“Men versus the Man”, Mencken, La Monte, Derbyshire
Everything has come together perfectly for this new book, and we think it’s an essential purchase for the Social Darwinist, Menckenophile, Egoist or Reactionary Conservative.
“Men versus the Man”
H.L. Mencken
Robert Rives La Monte
preface by
John Derbyshire
There is no irony in the fact that H.L. Mencken is a tall figure in the history of letters, and Robert Rives La Monte is wholly forgotten. La Monte, who worked at the Baltimore News as well as being an editor for the International Socialist Review, was a true believer in the promise of Socialism, and here he writes six letters trying to convince H.L. Mencken that he should reject his selfish ways and become a comrade in the revolution to usher in a perfect world.
Mencken, long time writer for the Baltimore Sun, editor of The American Mercury, and prolific author and essayist, was the absolute worst choice of target for an evangelist of the common man. There have been few who were as openly resolved to a robust Nietzschean individualism. And so, in one of the turn of the last centuries greatest “flame wars,” we have the Bard of Baltimore’s six responses to those calls.
The battle of the “collective good” versus “individual liberty” still rages in pitched battles. One difference is that this one, chronicling a hundred year old battle of egoism against collectivism, was fought well before National Socialisms tens of millions and Communism’s hundred million corpses would add more serious weight to subsequent debates.
La Monte’s voice is rightfully now just one of many faceless advocates of class-warfare, and Mencken’s personality survives as the greatest advocate of social Darwinism and thus ultimately Mencken’s own views.
With a preface from the anti-optimist John Derbyshire (We Are Doomed,Unknown Quantity, etc.) giving a historical context as well as his own perspective and its relavance to conservative thought today. He states:
“The argument of Men versus the Man is one we are still having today. The content of the argument is the relative desirability of two approaches to our social life. On the one hand is proposed a society of men: a society in which none is allowed to rise too high above another, a society that subtracts great resources from the more able in an effort to raise up the less able. On the other hand is a society of the man: a society in which individuals are left to do what they can with their inherited capabilities, in conditions of maximum personal freedom and minimal state control.”
-John Derbyshire, from the preface
(Source: underworldamusements.net)
-
churchofsatannews reblogged this from kevinislaughter
-
deathisdeath liked this
-
lattaland liked this
-
fuckyoucuntface liked this
-
fuckyoucuntface reblogged this from kevinislaughter
-
kevinislaughter posted this