Serge Trifkovic is completely right. He has been one of the few voices on the conservative right to take a clear and principled stand on the issue of Muslim immigration and his understanding of Islam is unclouded by PC delusions. His book ‘The Sword of the Prophet’ is a must read.

It would be funny if it wasn’t so terrible. The paleos support immigration restrictions and oppose a war against the Muslim extremists and terrorists abroad. The neocons support a war against the Muslim extremists and terrorists abroad and oppose immigration restrictions.

Now, let’s see, is there any possible common ground between these parties? :-)

(That smile is sad.)

Lawrence Auster writes:
“Now, let’s see, is there any possible common ground between these parties? :-)”

The paleo’s recognize and understand the principle of subsidiarity, where as the neocons are primarily Hegelian and Straussian, with the unfortunate twist of many taking manifest destiny to a global level.

If the neocons have ever given a viable argument proving Pax Americana and US imperialist hegemony is consistent with subsidiarity, correctly understood, I have certainly never seen it. Nor do I expect to, since I suspect you are asking for common ground between truth and neocon error.

Lastly, the statement of, “oppose a war against the Muslim extremists and terrorists abroad”, is in error, because it subverts the paleo position. The paleos do not deny just war and self defense, but are against unjust war and imperialism