While We’re At It

♦ We often imagine that nihilism demoralizes, inducing a sense of meaninglessness. This is not always the case. In his poetic presentation of Epicurean philosophy, On the Nature of Things, Lucretius promises that a pointless and purposeless materialism will lead to calm and peace of mind. Joseph Conrad seems to have taken the same view. In a letter to a friend, he wrote, “When once the truth is grasped that one’s own personality is only a ridiculous and aimless masquerade of something hopelessly unknown the attainment of serenity is not very far off.” The idea is simple: If there’s nothing worth worrying about, then there’s no reason to worry. If there’s no purpose to life, then one is free to get on with simply living. 

---

♦ I was recently a guest on the Art of Darkness podcast, a series that treats great authors (artofdarkpod.com). Our topic was Conrad. The hosts asked me whether Conrad’s novels convey a message or point of view. There are common themes, I replied, but it is futile to try to determine Conrad’s views. He was a great ­mystifier of his own life—as much, perhaps, to himself as to ­others. 

---

♦ One persistent theme in Conrad’s novels is the fragility of personal identity (“a ridiculous and aimless masquerade of something hopelessly unknown”). ­Conrad shared with Emile Durkheim the concern that inner convictions and solid self-conceptions can wobble, even collapse. Writing in the 1890s, the French sociologist observed that modern society suffers from “a morbid disturbance which, while able to uproot the institutions of the past, has put nothing in their place; for the work of centuries cannot be remade in a few years.” 

---

♦ If you are interested in my reading of Conrad’s great novel Lord Jim, take a look at my essay in Azure (Spring 2011): “Joseph Conrad’s Play of Light and Shadow.” 

---

♦ A friend made an interesting observation about populism, which is driven by a growing dissatisfaction with liquid modernity and a world without borders: “We have no standing in society if we have no place to stand.” I replied, “Life in Christ gives us a place to stand.” 

---

♦ On February 13, the New York Times ran an opinion piece by Oren Cass. He notes an interesting parallel between the captivities of the Democratic and Republican parties: 

Special-interest pressure campaigns have been associated in recent years with “the groups,” as they are often called, activists that have pushed the Democratic Party far to the left of the typical voter on issues such as immigration, race, gender identity and climate change. But the Republican Party has its own special-interest groups—mirror images of the progressive ones, equally destructive of both its popularity and its prospects for getting anything done.

Alongside the Club for Growth, such groups as ­Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform and the Koch Network’s Americans for Prosperity have made it their mission to cut taxes continuously, regardless of what most voters prioritize or the federal budget can bear.

They preach tax cuts with the same desperate zeal as climate activists demanding a near-total elimination of carbon emissions. They oppose tax increases, no matter how large the deficit, with the same determination that open-borders advocates oppose any effort to restrict immigration. They insist that tax cuts spurred the late 1990s economic boom, although Bill Clinton raised taxes; that George W. Bush’s tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 paid for themselves, although tax revenues fell sharply; that Mr. Trump’s tax cuts in 2017 propelled growth, although growth slowed. They accuse anyone who suggests a need for more tax revenue of betraying conservatism—never mind that Ronald Reagan raised taxes repeatedly. 

---

♦ Conservative revolution—that’s an oxymoron. Authoritarian liberalism—another oxymoron. It’s a sign of the times that both are political and cultural realities. 

---

♦ Sketch of an Aristotelian argument for the First Amendment:

Man is a religious animal → religious freedom.
Man is a social animal → freedom of association.
Man is a political animal → freedom of the press.
Man is a rational animal → free speech. 

---

♦ John Rawls and liberalism share a dream not unlike that of Karl Marx and communism: the end of politics and of battles over what Rawls called comprehensive doctrines, allowing us to turn to the scientific management of utilities.  

---

♦ David Mamet: “Our lives, yours and mine, are full of sanctimony; in fact, a grand tool of self-diagnosis is recognition of the warm joy we take in sententiousness, and its big brother, righteousness.”  

---

♦ I mention Leo Strauss above. I remember reading in college one of his famous essays, “Persecution and the Art of Writing.” Strauss argues that the conventional pressures of traditional society forced the great writers of the Western tradition to disguise their true intentions. It made sense to me. To seek transcendence draws one away from the conventional. As Jesus tells Pontius Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world.” That’s a dangerous sentiment, unsettling to those in power, which is why Strauss thought that the strongest insights to be found in classical works of philosophy were communicated by indirection.

Strauss lived and wrote in liberal America. So, as a young person, I thought he was exempt from the pressure to keep his most important ideas and aims hidden. Only lately have I come to realize my naiveté. Strauss sought to educate aristocrats of the soul for leadership in modern democratic America, latter-day Platonic guardians. Our egalitarian ideology is hostile to such a project. As I have noted, liberalism-alone censors the non-liberal loves and loyalties that drive us toward excellences of the soul. Working in postwar America, which was increasingly doctrinaire in its liberalism-­alone, Strauss could not articulate his program explicitly. He encoded it in recondite readings of the history of political philosophy, and he pursued it with his students in the privacy of the seminar room. 

