When Education Does Not Mean Knowledge: The Case Of Mark Zuckerberg’s Sister

detractor3

There are times when a sleeping lion must reluctantly rouse himself from repose and swat a yapping dog.  Such ankle-biters need to learn that it is one thing to throw around malicious accusations, and quite another thing to be faced with a response.  In matters such as these, I am not concerned with power or influence (unlike you, Ms. Zuckerberg) but only with my good name, and the meaning and purpose of my work.

I have recently learned that the sister of Mark Zuckerberg has scribbled some derogatory article on what she calls the “manosphere” in which my name has appeared.  Ms. Zuckerberg has read my book Thirty-Seven and attacks me on several alleged grounds, primarily these:

  1.  That I do not devote enough attention in my writing to “women and children.”
  2. That I have an unduly “narrow view of history” in that I focus too much on character, masculine virtue, and leadership, and not enough on “historical processes.”

Ms. Zuckerberg proceeds to even more grandiose claims that the “manosphere” is somehow “linked” to evil goblins and gremlins such as the “alt-right” and other imaginary bugbears.  By cherry-picking this and that, and by stringing a few unrelated names together, the obvious attempt here is to malign those who do not write about the things Ms. Zuckerberg wants people to write about, as well as those who do not toe her party line of political correctness.  It is as false as it is intellectually dishonest.

I am not concerned with your approval or your praise, Ms. Zuckerberg:  I am concerned only with the truth.  For as Terence says [Andros, 68], “Obsequiousness makes friends, but the truth generates enemies.” (Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit).  In fact we will show that Ms. Zuckerberg has no understanding of either my own work or of the classics she claims to be defending.  Let us go through each point of Ms. Zuckerberg’s confused babbling to see what we may discover.

You first say that I do not write about women.  What?  What sort of foolishness is this?  Have you even spent five minutes looking through the articles on my blog here?

Have you not seen my article on queen Amalasuntha?

Have you not seen my article on Christine de Pizan, and why women need role models as much as men do?

Have you not seen my articles about Boccaccio’s On Famous Women?

You have also said I lack an appreciation of “historical processes.”  Oh, really?  Is that so?  Have you seen one of my most popular articles?:

The Rise And Fall Of Empires:  Ibn Khaldun’s Theory Of Social Development

But let me ask you this:  am I required only to write about things you approve of?  Did it ever occur to you that I recognize such processes, but choose not to write about them very often?  If you look at my books and my blog, you will find hardly anyone who writes about such a broad number of subjects.  I deal with nearly everything, including agriculture, health, history, literature, film, military affairs, and a myriad other topics.  Look at my articles archive on this page, if you can handle that.

I mention these articles not because I need your approval, but only because they prove the falsity of your statement that I am not interested in writing about women.  It might surprise you to learn, Ms. Zuckerberg, that a significant number of my readers are women.  Does that shock you?  It is a fact.  In truth, the most perceptive and intelligent review of one of my books has come from a woman.  You can find it here.  All types of readers come here to look at what is offered because they appreciate fine things and love quality.  Anyone is welcome here who comes with a clean heart, a decent spirit, and who is free from malice or rude behavior.

Not only this, but unlike anyone else, I am willing to write knowledgeably on Islamic and Arabic history.  Who else, in this political climate, is willing to do this?  You, for all of your posturing?  Would you dare to do this?  Do you have any knowledge of the Arabic language, as I do?  Are you willing to set your own prejudices aside for once, and approach the world with an honest heart?  Would I be writing about these sorts of things if I were some “alt-right” person?  Well?  What is your answer?

Consider these articles:

The Ointment Of Abu Ayyub

The Wisdom And Judgment Of Ibn Abi Duwad

Be The Phantom Of A Vision:  The Wisdom Of Ibn Munir

The Grave Of Suleiman The Magnificent

The Wisdom Of Mercy From Ibn Hazm Al-Zahiri

The blunt truth is that, for all your snide, carping criticisms, you know nothing about my work.  If I really were some “alt-right” person, would I be writing such things?  I have earned the right to write on these subjects because my readers know that I work harder than anyone else.  And that I am sincere.  And they accept me for it.  I am sustained by the love and devotion of my readers; you are sustained and motivated by fear and malice.

