June 2025

JUST OUR RIGHTS AS ENGLISHMEN:

Russell Kirk’s Revolution of Memory (Michael Lucchese, Summer 2025, National Affairs)

Memory is a vital element of what Kirk called the “moral imagination.” He took the phrase from the Anglo-Irish statesman Edmund Burke, who used it to signify, in Kirk’s words, “that power of ethical perception which strides beyond the barriers of private experience and momentary events,” and an apprehension “of right order in the soul and right order in the commonwealth.” Moral imagination is communicated through institutions — such as schools, churches, and families — as well as through the great literature of the West. It allows us to understand “the dignity of human nature”; it is a sense of the permanent things that gives order to our liberty.

Most revolutions, according to Kirk, seek to topple this moral imagination and replace it with ideology. This was the fanaticism, a kind of “inverted religion,” that defined the French Revolution and other modern totalitarianisms. Inspired by abstract theories about human nature’s perfectibility, ideologues violently reject traditional order and seek to reconstitute society according to a warped political geometry. They isolate certain real goods — liberté, égalité, fraternité — and pursue a radical agenda to promote them at the expense of all others, and even to remake the world.

Wary as he was of ideology, Kirk could defend the American founding because he understood that our Revolution did not have these characteristics. As he put it in one essay, the founders advanced a “Whig revolution” that aimed at a “recovery of what was being lost,” not a “Jacobin revolution [that] meant destruction of the fabric of society.” Revolution, for the Americans, was a return to the traditions of self-government and the particular rights of place that had developed over long centuries — rights that the imperial Parliament of the 1770s had violated.

CUOMO RAN AS DONALD:

Zohran Mamdani and the Making of a “Muslim Menace”: Islamophobia and the politics of belonging (Tazeen M. Ali, June 24, 2025, ARC)


In a campaign mailer designed by a PAC supporting disgraced former New York governor and current mayoral hopeful Andrew Cuomo, Queens assembly member Zohran Mamdani’s image appears with his beard digitally altered to look longer, fuller, and darker. This manipulation invokes tired Islamophobic tropes that cast bearded brown Muslim men as dangerous, violent, and in Mamdani’s case, unfit for public office. While the mailer was never distributed by Cuomo’s camp, the image leaked online. Mamdani responded to the image by calling it what it was: Islamophobic and “meant to make me look threatening.”

Moreover, the manipulated beard image is a part of a long-standing tradition in American politics: altering minoritized candidates’ physical features to further racist, Islamophobic, and antisemitic tropes, and cast them as inherently other. Cuomo’s camp condemned the altered image, but this smear was not an isolated incident: it was part of a broader pattern. As Mamdani’s campaign has surged in the final days before New York’s Democratic mayoral primary—which ends Tuesday—he has faced a wave of coded and overt attacks. Cuomo has warned voters that to elect Mamdani would be “reckless and dangerous.” Mamdani has also received multiple death threats replete with Islamophobic language, calling him “a terrorist who is not welcome in New York or America.”

These attacks are not just about politics. They are also about identity. Mamdani, a Twelver Shia Muslim, African-born immigrant, and democratic socialist, represents a challenge to entrenched racial, religious, and political hierarchies. As with other progressive politicians of color, from Ilhan Omar to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the backlash against him reveals the limits of establishment tolerance for candidates who refuse to conform.

THE ANGLOSPHERIC DIFFERENCE…:

The Myth of the Epistemic Hero and the Appeal of Getting it Wrong Together (Rachel Robison-Greene, 6/23/25, 3Quarks)

In book VII of Plato’s Republic, he provides one of his most famous allegories. Socrates, Plato’s teacher and central participant in the dialogue, tells the story that has come to be known as “The Allegory of the Cave.” He first describes a group of prisoners chained up in a cave. They are positioned in such a way that they cannot move their heads, and they can see only what is right in front of them. Their discussions with one another concern only what they are able to apprehend from this limited vantage point. They see shadows cast on the wall in front of them and come to believe that all of reality is contained in what they can observe.

Socrates then asks those with whom he is conversing to imagine that one of the prisoners is released from his chains and allowed to ascend to a higher position in the cave. This would be disconcerting to the released prisoner at first. Socrates says, “he will suffer sharp pains; the glare will distress him.” Nevertheless, once he becomes accustomed to the brighter part of the cave, he will be unable to see things in the way he once did. He will no longer see shadows; he will now see the source of those shadows—the puppets that were casting the shadows on the walls.

There is still more to reality than the puppets casting the shadows. Socrates portrays the liberated man as at least somewhat unwilling to move to the next stage. He says, “he is reluctantly dragged to a steep and rugged ascent and held fast until he is forced into the presence of the sun himself. Is he not likely to be pained and irritated? When he approaches the light his eyes will be dazzled and he will not be able to see anything at all of what he now calls realities.” From this new perspective, the man sees not shadows, or puppets, but the truth of reality itself.

