First It Was Wal-Mart and Then It Was . . . Private Property?
As I have written elsewhere, I normally cringe when I read the Economics section of most conservative publications. Nothing changed when I picked up last month's issue of Chronicles. Writing under the heading of "The Economy," R. Cort Kirkwood has done it again. Jeff Tucker has already drawn our attention to Kirkwood's anti-Wal-Mart rant in the November issue of Chronicles. Now Kirkwood has taken on Wal-Mart again ("Wal-Mart and the Homosexuals"), maintaining that "Wal-Mart wants to undermine the American family and culture by supporting buggery." Kirkwood betters his previous effort this time, however, managing to also attack Jeff Tucker, libertarianism, capitalism, and private property in his screed against Wal-Mart.
What would conservatives do without Wal-Mart? Would they attack Sears, Target, and Home Depot? But where do they draw the line? Since "big-box stores" are evil, is a company with large stores off limits? What about a company with a large number of stores? What about a company that is not locally owned? Is there any place that a conservative can shop with a good conscience?
Economics aside, I like reading Chronicles magazine, and will continue to do so because, besides the excellent articles by Raimondo, there are also some gems that you won't find anywhere else. Like this in the February issue by the editor, Tom Fleming: "To this day, Christians and Southerners have not wised up. Every four years, they get out the vote for a party that betrays and insults them as soon as its members are in office."