What does it mean to be called a conservative?
Certainly not that one is a member of any particular political party, despite some strong correlations. Are Libertarians conservatives? Rand Paul ran for Senate as a Republican; his father Ron ran for president. And today, few conservatives would express any strong ties with either Nelson Rockefeller or Mike Bloomberg. Are Rockefeller and Bloomberg not conservatives?
Social conservatives talk about family values, right to life and protecting traditional marriage. Yet log cabin Republicans, many of whom are gays or lesbians, sponsored that Riverside California court challenge to "don't ask, don't tell."
Fiscal conservatives champion responsible spending, while hawks - those who would make the world "safe for democracy" - ran two wars off budget. Certainly hawks are not among the fiscally conservative.
Years ago after Democrats had reigned supreme for 24 years, voices sprang up to define conservatism. Among the most vocal were William F. Buckley Jr. and Barry Goldwater, Mr. Conservative embodied. A Buckley protege helped write Goldwater's "Conscience of a Conservative." Another protege, an academician not a media personality like Buckley, authored books on the subject and gave numerous lectures. In 1953 this man, Russell Kirk, altered the American political landscape by describing the conservative way of thinking. In "The Conservative Mind," Kirk set forth six cannons of thought - principles for approaching problems:
1. Providence: A transcendent order or body of law rules society as well as conscience.
2. Enjoyment: Life is filled with variety and mystery, not the narrow uniformity of radical systems such as liberalism or socialism.
3. Ordered society: Civilized society requires order and class. Equal treatment does not equate with equality of condition, either economic or social.
4. Property and freedom: These are inseparably connected. Individual ownership of property is the only foundation on which true liberty may be established. The right to enjoy the fruits of one's labor is one of the few genuine rights of man that conservative thinkers recognize.
5. Faith in tradition: Customs and traditions are a check on those who would seek power and control or radical change.
6. Change: Change is not necessarily the same as reform. Society must alter itself slowly, avoiding the embrace of radical innovation.
Kirk disavowed any narrow prescriptions for what a conservative believes. His work described historically how conservatives thought about and approached problem solving.
Today's neo-conservatives may have strayed far from the Buckley/Kirk philosophy, having been taken over by a band of pundits who now face challenges from a considerably less well-organized tea party, which has yet to fully describe all of its principles. Shortly before his death, Kirk spoke out critically of neo-conservatism and throughout his career condemned Libertarianism. None of these movements have much in common with Buckley and Kirk.
So what does it mean to think like a conservative? Based upon these six criteria, not unlike "beauty," conservatism may be in the eye of its beholder. And as a way of thinking about problem solving, it defies precise definition. Rather, it is a way of moving into the future while still respecting and giving reverence to the past.
-
Dale Whiting is a Chandler resident
Leon Ceniceros posted at 9:40 am on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
What's does a political "label" have to do with anything other than to supply the Media, both print and television with political "fodder". So-called "Conservative" values weren' t the only ones for the reason that Democrats and "R.H.I.N.O.'s" (Republicans In Name Only) were kicked out of office all across America. Old fashioned "American" values were the main reasons that Tea Party Republicans and Hard-Core Republicans were elected overwhelmingly to "Stop the Socialist and Marxist Agenda" of the Obama, Pelosi and Reid Administration.
The American people this election didn't vote "Conservative" or "Liberal"...they voted for "red-blooded, gun-loving, flag-waving, church-going, patriotic American politicians who for the most part are 99% Republican (Democrat Gabrielle Giffords being one of the few on the other side of the aisle, God Bless her).
These voters want "closed" not "open" borders. They didn't want some California ex-hippie, flower-child (remember the ones who spit on returning Soldiers and Marines from Viet Nam and called them "baby killers" and worse) Democrat politicians passing laws for "walk in the door" abortions, politically correct social engineering laws allowing any one with any sexual persuasion or life-style in our Military (were not talking about renting an apartment, visiting someone in the hospital, going to college or getting a job...we are talking about our Armed Forces here folks, the men and women who "protect" America from harm) , they don't want to have to learn Spanish to get a job in America, they don't want restrictive gun laws, they don't want tax-and-spend Socialism that helps the poor by by punishing the wealthy who worked hard and sacrificed for 4-6-8 years getting higher education to earn a good living, they don't want Amnesty for 20 million Illegal Aliens from Mexico and points south and they sure as heck don't want American Citizenship to be given to the children of Illegal Aliens from any Country who have no right to be in America in the first place.