---

♦ In our most recent issue (March 2025), we published a fine poem, “Letter to a Middle-Aged Poet.” I’m proud of our high standards. But I’m ashamed to report that we made a mistake. We wrongly attributed to poem to ­David Middleton. The correct author is Matthew ­Buckley Smith. I apologize to both men for this error. 

---

♦ Dennis Floyd established the ROFTers group in Denver more than twenty years ago. In doing so, he provided the impetus for the entire ROFTers movement. In 2001, Dennis’s brother convinced him to subscribe to First Things. An engineer by training, Dennis thought that conversation with others would help him understand our theological and philosophical articles. Here’s how he tells the story:

So, in May of 2003, I emailed Vince Druding, Editorial Assistant at First Things, asking if he could supply me with contact information for subscribers in the Denver area. He replied on May 18 that privacy laws prevented him from doing that but promised to raise the matter with the editors to see if an alternative could be developed.

He wrote again on May 21, this time including another reader who had expressed a similar interest, to say that the editorial board liked the idea and requesting that we “submit a letter expressing formally this request and the ideas you have for it, including contact information that you would not mind being printed in the magazine.”

I did this immediately and on June 16 received an email reply from James Nuechterlein, then-editor of First Things, thanking me for my interest in “organizing a First Things discussion group in the Denver area.” He stated that they would announce in the August/September issue that First Things would provide “contact data for people like you who are willing to take the initiative in organizing FT groups in particular areas.” That information would be published in the October issue

This was done. In his “While We’re At It” section of the August/September issue Fr. Neuhaus wrote, “If you’re interested in convening ROFTERS (Readers of First Things) who want to discuss articles appearing in the Journal, drop us a letter explaining what you have in mind. We will then post in this section the names and addresses of conveners, and subscribers who are interested in being a part of such groups can get in touch with them. Our lawyers insist that we say such groups are not officially sponsored by FT; we are only helping facilitate such groups at the request of readers. Let’s see how this works out.”

It worked out very well! In the October issue my contact information was published, along with that of four other prospective conveners (Robert Caffrey, Annapolis, MD; Rev. Michael Gilligan, So. Chicago; Chris Saxman, ­Stauton, MD; and M.J. Christiensen, Deland, FL) Nine more conveners were listed in the November issue, three more in December, and by April, 2004 some 45 conveners had surfaced. Eventually over 100 conveners were identified in the U.S., Canada, and various locales around the world.

Dennis continues to convene the Denver group. I’ve visited the group several times, always refreshed by the good fellowship and reminded of how lucky we are to have such smart and engaged readers. 

---

♦ Dennis also takes issue (gently) with my characterization of the appeal of joining a ROFTers group. Here’s what he wrote in the same missive that gave the account of the movement’s origin:

Even 22 years after the inception of Rofters, new conveners are often identified in each monthly issue of the journal. In the February 2025 issue, for example, editor Reno introduced still another prospective convener (Darrel Darby of Charleston, SC). In doing so, Dr. Reno stated, “If you want to meet smart, like-minded people who are not averse to arguing about theology, culture, and the meaning of life, get in touch with him.”

Dr. Reno does not capture the essence of our Rofters group with these words. I would say that if you want to engage in fruitful, interesting discussions about current important cultural, philosophical, and theological topics, join a local Rofters group. What you will find is that you will get to know some of the most wonderful people in your life and treasure their presence, friendship, and insights immensely.

Take Dennis’s words to heart. First Things is more than a world of ideas. It’s a fellowship of persons. 

---

♦ We have many readers hoping to form ROFTers groups. Please contact them if you’d like to meet monthly to discuss the most recent issue of First Things.

• Keith Duff of Aurora, Illinois: keith.duff@­villagebible.org
• Willy Dillingham of Carrington, North Dakota: wsd1776@gmail.com
• John Lynn Gullickson of Las Vegas, Nevada: Johnlynngulickson@hotmail.com
• Rene Nevarez of El Paso, Texas: nevarez77@­sbcglobal.net
• Luke Heibel of Fayetteville, North Carolina: lgheibel@yahoo.com

Two existing ROFTers groups are seeking new members. Drop the group leader a note to find out when and where to meet.

• David Simpson of Beaufort, South Carolina: ­dlsimpsonjr@gmail.com
• John Trecker of Kansas City, Kansas: jttrecker@gmail.com 

---

♦ For the annual First Things Chicago Conversation, I’ll sit down with Anna Moreland to talk about why things are so broken for young people—and what we can do to make some repairs. “Cultivating Virtue in the Age of TikTok” will take place at the Athenaeum Center on the north side of Chicago. To register for the event, visit firstthings.com/events. I look forward to seeing you there. 

---

♦ Save the date for our annual Intellectual Retreat in New York City, beginning with dinner and a lecture on Friday, August 8 and continuing with a day of seminars and discussion on Saturday, August 9. This year’s theme: faith in the age of technology.