If believing X makes one a good person, then avoiding evidence to the contrary preserves one’s virtue.

Don’t see, hear or speak anything that threatens my identity and standing.

Contemporary progressivism regularly treats failure to embrace various beliefs or narratives as a sign of intellectual or moral delinquency (or both). The various -ist or -phobe terms that get bandied about label people as suffering morally crippling cognitive delinquency.* At its most trenchant, this attitude to dissent leads directly into an ongoing pattern of “submit or be stigmatised”: either accept claim X or be stigmatised as an -ist or a -phobe.

The claim that those who significantly disagree are morally delinquent is often…

The human disasters of actually existing Marxism flow directly from Marx’s theories.

Two toxic theorists and three mass murdering tyrants.

The most obvious feature of Marxism is that it has been the ruling ideology of a series of tyrannies, some of which murdered millions of their own citizens and all of which performed worse, typically disastrously worse, than their “capitalist” equivalents in promoting human well-being. The last point has been established by a series of clear natural experiments (North and South Korea, East and West Germany, China and Taiwan) but it also obvious if one just compares outcomes between reasonably similar states.

Communism (i.e. revolutionary Marxism) was strategically…

Progressivism has great strategic and rhetorical power, and recurring intellectual patterns, yet institutions it dominates tend to decay.


Progressivism, in all its forms, justifies itself, both as a system of belief and in its rhetoric, by its commitment to a golden future. This is an enormous rhetorical advantage, as the imagined future can be much more morally grand than any actual existing present or past, with all the trade-offs, inconsistencies and failures anything that actually exists must entail.

It is commonly held by progressives that that very commitment to the golden future, free of whatever sins or evils a particular…

Not only is the logic of belief not necessarily the logic of believers, the use of scripture is itself subject to evolutionary processes.

Charles de Steuben, ‘Bataille de Poitiers en octobre 732', depicting Charles Martel confronting Abdul Rahman Al Gafiqi.

Educator and reform Muslim Irshad Manji and evolutionary biologist and secular Jew Bret Weinstein have a very thoughtful discussion about violence in scriptures and their different manifestation in (historical) Islam and Judaism. To state the obvious, there is a lot of violence in the Quran and there is a lot of violence in the Torah. …

Cousin marriage in the Middle East works differently than does cousin marriage in South India.

Dr Alice Evans has a wonderful blog post, essay really, on why the situation of women in South India is generally better than that of women in North India. The piece is comprehensively researched and very well reasoned.

I do however, have one quibble. It is with Dr Evans using cousin marriage in the Middle East to argue that cousin marriage in South India is not likely to be a significant explanatory factor in the comparatively better position of women in South India. …

Moving beyond political swear words (and grappling with very different life experiences).

Trying to define fascism is possibly a pointless exercise, as it has long since largely lost any specific meaning, becoming a political swearword used for denouncing those you disagree with and establishing how morally wonderful and heroic you are for being against such vile folk. It thus involves equal parts political slander and narcissistic self-promotion.

The more one is addicted to slandering those you oppose, and to narcissistic self-aggrandisement, the more freely one throws about the term fascist. In our time, given the dramatic lack of actual fascists…

The Women’s movement is a product of conditions that existed in Western society but nowhere else.

Feminism was a product of North-Western Europe (and the settler Anglosphere) for very specific cultural and institutional reasons. The women’s movement had to come out of a culture which already gave women’s choices sufficient standing, where elite women could organise and deploy resources, where kin-group loyalties did not dominate and constrain, and where explicit political bargaining was already part of the institutional landscape. This combination of features was true in no other cultures other than in the societies that descended from Medieval Latin Christendom.

In the American West, both Euro-American and Chinese-American societies had a shortage of women: but with very different consequences for women.

Annie Oakley in the 1880s.

Thanks to the Christian sanctification of single-spouse marriage, insistence that a woman’s consent was required for a valid marriage, and the disappearance (under the pressure of Christianity and manorialism) of kin groups from Europe (apart from the Celtic and Balkan fringes, where manorialism did not reach), women had much higher status in Euro-American society than was the pattern in polygynous societies with kin groups, such as Islam and China.

In polygynous societies, particularly ones where men controlled the productive…

What Heidegger took reams of obscure prose to do, C.S.Lewis expressed in a few, clear paragraphs.

Monks debating philosophy at Sera monastery, Tibet.

I have been struggling to get through Martin Heidegger’s magnum opus, Being and Time. I gave up on my first attempt. Fortunately, I then completed reading Thomas McEvilley’s much clearer, and historically informative, magnum opus, The Shape of Ancient Thought: an examination of the history of Greek and Indian philosophy and the interactions between them. Re-attempting Being and Time, I found it still unnecessarily obscure, but somewhat more approachable.

It was more approachable because Heidegger is attempting to supersede the entire Western philosophical tradition…

The UK Court of Appeal continues the march to give up on all three.

In a recent decision, the UIK Court of Appeal has decided it was fine to ends someone’s employment if they expressed public support for Christian views of sex and marriage, as such views may offend people.

Christians should not be surprised by this. After all, Jesus was nailed to a cross because what he said and did offended people.

Citizens of the United States should not be surprised by the notion that saying things may offend people. After all, the Declaration of Independence offended many, many…

Lorenzo M Warby

An accidental small businessman who reads a lot and thinks about what he reads, sometimes productively. Currently writing a book on marriage.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store