Lent is off to a good start. At one of the four masses yesterday (I believe Ash Wednesday is the day of highest mass attendance all year at Assumption), I was pleasantly surprised to hear the words "Remember, man, you are dust and to dust you will return" as ash was wiped onto my forehead, rather than the modern "Repent, and believe in the gospel." Although the new words are hardly among the worst innovations of the new liturgy, as Father said, the old ones are a powerful imperative to set our lives straight which most Catholics are deprived of.

Today was also witness to a happy anomaly. I cannot figure it out. Assumption College is so sensitive to everything racial. We have an office of multicultural affairs, and there have been more racial healing retreats, lectures, and pow-wows than I can count on my fingers and toes. And yet, to celebrate Black History Month, Taylor Dining Hall actually had a special dinner featuring fried chicken, catfish, cornbread, and other conspicuously Southern goodies as if they were as definitively black as the national dishes we enjoy in our periodic around-the-world style events. Many students have said for weeks, possibly correctly, that the meal was racist (though one of the best Taylor has offered- went up for 2nds of catfish and 3rds of cornbread- so I'm glad they went ahead with it). Can somebody tell me if this food is really authentically "black" in any way, or has Assumption just set race relations back another decade?

Black History Month has not been celebrated with the energy I expected- a few displays in the library, the meal, an event or two on the tail of MLK day- but race is a subject of frequent discussion at the college, and the dialogue has not abated. As I have said, the stream of events is not confined to the month of February, and we never go too long without being talked at about racism or a related subject, or urged to strive for this asymptotic racial healing, harmony, etc. It can all get awfully annoying. While it is certainly a good thing that racial hatred has been greatly diminished over the last few decades, some time or other the multiculturalism people need to realize that their goal of a colorblind society is impossible, a utopia of sorts. An ideology, which like all ideology doubtless leads to harmful excess if its pursuit is not moderated.

Race is natural, an extended family of sorts and, an whatever the pros and cons of it, an instinctual line by which people group and divide themselves. Ever been to a middle or high school cafeteria? True, as we mature, these divisions weaken, somewhat, but this coincides with the breakdown of traditional social cliques which makes college so enjoyable. And as far as adults go, as one indication, mixed race marriages are still quite uncommon. Some level of racism will always be with us, that no amount of social engineering would be able to exorcise. Predictably, the perennial drilling against racism has led to white resentment at all the guilt we are supposed to bear.

That lecturing devolves into browbeating is simply inevitable. Hence some of my acquaintances, here and elsewhere, have bemoaned Black History Month and recommended its elimination in their conversations (this all is too sensitive and politically incorrect to be discussed at most events). One even suggested that there be a White History Month (in my mind, this would merely answer the egging-on of the multi-culti folks in kind, creating more resentment and division); a friend answered that the other 11 months of the year are white history months, although on this point I couldn't agree less: no one ever calls Richard Wright and Dr. King "dead black males". However, this too seems to be an excess of sorts, too: blacks have a right to celebrate their history. The celebration is only a problem when whites and people of other races are made to join in the celebrations (while few events on campus are really mandatory, the attendences at many events dealing with race or other politically liberal topics are artificially inflated by the assignment of extra credit work by professors). Without an equivalent period to celebrate the achievements of the race of the vast majority, a feeling (even if it is just a feeling) of guilt and shame ensues, causing resentment. And as I've said, if there was, a nonsensical competition would ensue.

Every American has learned about the accomplishments of blacks and other nonwhites in grade school, and that was sufficient or more than sufficient. I don't care how smashing a lineup of speakers we get, or how many, it will not create a colorblind society (the keynote speaker at the annual MLK Jr. dinner attended by many of the big organizations on campus, Father Savage of my own Diocese of Springfield, was spectacular not because he discussed race, but because his focus was on virtue and vocation in the words of Dr. King and others). Would an absolutely colorblind society even be a good thing? While race does divide us, without these divisions it would be much more difficult to preserve particular cultures and community character. And since the races would eventually become blurred or even disappear, everyone would look the same, and this vaunted diversity we celebrate would be no more. Again, this is not to say that race is an undiminished good, but how much more good can be done? The sporadic racial incident here or off campus inevitably produces an uproar from the community, even though the perpetrators are virtually always inane and unintelligent hooligans- and I assure you, they will always be with us.

