At Home On Piety Hill

Why, that would be Camille Paglia, of course! Now, here’s a woman from the other end of the spectrum I think I could have an enjoyable discussion with, even though we strongly disagree on a number of issues. She’s smart, she’s tough, but she’s fair minded and has a good grasp of history, I think. She was interviewed on Salon.com and here are a few choice excerpts.

On religion:

But religion is absolutely central to this country in ways that Europe’s secularized intellectuals fail to understand. I’m speaking here as an atheist who studies religion and respects it enormously. In the history of mankind, the benefits that religion has brought to society in shaping behavior and moral choice are overwhelming in comparison to the negatives, which anyone can list — like religious wars and bigotry. Without religion, we’d have anarchy.

On Condoleeza Rice:

Condi Rice looks lost lately. She’s overstretched and on a learning curve. Her training (by Madeleine Albright’s father) focused on the Cold War era when the world was polarized between two superpowers. It didn’t prepare her for the baffling and frustrating complexities of the highly sectarian and factionalized Middle East. You need to know the turbulent history of the ancient Near East to understand what’s going on there now. It’s always been a roiling cauldron — wars and more wars and massacres from the Egyptian, Assyrian and Roman empires down to the fascist rule by the Ottomans. Every feminist who wants to smash the glass ceiling should realize she has a stake in Condi Rice’s success. Rice is a brilliant woman, but diplomacy is an art.

On George Bush:

I’m not a Bush hater. I’ve always viewed him as a decent fellow who was pushed into the presidency because he was his father’s son. But he’s been out of his depth in foreign affairs from the start. He certainly lacks the basic verbal skills for the presidency — reading speeches authored by others is no substitute. But I’ve become concerned about Bush’s mental state in the past few months. Sometimes in his press conferences or prepared statements (which I listened to on the radio), I heard a sort of Nixonian tension and hysteria. His vocal patterns were over-intense and his inflections impatient, lurching and sarcastic. There was this seething quality to his speech that worried me and that seemed to signal that something major is being planned — perhaps another military incursion.

More excerpts to follow… I really enjoyed this interview.

This entry was posted on Friday, October 27th, 2006 at 5:00 am and is filed under Christianity, Culture, Each and Every, Politics, Religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.