Carnifex

this, too, of course, but they're amateurs in comparison to communism. One is tempted to say that communism draws its circle with headstones . . . but this would be wrong as the mass graves are almost invariably unmarked.

[3] You may have noted that families have parents and children, the parents being in charge. Have you ever noticed how often people who use phrases like 'Family of Man' tend to think of themselves as the parents? Guess who they think of as children.

[4] And paid for by you. You know the ones: 'feed, clothe and educate poor little Maritza for twenty-seven cents a day?' It doesn't work that way. Little Maritza, if she gets clothed, fed and educated at all, typically gets it from strings-attached government grants. Sadly, for the men and women who claim to be feeding little Maritza, those strings tend to exclude things like paying for mansions in Darien. In most unenlightened fashion, when governments give money to feed Little Maritza they actually insist that little Maritza be fed. Likewise stays at five star resorts for conferences are out. Likewise, flying first class to those conferences is out. That's where your no- strings-attached twenty-seven cents a day comes in. It can be used for the important things, mansions, luxury conferences, and first class airline seats. See: The Road to Hell, Michael Maren, The Free Press, 1997.

[5] Oh, yes, the mullahs take care of their own. This is one similarity between religious cosmopolitanism and non-religious cosmopolitanism.

[6] So do the Chinese communists. In fact, they're especially good at taking care of their own. They put mere mullahs and simple Tranzis in the shade. From an article by Carsten A. Holz, in Far Eastern Economic Review, April, 2007: 'Article after article pores over the potential economic reasons for the increase in income inequality in China. We ignore the fact that of the 3,220 Chinese citizens with a personal wealth of 100 million yuan ($13 million) or more, 2, 932 are children of high-level cadres. Of the key positions in the five industrial sectors—finance, foreign trade, land development, large-scale engineering and securities—85% to 90% are held by children of high-level cadres.'

[7] Cosmopolitanism and Patriotism, Boston Review 19:5 (October-November 1994).

[8] After all, there are always people like me willing to spice up a dull world literarily . . . and perhaps in other ways, too.

[9] I'm deliberately leaving out of here the cosmopolitanism which would be justified, or at least theoretically justifiable, if people did actually reincarnate. This, of course, would presuppose that upon reincarnation we cross societal lines rather than, say, my soul having to wait, a la Druze, for another Kratman baby to be born so that I can inhabit it. It also presupposes that, unlike Hinduism, where the boundaries between men are explicit in birth, reincarnation is purely random. I know of no significant form of cosmopolitanism that has its basis in reincarnation. Such a justification would, in any case, be highly speculative.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Interestingly, there's a draft declaration at the United Nations, the United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Article 7 of which decries, among other things, 'cultural genocide,' to include, 'Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities.' I'd like to see that adopted, with a couple of definitions, and some criminal liability attached. Why? Well, if we define indigenous to include native-born, as we certainly might, then we could charge and try all those people who insist on forcibly inflicting upon our children foreign culture and values in place of our own for 'Cultural Genocide.' Be a hoot, wouldn't it?

[12] I am indebted to Professor Sam Huntington's Who Are We, Simon and Schuster, 2004, for this little tidbit.

[13] By the way, I don't mean here to insult Juan Robles, the MS-13 drug runner and assassin, nor his organization, by invidious comparison to, say, Ford or Microsoft. At least Juan has loyalty to something beyond money and genes. And MS-13, at least, can generate loyalty that is not merely bought and paid for.

[14] 'If smarts were people, Lee Harris would be China.' –Jonah Goldberg

[15] Lee Harris, The Cosmopolitan Illusion, Policy Review, April/May 2003. Other things have, too: religion, region, sect and race, for example. They all draw circles that the nation has often been able to surmount.

[16] For an equally good, and perhaps better, example, consider the break-up of India following the end of the British Raj caused that that peerless cosmopolitan, Gandhi.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Though a cynical man, which of course I am not, can hardly help but note the potential for Anthropocentric (man-made) Global Warming to fill this need for an external threat to draw people together. It would be paranoid to say this is the motive. It is not paranoid to note how very convenient AGW is.

[19] See, e.g., the French. For that matter, see ,e.g. Europe.

[20] There's a lesson in there, I think, about how any form of cosmopolitanism must ultimately deal with those who do not accept its teachings.

THE END

For more great books visit

http://www.webscription.net