After the election and inauguration of President Obama, who has already reversed the Mexico City Policy and has promised to sign the Freedom of Choice Act if it is introduced and signed, one of my few consolations was the recent election of Taro Aso as Japan's first Catholic Prime Minister. You can only imagine my grief last Friday, when reading the New York Times that Aso's days are numbered; according to Reuters, 71% of Japanese voters want him gone. A right-winger even in the conservative Liberal Democratic Party, Aso has more going for him than his religion. He's my type of politician, dare I say an oriental Silvio Berlusconi- and as such he is meeting his end largely as a result of politically incorrect slip-ups.

Among his notoriously funny words, he has said that Americans diplomats in the Middle East are ineffective because of their "blue eyes and blond hair", whereas the Japanese will be trusted owing to their "yellow faces". Blue-eyed myself, I can only giggle, wishing Mr. Aso's yellow-faced compadres had taken it as lightly. A tireless patriot, he has praised his nation for being "one nation [with] one civilisation, one language, one culture and one race". At the same time, while a more capitalistic than I would like a dream politician to be, he is singular in his honesty concerning the objectives of his policy, affirming that "the best country is one in which rich Jews feel like living". Even his own religion has not been spared. He declared, "Our values in Japan regard hard work as important... To work is good. It's completely different thinking from the Old Testament... We should share our philosophy with many other nations". While Adam was punished with physical labor, I would argue that work is important to living a complete human life in our fallen state, where idleness is a sure road to vice. And as the Bible (New Testament) says, "if any man will not work, neither let him eat" (2 Thess. 3:10). Still, this can't exactly be considered an insult given the speaker. There are other reasons for the seemingly imminent fall of the PM, but, like Bushisms, they are a sign and symbol of his unpopularity (and they certainly aren't weightless, given the impact eloquence and the lack thereof have had on our President and his predecessor).

Alas, I do not doubt there will ever be such a fine head of government in the Land of the Rising Sun. Despite Aso's rule being in a land halfway around the world, he even improved the life of this American. Not only is he Catholic, conservative, nationalistic, and a fixture in media lampoons; he's a big manga fan. And I mean big- the shares of manga-related corporations surged as soon as it became apparent he would soon be PM. Whereas most of our young people are Obamatrons, Aso's passion made him unusually popular among the youth of Japan, and he festoons comical billboards and manga shop advertisements across the land. I cannot resist reposting some in full size, as they appear here, here, and here:










Let the point not be lost amid my Cusackian imagerial excess. As I read on Wikipedia and later elsewhere, he's a particularly big fan of Rozen Maiden, to the point that he's been nicknamed Rozen Aso. Taking the clue from a fan measurelessly more the veteran than myself, I purchased volume 1 of the beautiful series last evening, and am very happy. Although manga and anime aren't nearly as popular here as they are in the Land of the Rising (or perhaps the Setting) Sun, were I ever to become a politician, the manga fans among my supporters (yes, both of them) could perhaps bestow upon me the nickname Rozen ~. In any case, it sounds much better than Rozen Aso.

This sonnet is a good partner for my St. Valentine's Day poem. Since one of my fans in student government liked it, maybe you will too.

Sonnet CIX- Promise

A promise is a promise, saying goes,
And blessings come to us if we can keep.
The problem is, I try to fall to sleep,
I lie there, neck is craned, return to those
Expurged devotions, mouth responses, give
My unasked love to her before I think.
A drain where all of my emotions sink
My conscience, partial, porous, iron sieve
Can better beat me on the head than stop
Those thoughts; pacific, precious. Mind is whole:
The reason, passion, spirit of my soul
Are not in quarrel, ready all to drop
This armistice. But God had overheard,
And gave me rest without a broken word.