At this point, Socrates emphasizes the intrinsic value of knowledge. Though the prisoner was reluctant at first, once he sees things in the light of the sun, he would never want to return to the state he was in before. He would never trade true beliefs for falsehoods, even pleasant falsehoods. He would rather live a solitary life knowing all that he knows than have honors conferred on him by his former fellows for assenting to the truth of all they took themselves to know before.

In his Meditations on First Philosophy, René Descartes describes a similar solitary journey.

…is the recognition that no one escapes: gnosticism is deluisional.

FIRST, DO NO HARM:

Supreme Court Delivers the Obvious Result in Skrmetti (Frank DeVito, Jun 22, 2025, American Conservative)

Tennessee had banned surgical and hormonal interventions for minors with gender dysphoria. There are many reasons to impose such a ban. First and foremost, “changing one’s gender” is not possible because it does not comport with nature and the design of the human person.

But putting fundamental reality aside, there are additional, prudential reasons to stop these procedures for minors: Despite the clearly biased and ideologically driven “science” that supposedly shows sex-change surgeries are good and healthy for confused children, the adverse consequences are becoming increasingly obvious as more data becomes available. The long-term effects of doing these terrible things to minors are starting to come to light. While we shouldn’t need statistics to prove that it is good to prevent emotionally troubled and confused children from mutilating their sex organs, they help bolster the obvious argument.

If leftist activists want to oppose laws like the one in Tennessee (about half of U.S. states have similar laws), fine. Start a movement and go convince the voters that children should be able to surgically sterilize themselves or take drugs to interfere with puberty.

DULL MEN TO FIT OUR DULL TIMES:

There’s Never Been a Better Time to Be a Dull Man (Joanna Sommer, June 18, 2025, Inside Hook)

Whether it be plants, Pokémon cards or chess like my boyfriend, it’s clear that having a partner with a mundane hobby is kind of hot. For one, the science is all there: Having a hobby is good for you. It can help with managing stress levels, social wellbeing, mood and even your immune system. And if you’re feeling good mentally and physically, a potential partner is bound to notice your confidence and pleasure for life, which in turn makes you generally more attractive.

Having a hobby also gives you something to make time for outside of your work day, which seems like a pretty impressive thing to do anymore. Life is busy, but rallying your energy toward something you like and feel driven about simply for pleasure? Hot. That said activity having nothing to do with scrolling on your phone? Even hotter. It shows you’re well-rounded, passionate and not chronically glued to screens like the rest of us. You’re also educated on a hyper-niche topic that not everyone is, which adds another lovely layer to all of this.

It doesn’t even matter if the hobby seems “dull” to the public eye. That gives it a negative connotation. Even if it’s simple like watering plants or bird watching, you’re doing more than a lot of other people. Only 67% of adults in the United States report having multiple hobbies. In a world where people are social media-obsessed and constantly staying on top of “trends,” it’s much cooler to do your own thing that makes you happy, even if it seems dry by societal standards. You aren’t alone in your dry hobby, either. Enter: the Dull Men’s Club.

Practically begging to be treated to Cloudspotting03755

WE ARE ALL PIGOUVIAN NOW:

Science says plastic bag bans really do work (Joseph Winters, Jun 19, 2025, Grist)

When you outlaw or discourage the sale of plastic bags, fewer of them end up as litter on beaches.

That’s the intuitive finding of a paper published Thursday in the journal Science, which involved an analysis of policies to restrict plastic bag use across the United States. The study authors found that, in places with plastic bag bans or taxes, volunteers at shoreline cleanups collected 25 to 47 percent fewer plastic bags as a total fraction of items collected, compared to places with no plastic bag policies.

MY SUMMER OF HOTNESS:

There’s Never Been a Better Time to Be a Dull Man: Gather ’round, men with nerdy hobbies and unstereotypical interests. Society’s “dull” is the new “incredibly attractive.” (Joanna Sommer, June 18, 2025, Inside hook)

Whether it be plants, Pokémon cards or chess like my boyfriend, it’s clear that having a partner with a mundane hobby is kind of hot. For one, the science is all there: Having a hobby is good for you. It can help with managing stress levels, social wellbeing, mood and even your immune system. And if you’re feeling good mentally and physically, a potential partner is bound to notice your confidence and pleasure for life, which in turn makes you generally more attractive.

Having a hobby also gives you something to make time for outside of your work day, which seems like a pretty impressive thing to do anymore. Life is busy, but rallying your energy toward something you like and feel driven about simply for pleasure? Hot. That said activity having nothing to do with scrolling on your phone? Even hotter. It shows you’re well-rounded, passionate and not chronically glued to screens like the rest of us. You’re also educated on a hyper-niche topic that not everyone is, which adds another lovely layer to all of this.

It doesn’t even matter if the hobby seems “dull” to the public eye. That gives it a negative connotation. Even if it’s simple like watering plants or bird watching, you’re doing more than a lot of other people. Only 67% of adults in the United States report having multiple hobbies. In a world where people are social media-obsessed and constantly staying on top of “trends,” it’s much cooler to do your own thing that makes you happy, even if it seems dry by societal standards. You aren’t alone in your dry hobby, either. Enter: the Dull Men’s Club.