So tell me....what "LABEL" would you put on these voters in the November 2nd, 2010 Local, County, State and National Elections ???
I would just call them .......AMERICANS.....and leave it at that.
Accuracy posted at 11:27 am on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
“Today’s neo-conservatives stray far from principles” is the East Valley Tribune’s title for Dale Whiting’s column.
Yesterday's and today’s neo-conservatives (neo-cons) are only former ‘Liberals’ espousing political conservatism. They may be what some call ‘neo-conservatives’ that stray far from principles, but they are not all “Constitutional Conservatives”.
There is clearly a great awakening occurring in America and it is on the cusp of bringing about a great change in how our nation is governed. Concerned conservative citizens are driving this change. Conservatives who want to see a return to our founding principles that are embodied in our Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.
There was a new batch of “Constitutional Conservatives” elected on November 2. And among them, are Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives who will attempt to repeal President Obama's healthcare law this week.
Both, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ken.) say; “it is a conservative who actually believes in smaller government and more individual freedom."
"Constitutional Conservative" Rep. Michele Bachmann, (R-Minn.), along with 95 members of Congress, endorsed the "Declaration of Health Care Independence" with its "10 constitutional conservative principles." Bachmann is a supporter of the Conservative Tea Party movement and is founder of the House Tea Party Caucus.
Tea Party Conservative members and Christian Conservatives say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, which is far from Libertarians and Liberals viewpoint.
Earl Nightingale, an American motivational speaker and author (throughout the 1960s) quoted many times; "We become what we think about" . . . Dale Whiting is thinking more and more about his ideal model Liberal Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and other Liberal Democrats in Congress.
Dale Whiting posted at 1:36 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Leon and Accuracy,
Just remember, Mussolini also made the trains run on time! The point is, "there is much much more to being conservative than the laundry list of issues you name."
Were they here today, Bill Buckley and Kirk Russell would crush the arguments of Newt Gingrich, the father of Neo-conservatism and Karl Rove, its permanent political advisor. Barry Goldwater would distance himself from today's Neo-cons, too.
But if you guys are happy being simple minded Neo-cons, go for it. You have that right. Neo-con politicians like the ones you name, know how to play to their base. They know the score by heart and are excellent base players. I can hear their tunes playing in the background to most all you have said.
Now, go back and consider the cannons of conservative thought and see what of the issues you list measure up and what does not. Believe me, you got nothing better to do.
Dale Whiting posted at 2:02 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Leon,
For starters, name one item on that Socialist/Marxist agenda you mention. Know that Burke and his progeny abhored socialism and Marxism as well as Newt Gingrich and his Neo-conism. Today's Neo-cons cry "Wolf" at most anything they see that does not appear to measure up to what they think is conservative, not knowing the difference between conservative thought and Fasism where the leaders are hidden behind a well coached front.
Gun control appears to be a hot topic. Or would you prefer to name another? Just remember, gun control is not on the President's agenda but Healthcare reform is. And even the new House Leadership promises to replace last year's reform with less "onerous' ideas, not wishing to admit that much of what was passed last year first came out of the mouths of Neo-cons.
Accuracy,
Why don't you write a column on Bachmann's "10 constitutional conservative principles," and let's see how they measure up to Kirk's six cannons of conservative thought! And where Buckley and Kirk were ghosting behind Goldwater, tell us who is ghosting for Bachmann.
Dale Whiting posted at 3:02 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Leon,
One last thought. Where you mention religion and so does Russell KirK, I have an observation to make. You state: "The American people this election didn't vote "Conservative" or "Liberal"...they voted for "red-blooded, gun-loving, flag-waving, church-going, patriotic American politicians who for the most part are 99% Republican."
Question: What do the following have in common. Ambassador to China-Huntsman, Harry Reid, Mitt Romney, Glen Beck, Jeff Flake, and upwards of 10% of this county? Answer, they all are church-going, attending the exact same denomination. And that denomination was once lead by the former Secretary of Agriculture under Eisenhower, Ezra Benson. And as did Bill Buckley and Russell Kirk, most of the members of Congress, both Democrat and Republican attend church, too. The Democrats I know are "red-blooded, 2nd Amendment-loving, flag-waving, church-going, patriotic Americans." What Democrats do you know who are not?
Freethinker posted at 3:08 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
"1. Providence: A transcendent order or body of law rules society"
Transcendent? Is this an allusion to an Abrahamic myth?
Using the word Providence surely spells that out.
So how can embracing Bronze Age mythology help solve problems?