Grace really has its moments, even in the most remote souls. What grace is and how it operates in the lives of normal individuals has always been foggy to me. On the one hand, the Christian can view almost every circumstance beyond their control as endowed with grace. The contrary of empiricism, the paradigm was well explicated in a passage from Pierre de Calan's Cosmas or the Love of God, the inaugural reading of the SGA Book Club [planned months and months in advance, the first meeting will occur next Wednesday; so long anticipated, it is being heralded like the Second Coming of Christ]. The narrator says,

Perhaps you would want to call chance what I am calling grace. But for a Christian- remember the dying words Bernanos attributes to his country priest- everything is grace, chance included. (pg. 44)

While there is surely provincial sentiment and a bit of church lady piety in this, it has become difficult not to view this law-governed world in such a way. Leibniz came to believe that the best of gods could only create the best of worlds; while this is false in the literal sense, in a poetic sense, this world has many particular excellences that will not be in Heaven (though they are of a lower order than those in Heaven), and insofar as this is a world wherein fallen men live finite lives, I can imagine no better. There is beauty in all things. Whether something is experienced as good or bad in our lives, there is always a sort of beauty or purposefulness in the given thing. Hence, love and tragedy are equally artful, and even the most unfortunate individual can always find beauty or meaning in their life. Because life on earth and the material world is cyclical, every evil or misfortune, wilderness or decaying empire, bears some future benefit in its womb. Nothing in itself is truly evil, because evil is merely a deficiency; having no objective existence, and being unessential to actions or events so designated by adjective, even those realities we would rather turn away from retain the essential beauty of the created. For instance, I am presently reading Nick Flynn's Another BS Night in Suck City for a class; while there has been scarce a cheerful happening in the book, it has been a moving and well worthwhile read nonetheless.

But all of that is somewhat obvious, and more a matter of subjective perception than objective reality. As "Sonnet CIX" illustrates, grace is essential to faith, hope, and charity, the theological virtues, which are not a part of human nature, but only given us by the grace of God. Without His help, we cannot escape the slavery of our feelings and emotions; reason even will not deliver us from despair and anger, nor will it make us love our neighbor. Only with recourse to the gift of God, verily, are we truly free.

We have been watching The Queen in one of my Political Science classes. A mixed portrayal of the House of Windsor in the first days of Tony Blair and in the aftermath of Princess Diana, it is nevertheless a perquisite of the major that the department sees fit to consider the role of monarchy in the modern world. Of course, I would prefer if we touched on some of the classical arguments for actual hereditary
rule (exemplified by Her Majesty's immutable sense of propriety and decorum, not subject to the whim of opinion polling, well portrayed in the movie), but given that the only monarch in Europe who retains significant authority is the Prince of Liechtenstein, any discussion however worthwhile would be particularly irrelevant, except to the rare enthusiast of monarchy, such as myself. But indeed, I am of an uncommon breed in the Republic.

As the New World Order marches forward, despair comes cheap. I am far from alone, among Catholics, Christians or anyone convinced that there is a good life, in my glumness at the prospect of the world without nations, divisions, and passions which the advocates of free trade and internationalism, united in spirit even when they are divided in name, so coolheadedly long for, individually, in their op-ed columns, in our colleges and universities, and in organs such as the United Nations and the European Union. Among traditional Catholics such as myself, the resentment of this vision often fuels the perennial desire to restore the overthrown monarchies of Chrsitendom, limit trade to foster local economies and ties, and generally create a government which sees itself as ensuring our spiritual as well as our bodily well being. As I have said, though, the likeliness that the Bourbons, Braganzas, or Habsburgs will resume their thrones and throw out the present clowns in Paris, Lisbon, and Vienna, anytime soon, is roughly nonexistant, so even though monarchy holds the most promise for anxious localists and counterrevolutionares, the movement is often criticized as a waste of time.