As anyone can see, you cherry-pick random names and phrases out of context to “prove” your false points, and those things that mesh with your agenda.  This is intellectual dishonesty at its worst.

Let me move on to your other false point where you said I unduly emphasize character and virtue.  How can someone like yourself, who claims to be a classicist, say such a thing?  Do you hate your field that much?

There are a great many classical writers, and one cannot speak for all of them in a few sentences.  But are you actually going to try to deny, Ms. Zuckerberg, that an emphasis on character and virtue is not a thread that runs through a great number of classical authors?  Are you so willfully blind that you refuse to see what is right before your eyes?  Consider these examples, just to state a few.

Plutarch

I devoted a chapter to Plutarch in my book Thirty-Seven.  He is certainly one of the most influential writers in history.  Are you going to say, Ms. Zuckerberg, that character and morals were not important to him?  Mme. Roland (a distinguished woman I am sure you are ignorant of) called Plutarch “the pasture of great souls.”  The poet Heinrich Heine was spurred to action by reading of the glorious deeds described in Plutarch, as was Napoleon and countless others.

Who can possibly complain about the vision and goodness of a man who could write (as Plutarch did) the following?:

Will not the good man consider every day to be a festival?…For the world is the most august of temples and most worthy of its Lord.  Into this temple man is introduced at his birth, into the presence not of statues made with hands and motionless, but such as the Divine Mind has manifested to our senses…As this life is the most perfect of initiations into the most exalted of mysteries, we should be ever filled with good cheer and rejoicing. [De tranquilitate animi IX.20]

Are these the words of man who thinks character is not important?  The scholar Richard Kimball said the following in his article Plutarch and the Issue of Character:

The issue of character, in both senses of “issue,” was at the heart of Plutarch’s teaching. It was also at the heart of Western culture for the centuries in which Plutarch was accounted an indispensable guide. Countless people turned to Plutarch not only for entertainment but also for moral intelligence. He was, as one scholar put it, “simply one of the most influential writers who ever lived,” not because of his art but because of the dignity he portrayed. We have lost our taste for that species of nobility.

It is just because we have lost our ability to recognize this nobility that I celebrate it so much.  Are you so frightened of talk about character and leadership because you recognize that you fall so short of the ideal?  Does this type of language make you uncomfortable, knowing deep down that you have no achievements of consequence to your own name, and that you can only elevate yourself by unfairly attacking others?

Sallust

Consider this quote from the first paragraph of the great historian’s Conspiracy of Catiline:

For me it seems more proper to seek glory through one’s natural character than through the efforts of naked force and, since this life that we delight in is short, to fashion a legacy for ourselves that is as lasting as possible.  For glory derived from riches and appearances is transitory and brittle, but masculine virtue is pure and eternal.

Does this sound like someone who thought character was not important?  Who can fail to be inspired by such beautiful language?

Quintilian

Character was important to the ancients even in areas where would not expect, such as rhetoric and medicine.  Consider Quintilian.  He spends a whole section in his treatise on oratory (Institutio Oratoria XII.5) to the importance of character.  You should go and read it, since evidently you know nothing of these matters.  In the same book, he also discusses how a knowledge of philosophy and history are also important.  I spend a lot of time in my books and on my blog discussing these things.

