The Decline and Fall of Imprimis
By Peter Klein on Aug 9, 2008 in Economics, Politics
Imprimis, the newsletter of Hillsdale College, was once an important part of the libertarian/conservative literary canon, with contributions from people like Henry Hazlitt, Arthur Shenfield, F. A. Hayek, Ben Rogge, Erik Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, M. E. Bradford, Russell Kirk, Malcolm Muggeridge, Forrest McDonald, Sidney Hook, and James Buchanan. Hayek’s important essay, “Coping with Ignorance,” discussing his intellectual relationship with Mises, appeared in the July 1978 issue.
No mas. Today’s Imprimis features the likes of John Bolton, Dick Armey, Victor Davis Hanson, Fred Barnes, Brit Hume, and Frank Gaffney. Yes, these essays are just as thoughtful and provocative as you’d expect. The most recent issue ran a piece by that Deep Thinker and Highly Regarded Person of Letters, Michelle Malkin. Oh, how the mighty have fallen!
Guys, save yourselves a few cents in postage and stop cluttering my mailbox with stuff I can pick up just as easily from Fox News.
Sad and true… the fall of Imprimus to the faux “conservative” Churchillian warmongers is to be expected.
As was the Pavlovian yelping and snideness at the message and candidacy of noninterventionist Ron Paul by said warmongers and GOP lackeys and minions and watercarriers.
So long as they keep the donors OBLIVIOUS they evidently could care less about the impending US Empire and its logical and quite soon collapse and will “patriotically” and “conservatively” continue to shill endlessly for the Standard of the Empire and treasure…….scurrying in the political Skinner Box maze for a promised bigger slice of cheese..and ANOTHER picture with Tom Ridge and Dick Cheney…..
Chris Bieber | Aug 11, 2008 | Reply
I’m too young to know, but are you sure Imprimis was as good as you remember it? If “canonical” essays are sparse — maybe one or two a year — then it would seem like there were a lot more in the past because you only remember the good ones. Or perhaps the essays only become canonical over time and were not any more noteworthy in their time than recent ones are now?
Is your real complaint that there are just too many conservatives supportive of the current wars?
Federalist | Aug 12, 2008 | Reply
Peter,
The characteristics of your “likes of” list is that they have a fairly clear perception of the world as it is and America’s role in it. That is their value as commentators.
Imprimis continues to carry commentary that makes me think and from time to time make adjustments to my thinking.
It sounds like you’ve at some point gotten crossways with Miss Malkin. I’m sorry about that. No, she may not be a Deep Thinker, but by golly she’s smart!
cam
Cam Lynn | Aug 12, 2008 | Reply
Federalist: Of course I’m cherry-picking. (If you browse the archive of past issues you’ll see that there was plenty of filler in those days too.) The point is that today, there are no cherries to pick.
Cam, my point is that the commentary in today’s Imprimis is at a much lower level than the commentary featured in former issues. Today’s contributors are virtually all journalists (I’ll restrain myself from writing “third-rate hacks”). Imprimis published journalists in the past, but also distinguished scholars, writers, and contributors to the public debate. Not any more. I mean, can you imagine putting an article from today’s Imprimis on a college reading list?
Peter Klein | Aug 12, 2008 | Reply
I like to refer to the Fox/Hannity/Rush/Coulter party line as “conservativism” as indeed many of its followers surely do.
Tom Walls | Oct 13, 2008 | Reply
Peter,
Since you like to dwell on the past, please read Rogge’s Imprimis piece from 1974. Pay particular attention to Rogge’s reference to Schumpeter’s description of “intellectuals” and where they fit in the scheme of things. Then come back and tell us if this it the sort of “intellectualism” for which you long.
The link is here.
Dave Benson | Mar 22, 2009 | Reply