How then, if the consolidation of the West seems inevitable, do we restore a more sane and natural political arrangement? I don't have all, in fact I have few answers, but I recently became aware of one successful establishment of a monarchy, which has, for nearly 40 years, benefitted the local ecomony, thriven on argiculture, and made the world a bit more colorful, diverse, and fun, bucking all the trends. I'm talking Down Under. I'm talking, of course, about the Principality of Hutt River!!

A micronation located within Western Austrailia, the Principality of Hutt River seceded in 1970, due to an excessive wheat quota. Comprised of about 29 square miles (the lands of the original farm), the nation is larger than more widely recognized countries like Andorra, Lichtenstein, Monaco, Nauru, and the Vatican City. Now, I know what you are thinking- Crusader, this is silly- the guy is just running a nation out of his back yard to make money. While it is true that the Principality does a good business in coins, stamps, memorabilia, and tourism, H.R.H. Prince Leonard farmed the land for twenty years before the secession, and the chief source of national revenue is still agriculture. Prince Leonard, to be sure, may be a little kooky, but that is to be expected from someone who would try to start their own country; more importantly, though, a cursory view of the website will show that he really cares about the administration of his chunk of the Outback. While his carrying-on like a European monarch may seem silly, much more his issuing of titles of nobility and sending of charges d'affairs overseas, remember that many of the universally acknowledged princes of say, the Holy Roman Empire, have commanded smaller dominions but the same respect. And the definitive proof- he doesn't pay any taxes to the Austrailian government; can you imagine an American with that much land not paying any taxes for four decades? Treating the Principality like a sovereign state may seem silly at first, but logically there is no reason not to since it is really self-governing, and that is a surer sign of independence than membership in the UN or acknowledgment by other nations; refusing such are indeed legalistic denials of reality.

While I would have preferred if His Highness had seceded from the Netherlands, or from France, the example is heartening. Although Prince Leonard is not a Catholic Traditionalist, there is no reason that land owners among the latter, disgruntled with the state of the world, cannot repeat his successful secession, thereby depriving bad governments of revenue and creating little royal oases to pretty up the map- once the international community acknowledges them!

Given the day of the month, I have found it proper to post something romantic.

Judge not you these wishes petty,
---, my dearest wholly.
Every moment precious being,
Great the silent costs in choosing
May appear, and hesitation
Answers every final question.
Worries wait below your smile,
Worries which I am not able
To make void and dissipated
Right away, and haven't settled

Rationally- for with reason
We may only want to lessen
Anxiousness about the places
Long arrived at by our choices.
Goods received in contemplation,
Progress through detente and caution
Might be best, their gains the surest.
Triumphs, though, which are the greatest

Trust away vocation's details,
Trust so purely nothing rivals
This devotion to a future,
Find in notions of this pleasure
Highest peace and highest order,
Striving e'er for nothing further.
How could two, ensouled and trying,
Not be happy in their ending?

Happy St. Valentine's Day!

A few days ago, I was watching the latest episode of Bleach, and as the opening sequence went by, I noticed one of the lines, "Isn't life so sad when all you do is live?" "How Aristotelian!" I thought to myself.

The family is the association established by nature for the supply of men's everyday wants... But when several families are united, and the association aims at something more than the supply of daily needs, the first society to be formed is the village. And the most natural form of the village appears to be that of a colony from the family, composed of the children and grandchildren... this is the reason why Hellenic states were originally governed by kings; because the Hellenes were under royal rule before they came together, as the barbarians still are. Every family is ruled by the eldest, and therefore in the colonies of the family the kingly form of government prevailed because they were of the same blood...