And if you have an answer to that, please let our allies who are actually Christian nations, like Haiti and Zimbabwe, know too.
EmperorSmith posted at 4:35 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Before I make thought provoking response I am honored that you referenced Kirk.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 4:58 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Wow...some one didn't take their "nice" pills today. Sorry, but I don't want to get down in the gutter and do the "MSNBC" personal attacks. Look, it's been 2 months since the 2010 National Elections. The American People have spoken and the Obama-Pelosi-Reid.....Democrat Slide into Socialism....has been repudiated. I am just one vote out of millions and the millions of Americans have told the Politicians that they don't want a Red Flag flying over the Capitol Dome, they don't want the Mexican Flag flying over the Capitol Dome, they don't want the Rainbow Flag flying over the Capitol Dome.....THEY WANT OLD GLORY FLYING OVER THE CAPITOL DOME.
So as we used to say in the Army...."suck it up"....accept what is is what is. You can't change the Election Results with "name-calling" or "Liberal attack dog abuse". Try and be a good American and .......move on. Put a happy face on in the morning. We have enough problems with jobs, foreclosures and many, many other situations that need both Conservatives and Liberals to solve.
Accuracy posted at 7:00 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Once again Dale Whiting – The word neo-conservative (spelled neoconservative; colloquially, neocon) means "newly conservative," and thus formerly liberal.
And just like many “Liberals”, you use the word 'neo-con' to label all Republicans.
What does it mean to be a neo-conservative and not a Constitutional Conservative? In American politics, it is someone presented as a conservative but who actually favors big government (just like the “Liberals") and a hostility to religion in politics and government.
------------------------------------------
Michele Bachmann's "Declaration of Health Care Independence" with its "10 constitutional conservative principles."
“The Declaration of Health Care Independence is a commitment to protect the rights of the American people to make their own health care decisions, reduce bureaucratic red-tape, decrease intergenerational debt, and includes 10 common-sense principles that must be included in future health care reforms,” said Constitutional Conservative Rep. Michele Bachmann, (R-Minn.). “This is not a bill, but rather a roadmap of the rules going forward.
Following 10 points of agreement in her declaration:
• Protect as inviolate the vital doctor-patient relationship;
• Reject any addition to the crushing national debt heaped upon all Americans;
• Improve, rather than diminish, the quality of care that Americans enjoy;
• Be negotiated publicly, transparently, with genuine accountability and oversight;
• Treat private citizens at least as well as political officials;
• Protect taxpayers from funding of abortion and abortion coverage;
• Reject all new mandates on patients, employers, individuals or states;
• Prohibit expansion of taxpayer-funded health care to those unlawfully present in the United States;
• Guarantee Equal Protection under the law and the Constitution;
• Empower, rather than limit, an open and accessible marketplace of health care choice and opportunity.
Cerulean posted at 8:58 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
It is interesting to note that Joe Lieberman announced his retirement yesterday Jan 18.
In 1988 William Buckley Jr. told the New York Times ''We want to pass the word that it's O.K. to vote for the other guy [Lieberman] or stay at home,''
Of the Republican candidate Mr. Buckley said ''His pomposity and tergiversations on every issue make his running as a Republican an anomaly we ought to correct,''
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE5DF143AF935A2575BC0A96E948260
[wink] Neo-cons are tergiversates, that's it!
Dale Whiting posted at 9:44 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Freethinker,
The first cannon states that there is a set of general moral values, ones which transcend both time and culture, which draw together and define what is "right" and what is "wrong." Conservatives honor those values, as amorporus as they may be, and do not switch values from issue to issue.
This is apposed to the Marxists who espouse that religion, all religion, and even humanism, is the opiate of the masses. A classical conservative has strong and consistent moral values. Not sure why Kirk is so obscure about his language. Both he and Buckley are hard reads.
Leon,
Interesting prose. But can you be more specific? Can you pick an issue and discuss it?
Accuracy,
I lable as neoconservative those who follow Newt Gingrich's Contract with America and who follow in the footsteps of Bush 43/Rove/Cheney to spend money recklessly on nearly senseless, counterproductive wars, all the while ignoring fiscally sound government.
So are you a Neo-con? Do you make all sorts of sound and furry about so called conservative values, all the while forgetting the founding principles of Conservatism? Conservatives seek to conserve traditional values while meeting the challenges of the day.
The problem with Bachmann's list of 10 principles is that one has to assume that the 2010 healthcare reform act violates those principles without really studying it. Heck, Huckabee is on TV telling us that no one knows for sure what it does.