Galen

Even the practice of medicine needed good character, according to Galen.  In his aptly-named treatise Quod optimus medicus sit quoque philosophus (The Best Doctor Is Also A Philosopher) he tells us:

For if in order to discover the nature of the body, the differentiae of diseases and the indications for cures, it is appropriate for him to be practiced in logic, and to stay diligent in the practice of these things, to despise money, and to exercise self-control.[I.60K]

Character matters in everything, Ms. Zuckerberg, and it affects everything.  And this is why I focus on it in my books.  If you had a more expansive soul and were possessed of deeper life experiences you might know this.  And this really is the heart of the matter.  It is an incontestable fact that a diligent study of the classical texts and languages promotes civic virtue, moral excellence, and a deeper connection with the continuity of history.  For you to be unaware of this is shameful.  The works of antiquity have helped teach me to overcome bodily pain and deficiency by endurance and greatness of soul; to have contempt for death and the fleeting nature of life; to ward off melancholy by focusing on the majesty and glory of classical virtue (virtus); and to seek to live a balanced and happy life by cherishing friendship, family, and love.  All these I have learned, and will continue to learn.

I emphasize character, morals, and the education of the young because I know how important it is.  I am a forty-eight year old man who has more scars than you will ever have.  I have fought more battles than you will ever fight.  While you were mincing around the halls of Princeton University, I was leading Marines in Okinawa and East Asia.  While you were bullying people for not adhering to your politically-correct ideology, I was starting a law firm, trying cases in court, fighting for the rights of the common man, and making an honest name for myself.

This is the difference between you and me.  While you are a spoiled child of privilege, I am a man who has earned his way through life through the sweat of his own brow.

Do you want to know why I write?  Because I love the subject matter, and I truly believe in its power to bring back what we have lost from our society.  I venerate these classical and Renaissance works because I know how true their lessons are for real life.  I use them as a source of moral inspiration, a guide to a better life, and as a vision for the elevation of the human spirit.

You, on the other hand, use them as a punch line.  You have no real feel for these works.  If you did, you would never be able to miss the role of character and virtue in a great many classical and Renaissance works.  In fact, I think that deep down, you despise these books.  Why?  They call attention to everything that you and your social justice warrior ilk are not:  honorable, good, just, and fair-minded.  Those who lack character and virtue hate nothing more than someone who talks about such things.  You seek to shut people up who fail to toe your politically-correct line.

I seek to elevate people and raise them up, Ms. Zuckerberg, while you seek to pull people down and denigrate them.  That is the difference between you and me.  What works do you have in your own name?  What achievements do you have to your credit?  I only  see something entitled “Bang Rome,” the title of which obviously is an attempt to capitalize on the success and fame of my friend Roosh Valizadeh.  What is this effrontery?  Can’t you come up with your own titles, without borrowing them from someone else?  Do you enjoy living off the labor of others?

I, on the other hand, work day and night to perfect my craft.  I work all day as an attorney and then write at night, producing books and blog articles that are equaled by no one.  This, on top of all my other responsibilities.  Can you comprehend what level of dedication and will this takes?  The originality and passion of Thirty-Seven terrifies you because it represents everything that you are not, and because it speaks truths for which you have no answers.

In your arrogance, you claim to be the purveyor of truth about the classics.  You claim to be protecting the world from imaginary straw-men, gremlins, goblins, and assorted bugbears.  I, on the other hand, never tried to dictate to people what they should and should not write.  I never claimed to possess ultimate wisdom or glory, but only a desire for them.  The only claim I make for myself is an acute desire for virtue and knowledge.

You are trying to swim in waters, Ms. Zuckerberg, that are too deep for you.  Let me tell you a story (even though I’m sure you’d rather hear one about gremlins and goblins) that you might want to reflect on.  Cicero relates this little anecdote in his De oratore (II.18).

In his later years, after he had been defeated by Scipio, the great general Hannibal went to live in Syria under the protection of King Antiochus at Ephesus.  At the king’s court there was a man–Phormio by name–who fancied himself an expert in many things he knew very little about.  Hannibal was invited to hear him speak, and so he went to see what Phormio was all about.  Phormio, who had never lifted a weapon in his entire life, began to discourse at length on military matters.  He talked about how to lead men, about how to win victories, and many other things.  Everyone applauded him when his talk was finished.

