I second Daffy Duck.

Interesting article. I'm not sure of the writers perspective. It's interesting that The Spectator didn't publish the authors name.

Perhaps a key to the philosophy of the author is the line "it is the consequence of importing identitarian systems into a civilisation that has forgotten why it rejected them in the first place".

Obviously the author is anti-left and anti-identitarian (or anti-ethnicity), sounds like this is firmly in Liberal party territory.

Sadly the Liberal's seem to have been doubling down on blindness. But I liked the bit about "a society that refuses to defend the ... conditions of its own existence does not remain ...".

people practicing some religious path and they look happy, and they are healthy, and they are sane
Daffy Duck,
In a period of absolute madness who decides what's sane ? Someone with three or more genders ? Or perhaps someone son educated that their only way to get through life is by being utterly delusional ? Pentecostals dancing with Rattlesnakes come to mind.

The threat we refuse to name is in fact the same that keeps telling us to let the "experts' deal with the problems. The irony of it ! Considering that it's always the "experts" who run the show that produces nothing but problems !
Look at Immigration, run by experts. Economy, tun by experts. Health, run by experts. Law & order, run by experts. Education. run by experts & so on & on & on !
Pauline Hanson's party is presently the only outfit that can offer people who know rather than perpetual "experts".
Merit must replace DEI if this society has even the slightest desire to survive. I believe the conservative mentality is the only way forward as none, literally none of the idealistic Leftist/Woke alternatives bureaucrats have & are demonstrating. Entrenched merit-devoid nepotism within our Peter principal authorities is running this Nation into the ground. Help put a stop to this appalling mess at the next election. Please offer opinions regarding the Peter principle in Australian bureaucracy ! Natural attrition would be the most fair way to go in my opinion ! Followed by Flat Tax.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=23780#401026

Indyvidual on Experts vs Merit, conservativism vs idealistic Leftist/Woke, Peter principle, DEI, Bureacrats, Nepotism, Pauline Hanson.

Answer-

The Peter Principle says that people will be promoted to their level of incompetance. But I would argue that Marxist/ Leftist/ Wokeist/ Academic/ Abstractionist/ Idealist loyalist's are incompetant to be real world managers (or even workers) because they don't live in the real world, and the higher they reach in academia may imply a greater mismatch, especially in the current era. So the Peter Principle would seem to be a step up from what we have now, as it implies that the managers were at least competent at a lower level.

Bob Whittacker said that he was told year 13 that "Marxism was a system of farmers and factory workers all working together by an enlightened system created by communist academics" he said he laughed at this blatant power grab. Aristotle argued with Plato's idea of abstract academic knowledge in his Nicomachean Ethics saying that truth was based on experience not abstraction. In the same way business argues with the academic universities. In modern times the academy dominates the process of specialization, then we wonder why there is scarcity and incompetence.

I think that is what Indyvidual is objecting to when he talks about "experts" and "merit"- academic tyrannical "experts" in abstraction not reality verses those with experiential "merit". The irony of these academic experts is that they seek to disarm the population to consolidate their power, they buy their power with the populations slavery, in the name of freedom. An armed population cannot be enslaved.

Therefore Marxism isn't about freedom or equality, but slavery by the technocrats that don't want to test their ideas from reality. Marxist's try to destroy the west in the name of equality, but this will not free other cultures, Marxism wants to destroy all cultures, it is an invasive force, that wants to capture all territories in abstract Marxist Managerialism Tyranny, as James Burnham said, and use the "power of scarcity" to maintain it's power. Capitalism otoh uses the "power of excess" to motivate people.