Kirk would tell us that any reform done needs to be incremental, one step at a time, with plenty of looking back. But where healthcare reform has been stalled for so long, and where other countries have forged ahead, looking over the fence to our north and across the pond to Europe is permissible, both to see what was good and what was bad. It seems to me that opponents do not look, they just assume. My ENT points out that where the US has socialized medice in Medcaid, Medicare, VA Hospitals/clinics and Burean of Indian Affairs Medicine, not to mention active duty medicine, medicine which trained those neurosurgeons in Tucson who saved Gabby's life, US socialized medicine ain't all that bad!
So Smitty, have you read Kirk? Apparently Rich has. But no one else has.
Ceruleon,
Bill Buckley was hard on everyone. In your example we see him being hard on Lieberman and on his opponent. Where most of those on this site see meas being hard on them, they think I must be a liberal. If Buckley knocked them, he'd be a liberal, too.
The one thing I liked about Lieberman was that he knew more about Middle East affairs and who was who than did McCain and Joe stooped to McCain's level to lend him a hand. Buckley had the occasional showing of sympathy, too.
Dale Whiting posted at 10:05 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Accuracy
P.S. I quote Wikipedia.
"The term neoconservative was used at one time as a criticism against proponents of American modern liberalism who had "moved to the right". Michael Harrington, a democratic socialist, coined the current sense of the term neoconservative in a 1973 Dissent magazine article concerning welfare policy. According to E. J. Dionne, the nascent neoconservatives were driven by "the notion that liberalism" had failed and "no longer knew what it was talking about." [Hense your understanding of those who, though formerly liberal, had converted. However]
"The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush. with particular focus on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine. The term neocon is often used as pejorative in this context." [I use neoconservative to describe Bush 43 Conservatives, all in the mold of Gingrich and Rove]
"The first major neoconservative to embrace the term, Irving Kristol, was considered a founder of the neoconservative movement. Kristol wrote of his neoconservative views in the 1979 article "Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed 'Neoconservative.'" His ideas have been influential since the 1950s, when he co-founded and edited Encounter magazine. Another source was Norman Podhoretz, editor of Commentary magazine from 1960 to 1995. By 1982 Podhoretz was calling himself a neoconservative, in a New York Times Magazine article titled "The Neoconservative Anguish over Reagan's Foreign Policy". Kristol's son, William Kristol, founded the neoconservative Project for the New American Century." [Wikipedia]
All of these Neoconservatives were criticized by Kirk and Buckley. Their conservatism was not well thoughtout and was not founded on those 6 cannons which Kirk lists.
Rich posted at 10:20 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
"Protect as inviolate the vital doctor-patient relationship"
That is really all that's necessary, just protect it from insurance companies as well as the government.
The problem with most if not all political questions is that politicians guild the lily.
Conservative is a pretty broad term. They called George Wallace one concurrently with Buckley. The fact is the majority of politicians who are out of office are in favor of smaller government, once a politician is in office big and bigger government becomes a goal, because now it's them. Buckley and Kirk are basically irrelevant because of that simple little fact.
Cerulean posted at 10:33 pm on Wed, Jan 19, 2011.
Dale,
actually Buckley was supporting Lieberman in this rare case. Buckley had said that he only voted Republican until this contest.
I also want you to know that you, et al in book reviews, have inspired me to give "The Conservative Mind' a look. So, I am looking forward to reading it and I hope it will be worth the time.
Accuracy posted at 6:10 am on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
"Neoliberal" -- a liberal who de-emphasizes traditional liberal doctrines in order to seek progress by more pragmatic methods.
So, Dale Whiting are you a Neoliberal?
Dale Whiting posted at 8:07 am on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
Rich,
You say "Buckley and Kirk are basically irrelevant because of that simple little fact [that big and bigger government becomes the politician's way of life]." Lord help us all! 45 years ago, I observed pretty much this same phenomenon among bureucrats working in the D.C. area. Morning, afternoon and lunch breaks were the highlites of their day.
Cerulean,
Kirk is a tough read. He does not descent to our level of understanding of History. But give him all of your patience and you will catch on to some rather profound concepts. I'm on the John Adams chapter. It take multiple reads of practically every line to catch on to much of what he says.
No Accuracy,
I am a classical conservative, in the mold of Wm. Buckley and Barry Goldwater. When one is guided by cannons of principle and not political issue based themes, as Curulean points out, one can cross party lines to vote for the person whose values are most nearly your own and still be critical of most everyone else, including those for whom you voted.