When Hannibal was asked what he thought of this performance, he is said to have replied, “I have seen many foolish and inept old men.  But none of them has delighted me as much as this old man, who speaks at such great length about things he knows nothing about.”

I have shown how you know nothing about my work, and how you have (at best) a superficial understanding of one of the main themes running through the classics you claim to love so much.  It remains only for me to point out that I have no knowledge of–and no connection to–any of the people mentioned in your article except my friend Roosh Valizadeh.  You have falsely and grotesquely tried to smear me by including my name with people whose ideas I do not share.  I am not part of your imaginary world of goblins and gremlins, as you know very well.

I have written a weekly article for Roosh’s site for over three years now.  And it is my pleasure–indeed, my honor–to do so.  In fact, I have not missed a single week of article submission in all these years.  Do you have this level of dedication to your craft?

Instead of attacking me, you should be celebrating me.  I have done more to introduce young men to the classics than you have done or ever will do.  And I have done it through honesty, sincerity, and magnitudo animi.  Can you say anything comparable?  No.  You lack greatness of soul; instead of creating, you know only how to destroy.  You spend your days obsessing about me and other innocent people who have done nothing to anyone.  It is you, you who seek to impose controls on what can and cannot be written about.

Ms. Zuckerberg!  I realize you are trying to make a name for yourself by attacking random strangers on the internet in the hope that it will validate your own existence.  Like any unscrupulous opportunist, your game is to exploit the “manosphere” to further your own name and agenda by portraying it as something bad and evil.  I realize that your famous family name makes you feel entitled to pass judgment on others and malign others for no reason.  I realize that you feel entitled to bully and condescend to others who do not accept your feminist agenda.  It is not an untried path; many others have walked this road before.  But I would hope that you have more potential than this.  You have become the oppressor and the bigot that you claim to be protecting the world against.

Unlike you, I am not a child of privilege.  No one ever gave me anything:  I made my own way in life as the son of immigrants who did not have the benefit of being royalty like yourself.  I earned my love of ancient wisdom with my own effort, and I hold it close to my heart.  You will never be able to define me, order me what to think, command me what to say, or deter me in my quest for knowledge and virtue.  That is something far, far beyond your poor power to attempt.  You will have to find someone else to tremble in fear at the sound of your shrieking; for I am not the one to do so.

You have just received your Ph.D.  You should be spending your time doing original research, collating manuscripts, and establishing yourself in your field.  The very last thing you should be doing is attacking me.

58 thoughts on “When Education Does Not Mean Knowledge: The Case Of Mark Zuckerberg’s Sister

  1. No such thing as bad publicity they say. I hope this increases and broadens your audience.

    I glanced at her presence on the Internet and didn’t come across anything that wasn’t superficial twaddle like this:
    View story at Medium.com

    Your site and your wonderful podcasts have done more to bring the classics to people than anything she has done. Keep up the good work.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. She is a woman who is extremely privileged to be the sister of Mark Zuckerberg or no one would give her such an elevated voice. I’ve listened to your podcasts and read your articles including ones that guide both men and women and that you’ve taken time to personally respond to my emails in which I had a personal question as you do among many people who come to you for help.

    Ultimately the reason why more and more people will go against such political correctness and mudslinging as Ms. Zuckerberg partakes in is that ultimately they are in their high castle casting judgement on all while as you have outlined in this article, the ones who truly want to teach, advise, help, and ultimately enrich the common man or woman’s life will be out there doing so in the real world. The lessons that you glean from the classics and share with us exist because they continue to resonate with people throughout time and place. The ones who try to co-opt these lessons and add their own agenda to it will find that their legacy and works will be forgotten in history.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. You could tell just how angry and bitter this person is by reading. Everything is sneering and preening. Quintus, if you haven’t read Scott Adams’ blog post on what he calls “word-thinking” (which I try to expand on), you should. Because that’s what this is. This person starts off by using buzzwords like “white supremacy” and “toxic masculinity.” The key insight about word-thinking is that once you accept a label paired with a concept, all critical thinking shuts down and confirmation bias takes over. One need only glance at that…thing, whatever it is that was published, and you can see that’s what’s happening.

