it certainly was not.
Finally, your collective dismissal of the entirety of my knowledge of politics, conservativsm, critical thinking and basically everything else, solely for my disagreement with your hero, and lacking any personal discussion of specific issues by yourself, is an excellent example of a collectivist's wrath over not being kneejerk-followed and intellectually obeyed.
Kirk and Buckley were elitist RINOs. They upheld conservative principles for corporate matters and distinguished between the relationships of people and corporations, corporations and government and people and government. Invocation of their posistions without careful discrimination of applicability concerning these three basic relationships is the age-old RINO technique that has resulted in the modern Republican Party, saying all the right things,a nd consistently doing all the wrong - with no one able to understand "how" it happened.
Your heroes were not conservative - they parsed conservatism away from small business freedom from regulations into corporate control of "conservative" regulatory domination. You're a poseur who invokes names, not a true student of political dynamics who dares address the core issues that have balkanized the Republican Party. Your ignorance of the use of decades of Delphi tactics by these people against conservative ideology while claiming to support it erases you from the discussion - you literally don't recognize what they did, how they did it, or even that they did it. Instead, to people like you, the Left just "rose" and conservatives just "fell," no doubt because of lack of appropriate worship, such as I am displaying here.
That's why you come in here with the lowest possible obedience meme - worship of name only. Which is not only intellectually insulting and highly condescending to anyone who reads your wroshipful screeds, but also fits the entire concept of RINOs and Leftist leader-worship perfectly. Except, of course, that you are doing it in the name of a philosophy that rejects such collectivism, which you obviously believe makes you clever, but actually reveals a tawdryness to which you remain oblivious.