All of this line crossing does confuse the narrow minded masses. So if you get confuzed, I'll understand.
Dale Whiting posted at 8:40 am on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
P.S. Cerulean,
Way to go, Guy! Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary 1974:
"Tergiversate: to use subterfuges, equivocate."
"Tergiversation: evasion of straightforward action or clear-cut statements."
Can't agree that it applies to Neoconservatives in general, but it certainly does apply to Neoconservative leadership. Where Bush 43 called us to war against al Qaeda and then had us invade Iraq, that was a clear evasion of straighforward action. Where Saddam had put out that contract on the life of Bush 41 in retaliation for Desert Storm, going into Iraq to fight 9-11 terrorism was subterfuge of enormous proportions, one we are still paying for today. Joe Wilson and his wife Vallerie Phlame personally paid for their exposure of our leaderships' attempt at tergivesation.
But I reserve the term Neoconservative for we poor suckers who followed Bush 43. And even Bush 43 may have been taken in by Cheney. Were we a nation of political monument builders, watching the Bush43/Cheney monuments come crashing down would be justice served at last.
And don't give me that "But they kept us safe" line of irrational reasoning. The financial, moral, emotional and human life costs, both ours and those whom we wrongfully attacked, must be factored in first, before being "kept safe" can be assessed as a worthwhile goal.
Let's face the cold hard facts here gang. Through our gross overreaction to the events of 9-11, we have lost the War on Terror. We have terrorized ourselves way beyond the capacity of bin Ladin to terrorize us. We are all neocons, conned by our Tergiversate leadership.
We had "nothing to fear but fear itself" but we did feared fear anyway! Whether selling a high tech border fense, or envasions of foreign lands, remember that fear sells and "Beware of the military-industrial complex." If speaking today, Ike must include Haliburton!
So thanks, Cerulean for adding these two words to our collective vocabulary!
EmperorSmith posted at 12:04 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
We have lost and are continuing to loose, are freedom.
maktak posted at 12:54 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
Indeed. In Arizona, a "conservative" seems to only be a three issue platform : Pro-gun rights, Resentment of the Federal Government, and Anti-illegal immigration. I agree, to some extent, in all three issues. However, these three issues alone do NOT make up a balanced or well-rounded conservative movement. The focus that the Arizona GOP has on these issues is so focused that they don't seem to be thinking about anything else. Don't we need job creation? Don't we want a healthy economy? How about raising the standard of education from the bottom of the pile to the top? It seems they've forgotten about these things. Instead of making Arizona a shining star in this country, they're content to tell the rest of the country to "get lost if you don't like it", like some spoiled child lacking in social skills.
EmperorSmith posted at 1:30 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
On illegal immigration I resent them for not standing up in there own home land. It is the tyranny of there home land that drove them here right. Maybe they should try to make there lives better there versus sucking off those who fought the tyranny. I guess they are afraid of death versus liberty.
Dale Whiting posted at 2:26 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
Smitty,
I would have stated "We have given away and continue to give away our freedom, exchanging our rights for the illusion of feedom from fear and terror."
Have you ever been deep into Mexico or known any Mexican Nationals? Like far too many third world countries, graft and corruption is the political way of life. If you think getting kidnapped is far to easy in Phoenix, try Hermosillo. And Hermosillo is a "nice town!"
Where we have a middle class here, down south they have a landed class, a politico/militiary law enforcement class - dedicated to preserving the status quo and the poor. Try to take enterprise south of the border and you had better be watching your back. [Unless you paid your share of bribes].
Maktak,
My thougths mirror yours.
Dale Whiting posted at 2:29 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
Subtracting my eight comments from the 22, this has been a thought provoking column. Any of you neoconservatives ready, willing and able to take a crack at it?
Rich, I would suppose you are capable. But if any of you do, you will have to come out from those masks of "handles" you all are hiding behind!
EmperorSmith posted at 6:05 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
I have never know a Mexican national but I would welcome a conversation. The way Mexico seems to be not sure if this gringo should venture especially since they do not allow guns.
Now what made you think I was talking about Mexicans? I resent the Irish also for not standing up? Also any other illegal immigrant.
EmperorSmith posted at 6:08 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
Genuine desire to migrate I completly agree with but not those who run.
Rich posted at 8:21 pm on Thu, Jan 20, 2011.