    Then this person has the audacity to tell people in the field what they *should* be doing, particularly the commanding language of “focus your scholarship on non-elite white men.”

    The concept of letting people focus their work on what they want seems completely alien, doesn’t it?

    These people have no idea. You can tell just how scared they are that they’re losing…”big league!”

    Culture is going to be the theme of 2017 I think. Onward!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “In fact, I think that deep down, you despise these books. Why? They call attention to everything that you and your social justice warrior ilk are not: honorable, good, just, and fair-minded. Those who lack character and virtue hate nothing more than someone who talks about such things. You seek to shut people up who fail to toe your politically-correct line.

    I seek to elevate people and raise them up, Ms. Zuckerberg, while you seek to pull people down and denigrate them. That is the difference between you and me.”

    This is what it is all about. Ms. Zuckerberg and others like her are the firefighters of Fahrenheit 451. They want these books burned in the sense that nobody reads them, even though the works are technically legal to read, out of fear of social or political retribution if they are caught. The result is that these books become neglected and the wisdom found within forgotten.

    Anyone who tries to bring back the knowledge of the past found in ancient literature is a threat to them, because it reveals the lies of our modern age. They want a world full of mercenaries with no ideologies, no convictions, and no values other than profit or business. They want people with no loyalties to anything and will voluntarily and eagerly sell their soul on command.

    Men of character, virtue, and honor are not for sale and cannot be bought.

    Since the elite cannot burn the books or censor them (yet), they will seek to destroy those who either write them or promote them.

    It seems Ms. Zuckerberg has not read Sun Tzu; if she had, she would known better than to make war against any enemy she does not know or understand at all.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I enjoyed the comments over there. One chap suggested we common folk ought not just read the primary sources because we might get silly ideas into our little heads. We should instead read the secondary scholarship which will give us the correct understanding of this material. We must, I imagine, be made to understand that Socrates was no hero – he was a brutal, privileged enforcer of white cisheteropatriarchy.
    Isn’t it good that we’ve learned to never back down. We know them better than they know themselves.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. This won’t be the most intelligent comment ever, but I’ve been watching Savage Kingdom on NatGeoWild (along with other lion-based nature documentaries), and you chose an iconically beautiful photo of a male lion. It makes me smile to know you understand why we both think that photo is glorious.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. What a brilliant take down of this entitled attention seeking privileged credentialed cunt. Musashi swordplay with words as the weapon. Poor girl didn’t realize what she was getting herself into by foolishly choosing to engage on terrain so familiar to you.
    You’ve done more to introduce aspects of the Classics and Philosophy to subject matter novices like myself (thankfully without inducing boredom or the compulsion to nap) than anyone I can think of currently.
    Keep up the great work and know that your fine work here has real impact.
    Best regards.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. I swear they have a checklist of buzzwords that they look for in any text, which if not present, they put their fingers in their ears and start screaming. She will be forgotten, but some of the things you write about have been around for thousands of years. Fuck this entitled bitch.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. This is pretty hilarious, I hope some good comes out of it where it will garner more attention to your site where people can cast their own judgement.

    Personally you are the sole reason why I even have an interest in the classics now instead of dismissing it outright! I find your translations more palatable and your comments provide excellent insight for me to digest the lessons.

    This matter will be forgotten in a few days at most.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Great response.

    You are almost being too classy about it.

    If it were me, I would get Veloce to coach me for a bit, and then challenge her to a scone bake-off.

    Really hit her where it hurts.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. These books of classical antiquity were abandoned forty years ago by the left academics as being irrelevant writings of dead white men.
    Now that others have picked up that mantle, and are finding meaning in these works, these cultural marxists are going to try and slither their way back in and dictate to us all what these writers (supposedly) really meant.
    I don’t think they’re going to be successful, because as you say, deep down these academics really can’t abide the messages contained in these classic works. 

