Status Updates From Up from Conservatism: Revit...

Matthew Peterson's essay on what he calls "Woke Capital" is not necessarily unique in substance, launching attacks at similar DEI, equity, and other "woke" programs as many of the prior essays. His linking of these culture war issues and the functioning of the economy, however, does stand out as one of the collection's more effective arguments (even if the ideological underpinnings are extreme).

In their co-authored essay, Milikh and Yenor call for rejection of federal oversight in education, the gutting of accreditation, and the abolishment of some university programs, among other solutions to the problem of liberalized education. David Goldman then outlines the failures of recent conservative economic strategy and calls for a return to the federal investment in development from the Reagan years.

Scott Yenor’s piece, in function, seems to serve mostly as an argument that American culture is *not* heteronormative enough, complete with consistent homophobic and transphobic talking points. Mitchell and Renn then take on “identity politics” as a “heresy” that may only be overcome by doubling down on deep protestant theology (a problem, because, they see a non-protestant conservatism in charge).

Normally I update every two essays but I have to take a break after reading Helen Andrew's piece on the "lie" that women "can have it all." The fact that the only woman in this anthology spends her page time arguing, basically, against the presence of women in the workforce manages to be both irritating and disappointing.

While John Fonte's contribution to this collection never uses the phrase "American exceptionalism," it serves as a 10 page defense of the concept, including efforts to explain away the dark history of racial slavery in America. David Azerrad then follows this up with an explicit repudiation of the entire concept of anti-racism (echoing a familiar Trumpian appeal about the alleged non-racist nature of modern America).

Hanania and Holloway both present far more coherent essays than Anton, though Hanania's description of "irredeemable" institutions that deserve to be destroyed may unnerve most moderate readers. Holloway's case for traditional nationalism, on the other hand, does not come across nearly as special as it believes itself to be when one considers the already widespread preoccupation with morality on the right.

Michael Anton's first essay in this book in an unhinged, borderline incoherent rant about the collapse of American civilization that offers little genuine insight into anything in favor of parroting malicious right-wing talking points. If this is the essay that was chosen to set the tone for the collection (though the introduction by Milikh was much better), I have low expectations.