Lovely. emp. Let me counter you if I may. Many years a ago I lived in Albuquerque. The profit in my business lay in Juarez (radio show, not drugs). I crossed the border weekly, to make a living. Because I sold advertising, and they sell their labor, is there a real difference beyond the governments we both pay to help us? It's been going on for three centuries, it's kind of what we are, a community inter-related, necessary to each other, divided by government. That's like, a sin?
Freethinker posted at 7:51 am on Fri, Jan 21, 2011.
Dale Whiting wrote:
"The first cannon states that there is a set of general moral values, ones which transcend both time and culture, which draw together and define what is "right" and what is "wrong."
And there's the clincher - this nonsensical belief that there are "transcendent" moral values.
And yet every time I ask someone who believes in Objective Morality to name one objective moral value, they either name a moral value that is actually subjective, or get angry and stomp off.
So here's the challenge - name an Objective Moral Value.
A hint for you: don't use killing children, rape, or human sacrifices as examples. I can show cultures where these things were morally acceptable.
Rich posted at 10:08 am on Fri, Jan 21, 2011.
"...name an Objective Moral Value"
Any you don't agree with imposed on you by the group you belong to.
sockratties posted at 12:32 pm on Fri, Jan 21, 2011.
Dale,
Before you get too enthralled with the wonders of Russell Kirk, you should realize that we live in this century after gaining independence from class protection of landed gentry, religious intolerance, the aristocracy of the crown and with hope of personal freedoms. We must look at our political models within the context of the environment of when they lived and what they could say without being executed for heresy or treason. In history, many great thinkers had to include what would now be considered “disclaimers” in their writings to keep away the men in black.
Kirk, like his social idols, Edmond Burke and predecessor John Locke saw the world as a paradigm that always had a paternal hierarchy within which every individual had a pre-defined position and roll. They did indeed dare to extend the philosophy of political thought for the time, but only altered the nature, not the relationship of government to the people. Kirk was a proponent of “natural law” much as described by Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century. God, the Crown and the aristocracy were always present and it was assumed class and status of the proletariat were divine edicts.
Kirk believed that Western cultures arise out of Christianity and that order (government and regulation) can not be separated from a culture. He believed that human existence is a divine mystery is not open to discussion.
Kirk was an advocate of Russell Burke who is admired for being a founder of modern conservatism as well as a representative of classical liberalism.
Both Kirk and Burke were advocates of John Locke who thought that everyone in a society gives up some freedom for the services and security provided by a government. He thought that citizens defined the rules they wished to live by and then lived according to those rules.
Burke believed that our class and status were preordained so if you were born as a peon you would always be a peon and die a peon. He believed that property and freedom were linked, in a time when only the elite owned property and that tradition, custom, convention and prescription were unalterable preserving the status quo.
Burke also believed that any attempt to change or alter the status quo was open to question and criticism but to advocate more of the same represented stability and preservation of the culture.
If you look closely you can see that there is no moral or ethical thread woven into this tapestry of culture. It is solely dependent on the concept of natural or divine law. Given these laissez-faire attitudes it is little wonder that we have had a moral decay in the power and economic monopolies within our culture.
The result is that we are now blaming the victims for the problems. It’s like the concept of starving people out of poverty.
EmperorSmith posted at 12:34 pm on Fri, Jan 21, 2011.
I have been giving your comment, Rich, much thought. Playing through scenarios in my mind. It seem to be the (class) deferential that is the barrier. I guess that goes through out history. I don't have a solution. I do think that big part of the cause is a massive overriding government that thinks it can see all. United states of America, right? America last I looked was the western hemisphere. So a federation of call it city states looks like would be a viable future. Each with own laws and regs.
EmperorSmith posted at 12:50 pm on Fri, Jan 21, 2011.
I think we each have our own objective moral values. For me it must be obvious it is freedom. For others I don't know there belief in what there god says (by the way even though I was raised Catholic I do not believe in god as they see it).
Cerulean posted at 10:24 pm on Mon, Feb 7, 2011.
In my reading of Kirk I am finding that he spends a lot of time on Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is, according to wikipedia, an ethical "idea that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its usefulness." Perhaps I have not read far enough into this to fully appreciate how to transpose this idea with my own experience, but I do not. At one point Kirk says "Utilitarianism proper; in still greater part, from Marxism, which is Utilitarianism flavored with Hegel and converted to the uses of the revolutionary proletariat." (page 115) How does Utilitarianism fit with Marxism or Hegel? I sometimes think that the only reason he brings it up is because he dislikes Bentham. That is where I am with Kirk and The Conservative Mind.