    Liked by 1 person

  12. The Zuckerbergs represent the worst of the Jewish people. Not the noble traits of a Einstein or a Feynman. But the subversive duplicity of an Abzug, a Sandberg, or a Horkheimer. Traitors, forever looking to denigrate the host country. And then when they are exposed, they’ll scurry off like roaches with a cry of “antisemitism!” It’s been done a million times already.

    They are the physical embodiment of cowardice. People who can only exist in a society of censorship and cuckolded manipulation (i.e. fake news from their demonic buddy Soros).

    She speaks of the classics. Ha! The Romans had a proper disgust for people of her ilk and they relegated them to their proper place – as powerless slaves. The reason that antisemitism is alive and well is because of people like her.

    Like

  13. Quintus,

    Ms. Zuckerberg’s attack article is atrocious and specious at best. Your response was measured, thought out, and absolutely disintegrated her premise and arguments. I believe you are right about her ignorance of the classics she supposedly is an expert. Please keep up the good work.

    Thanks,

    Loki0192

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Way to destroy a false intellectual, well done Quintus Things like this only make you stronger, and make your fans more loyal. Hopefully she drove some traffic and book sales your way.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Quintus, have you done any dedicated pieces to the subject of ‘When Education Does Not Mean Knowledge’? It’s a big issue today, in my opinion, and one of the reasons has to do with the abandonment of classical philosophy in contemporary thinking. Yeah, and I have to laugh at anyone taking issue with your writing. Keep up the great work.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Oh you ebil White men and your morality. Its the stumbling block for the New World Order. Novus Ordo Seclorum. Oh its a conspiracy, but no theory. Its written on your money. Tin foil hats aren’t worn at the Bank. White men like Plato, Aristotle, Shakespeare, and of course that hater Jesus Christ. Jesus isn’t some underpriviledged drug mule dealing dope. Those guys are the backbone of the left. Some pot, heroin for weight loss, and prozac to deal with the lonely atomised existence of shallow materialism. Its a drug cocktail. Add a worthless college degree and an STD or three and you can be a victim at the Pity Party tm.
    E Pluribus Unum. You know what that is? Fascism. Look it up.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. I come late to this blog, having read only a couple articles, all within the last year. I’ve been remiss in not adding it to my feed reader, and will fix that, post haste.

    Well put. If all of our foes were disposed to look at logic, philosophy, and reason, we may still disagree, but at least they would understand what you tell them. I hope this post convinces others, even as I am sure the incontinent child you addressed will not learn from this until many years have passed, and she has suffered much for her lack in perceiving truth.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Schopenhauer, in his estimation of the female character hit the nail on the head when he proclaimed that women are merely “big kids,” as such, they aren’t meant to be taken seriously. Now, I’ve fallen for that lure more times than I care to admit, and occasionally it still brings me some tenuous form of smug self satisfaction to debate them. But debating either a woman or a child is absurd, neither of these groups maintain semblance over their emotions when the validity of their argument has been soundly routed by an obviously superior intellect. Zuckerberg the Lesser couldn’t care less about your intellectual credentials because her pot shot wasn’t intended as an invitation to cerebral Holmgang. All women, being women, want attention. You gave her attention, you took the bait. It checked every box for rhetorical strategy; it was articulate, comprehensive, and lucid. A truly exemplary retort aimed at a wholly unworthy adversary. Skirts are knuckleheads, always have been, the only smart ones are the best looking and most hypergamously inclined. Nothing would have made her more furious than knowing that the Manosphere didn’t acknowledge the musings of one lone fat girl. I’m always reminded of the duel on Ganryu Island every time I find my ego insulted. Always be the one to show up late, carving a sword from a boat oar.

    Like

  19. I’m honored to mentioned so many times lately. I should write another piece on ROK.
    The one about raising daughters on the red pill seems to be a good one.