ALWAYS TAX EXTERNALITIES:

What warped the minds of serial killers? Lead pollution, a new book argues. (Kate Yoder, Jun 16, 2025, Grist)

In her new book Murderland: Crime and Bloodlust in the Time of Serial Killers, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author Caroline Fraser maps the rise of serial killers in the Pacific Northwest to the proliferation of pollution. In this case, the lead- and arsenic-poisoned plume that flowed from Asarco’s metal smelter northwest of Tacoma, which operated for almost a century and polluted more than 1,000 square miles of the Puget Sound area, the source of the famous “aroma of Tacoma.”


Fraser grew up in the 1970s on Mercer Island, connected to Seattle by a floating bridge with a deadly design, not far from a terrifying lineup of serial killers. George Waterfield Russell Jr., who went on to murder three women, lived just down the street, a few years ahead of Fraser at Mercer Island High School. (No surprise, his family once lived in Tacoma.) She had always thought the idea that the Pacific Northwest was a breeding ground for serial killers was “some kind of urban legend,” she told Grist.

But after much time spent staring at pollution maps, and looking up the former addresses of serial killers, she came up with an irresistible hypothesis: What if lead exposure was warping the minds of the country’s most harrowing murderers? In Murderland, Fraser makes a convincing case that these killers were exposed to heavy metal pollution in their youth, often from nearby smelters and the leaded gasoline that was once burned on every road in the country.

Studies have shown that childhood lead exposure is connected to rising crime rates, aggression, and psychopathy. In children, it can lead to behavior that’s been described as cruel, impulsive, and “crazy-like”; by adulthood, it’s been linked to a loss of brain volume, particularly for men. Fraser doesn’t pin sociopathy solely on exposure to lead, though she suggests that it’s a key ingredient.

THE GREAT UNLEADING:

The end of lead: Lead has been all but eliminated in most of the developed world. Doing the same for the rest of the world might not be difficult. (Clare Donaldson & Lauren Gilbert & James Hu, 6/12/25, Works i Progress)

Two thousand years ago, even the Romans noticed health problems among those who worked with lead: they became pale and sickly, and too much exposure could even lead to paralysis and delirium. But lead was useful and Roman medicine hardly an exact science; some illness might simply be the price society paid for such a versatile mineral.

With two thousand years more of medical knowledge, we can be more precise about lead’s impact on the body. If you ingest lead, it is absorbed through the gut; if you inhale it, it enters through the lungs. From there, it passes into the bloodstream, where it is deposited into the bones and organ tissues.

If it stayed there, perhaps lead exposure could be ignored. But, like all body systems, the bones are not static. Lead re-enters blood in the churn and change of resorption, the nonstop process that dissolves the bones’ contents into the bloodstream as part of the metabolic replacement of old bone tissue with new.

Once released into the bloodstream lead harms the endothelial cells that line the inner walls of blood vessels, while causing a different type of cell – known as vascular smooth muscle cells – to proliferate, simultaneously stiffening and clogging the arteries. At the same time lead damages the kidneys by both hardening the organs’ blood vessels and poisoning the tubes responsible for filtering blood.

These processes, in combination, substantially raise the risk of conditions like high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, and kidney disease. A national observational study showed that, after adjustment for various other risk factors, American adults with higher levels of blood lead had a 37 percent higher overall mortality risk, 70 percent higher cardiovascular disease mortality risk, and 108 percent higher coronary heart disease mortality risk.

From the blood, lead also slips into the brain. The blood-brain barrier, which protects the neural tissue from most toxins, lets lead through principally because lead ions chemically resemble calcium ions, vital to the proper functioning of brain cells. Once in the brain, lead degrades cell membranes, blunts neurotransmission, and deregulates intracellular signaling pathways that depend on calcium ions. It even directly kills off brain cells.

This can cause a laundry list of neurological and mental disorders: cognitive impairment, nerve damage, hearing loss, dementia, schizophrenia, and behavioral and attention problems. Many studies have found that lead exposure increases violent crime.

While both adults and children can suffer severe consequences from lead exposure, it is generally young children who receive the most exposure and who suffer the gravest consequences.2

To begin with, normal play and hand-to-mouth behavior make young children much more likely than other groups to ingest lead from sources like dust and soil, which can contain lead from paint chips, mining activity, and legacy contamination from gasoline. As they grow and develop, they absorb four to five times as much lead per unit of exposure as adults do, in part because of how lead imitates the chemistry of calcium. Children use much more calcium than adults because they are still growing new bones; replacing their calcium ions with lead is therefore particularly dangerous.

Most things that sicken children leave evidence for parents and doctors. But children exposed to lead don’t have a giveaway fever, or rash, or cough. There is no way for parents to tell that their children have been exposed, only the silent accumulation of cellular damage that, down the line, can cause long-term disease and impaired brain functioning.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, as human lead use ramped up, so too did human exposure to lead. By the 1980s, people were exposed to 1,000 to 10,000 times as much lead as ancient humans.