When several villages are united in a single complete community, large enough to be nearly or quite self-sufficing, the state comes into existence, originating in the bare needs of life, and continuing in existence for the sake of a good life. And therefore, if the earlier forms of society are natural, so is the state, for it is the end of them, and the nature of a thing is its end...
-from Aristotle's Politics

Hence, when the state (however different it is from the ancient polis) does not promote the good life, it is ignoring its natural end. And as the Bleach theme tells us, life is very sad.

*************

Student Senate note. While my earlier earlier etiquette proposal went nowhere, on the recommendation of a colleague I am proposing that, at the Sunday meetings of the Student Government Association, there should be no wearing of hats. While it is still an uphill battle, I have several fine senators in vocal support. As they explained at our last meeting (they having the greater portion of eloquence), SGA takes pride in being able to get away with dressing as informally as possible, and predictably some have reacted as if we were challenging a prerogative established in the Magna Carta. In any other formal meeting, however, wearing a hat would not be acceptable; since we wish to be taken seriously and desire to be professional, we should at least take the visible and easy step of removing our hats for the duration of the meeting, and act like it. Further, the degree of casualness, in every part of society is becoming unbearable and oppressive- many professors do not even wear ties and proper jackets to classes. We need to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

Some have complained that if we ban hats, there would be a "slippery slope" which would lead to the elimination of sweat pants and hoodies. We would respond: 1. Again, such casual attire is hardly a proud prerogative 2. We would have to vote on any changes, so there wouldn't be a "slippery slope" if it wasn't generally desired, and (me) 3. The most widely attended Sunday Mass is right before SGA, and the second one is shortly after- you should wear something nicer than a hoodie and sweats to Mass, anyway!

True to Assumption's heritage, the reading of the Political Science department is heavy in texts from the desks of Frenchmen. Originally founded as a seminary and a training ground for a Franco-American Catholic elite, the college has, despite the marginalizing of the French aspect in the 1950s onward, retained a special interest in the affairs and scholarship of the Eldest Daughter of the Church. While the focus is particular, it is never arbitrary. Last semester, I had the privilege to read several essays of Raymond Aron, and the experience justified the near-infatuation displayed by the professor. This time around, Pierre Manent's A World beyond Politics? A Defense of the Nation-State is on the agenda. After reading the first few chapters, I simply must recommend it to inveterate politicos and preoccupied popish family men and women alike.

I haven't quite figured out why a snitch with all the golden paint worn off and arranged on a golf tee on an island adorns the cover, but the work is appealingly bound. Opening it up, I bore great expectations: Manent is in that rare class of political scientists respected both by professors at a reasonably unexceptional college and Remnant columnist Christopher Ferrara. And I had already read a chapter for an earlier class. Manent's volume, translated by Assumption's own Marc LePain, does not begin with a stated thesis in the manner of American works. Instead, to my infinite delight, A World beyond Politics? begins with an introduction and three chapters dredging up the intrinsically initial, though often ignored question: Where are we? How did we get here? Rather than give a necessarily biased summary and exposition of his observations, I will have it suffice to say he examines the bases of our liberal (in the European sense) political, economic, and social order. He addressed many democratic phenomena- the conflict between science and liberty, the tendency to organize society into discrete spheres (separations of powers, Church and state, etc.), the creation of intense yet ultimately futile political passions- with fresh insights and in greater depth than they are given by the average political commentator. He is not afraid to admit the weaknesses of liberalism, and to give the critics of modern democracy their due, unlike the Fareed Zakarias dominant in our political discourse. Neither does he ignore its strengths and sink into denunciation. True to the example of his mentor Aron, Manent is not beholden to any ideology, and is more observor than pundit (that's my job).

A wide range of readers will enjoy A World Beyond Politics? For the individual who, caught between thousands of conflicting voices, often doesn't know what to think, Manent will be a welcome read, inviting the peruser to a survey of their political culture, and to consider its ills with the concrete interests of the social order in mind, and not idealistic abstractions. (And, I am sure, it will also address the plight of the nation-state in Europe more than adequately! Here is a review by someone who already read the whole thing.)