    You called it.
    Your article is example of what happens when a smart person become agitated.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Well done with this article, brother. It evokes an aspect of my professional oath as an engineer, penned by Kipling in the 1920s (“My reputation in my Calling I will honorably guard…”). Sometimes you need to stand up in the public forum and defend against those who attack your character or work.

    In this case, like some of the previous commenters, I see a golden lining in the criticism penned by Ms. Zuckerberg. There is fear oozing from her words. You and company are onto something, making inroads. And that is scaring the hell out of your adversaries.

    Keep it up, my friend!

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Just brilliant. Ms. Zuckerberg may have little feel for the classics, but after a response this devastating, she must know exactly how the legionaries in the Teutoberg forest felt in their final moments!

    Keep up the good work Quintus – it’s appreciated.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Pearls to swine, but with the technology of the internet, I too get to enjoy the sight this smooth, lustrous gem of a retort, even if she tramples it under hoof. Thank you.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. This is the first time that I’ve seen your site; indeed, it’s the first I’ve even heard of you. FWIW, I’ll just note the irony of feministas like Miss Zuckerberg and Mrs Clinton, who achieve their notoriety and positions entirely by riding the coattails of the men in their lives, and then they use their male-gotten positions to deride the nature of man.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Greatness of soul… not a lost art, I hope. I see you’re trying to keep it alive, as such I give you the highest tribute a man has to offer: his sincere respect.

    Like

  25. Dear Sir,
    I have just discovered your blog and intend to read much more of it. My knowledge of the classics is admittedly woeful. However, one thing I have made a regular, not superficial study in my time, is armor.

    I would like to make a suggestion that you change your seal. The helmet in your seal is a hamfisted reproduction from the Indian subcontinent from some point in the last 30 years.

    The topic of this article is a woman who knows just enough of her craft to be able to make a buck. And that is also what Asian reproduction armor largely represents. Both appeal primarily to those who know enough to detect what seems plausible, and yet not enough to know what is true. So in at least my case, your seal doesn’t send the intended message.

    If you’d like, you can email me and I’d be happy to make suggestions for a more accurate 1580s Italian close helm, or perhaps other less archetypal examples.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. As a Marine and teacher of the classics, I am heartened to see so eloquent and ardent a defender of virtus such as you staying in the fight; for, as Allan Blom mentioned in The Closing of the American Mind, “…practically no one reads (the classics) as they were once read – for finding out whether or not they were true.” Truth is a devalued commodity today, and Education is awash in the latest tripe. I prefer to follow Chesterton’s dictum that we ought to teach the oldest things to the youngest minds, but even, when talking to other teachers about truth or the ultimate questions and how they inform our experiences and reactions, I get only glazed-over expressions and blank looks. Hell, even talking to Marines with no formal training in the classics, I can sense more of a connection, a kinship even, because their experiences have “educated” them to trade in the currency of truth and ultimate reality. This, I assume, stems from their necessary proximity to death. They are philosophers in a way that civilians of this age cannot fathom. I once had an Education professor announce in class that one could not become the best teacher one could be without first having come to terms with one’s own death. To this sentiment, I agreed, but not without realizing that she came to this conclusion by ruminating long on the French existentialist philosophers, I by being in combat.
    I miss the camaraderie I once enjoyed in the Marines, having steel sharpen steel. And I loathe the abyss of civilian nihilism, with its lack of teleology and a cogent Weltanschauung. So, to see a fellow Teufel in the fight really gets my blood up. Keep your powder dry.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Thank you, brother, for your great words. Much appreciated. (I was active duty 1990-1994 and reserves 1995 to 2000). We’re not going to let anyone tell us how to think, or try to devalue our dear patrimony. Some things are much bigger than us and worth fighting for.

    You might like the motto I chose for my book “Pantheon”, which I took from the humanist Bartolomeo Fonzio: “So advance, fight unflinchingly with steel, and bring to bear standard against standard, weapon against weapon, and chest against chest. And I, the spectator of your fortitude…will be there, and will honor each of you according to his merits.” It never fails to arouse something within me.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s