The leak in the tires of classical liberalism, June 12th, 2024.

Jeffrey Ventrula recently put a lot of hay on his fore because he undertook to deal with a recent

outbreak of some Bronze Age buffoonery.

He covered quite a lot of territory, a lot more than I can respond to here, but I do need to respond

to the central part where he tangled with

something I recently tweeted. I will get to that shortly. The rest of his article is somewhat

of a jumble dessert trifle, with footnotes playing the role of the sponge cake.

The article really was an odd mix,

upbraiding the bronze bros for some of their jubanescent interests,

trying to state his agreements with Christian nationalism in a way that somehow came across

like disagreements, urging us all to issue pugnacity and debate, a standard

which clearly has some limits if this article was anything to go by, and getting to the point

to this my rejoinder, a complete failure to recognize my point.

Before getting into all that, I do want to say at the outset that I do not really understand

why I am in a debate with something posted on Truth Exchange, a good operation with good people,

and I do wish that I were not in this position. I agreed with a bunch of what was said,

thought that some of it was above the belt disagreement,

considered that other parts I disagreed with were really an unnecessary disagreement and believed that the

impact of the article as a whole was simply confused. Some essential background.

As many of you know I will be speaking at the Nat Khan Conference in early July

along with Al-Molar.

At this same conference, a Hindu speaker representing a Hindu nationalist movement,

...