Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
RFTM must rdg for principled conservatives of all stripes, March 19, 1998
By A Customer
Dr. Francis has a writing style and a subtle wit that I believe is second to none. He illustrates well poitical phenomenoms that very few writers see or dare to touch. Even though RFTM is a collection of his essays in another publication from 1989-96, the sundry subject matters fit together very well in near-booklike fashion. Dr. Francis does contradict himself from time to time (to his credit, far less than most conservatives, neo, ultra, or paleo), and he seems to posess a fundamental Washingtonesque snobbiness on infrequent occasion, and those are the only reasons I would give that I did not give it a perfect ten. Otherwise, get it, committ it to memory, and avoid lending it out as you may never get it back.
|
|
|
11 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Conservative Counterrevolution Countering the Hegemon?, October 11, 2003
~Revolution from the Middle~ is essentially an anthology of op-ed articles compiled by conservative journalist Samuel Francis from Chronicles Magazine. Francis is perceptive even if it misses the mark. He makes the contention that Middle America must become self-conscious or be crushed in a gigantic pincer movement by the Left Coasters, the Neoconservatives in orbit around the Beltway and the Limousine Liberals of the Northeastern Establishment. Internationalism coupled with runaway immigration from the Third World, cosmopolitan urbanization, decadent entertainment, vanity and crass materialism are the seeds of discontent sowed by the elites. If the crisis goes unabated, Middle America will be assimilated into a cultural and spiritual void. Francis hopes to thwart the dawning of America as a new Tower of Babel seething in a moat of cosmopolitan decadence and one-worldism. The book is thought-provoking and should not be ignored by conservatives.
Samuel Francis breaks with conservative luminaries like Russell Kirk and Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihin who for principled reasons rightly refuse to conflate conservatism to being an ideology or deem ideology as desirable. Samuel Francis on the other hand reasons that there is little left to conserve. For this reason, conervatives need to take a cue from communist theoretician Gramsci and adopt an insurgent ideology, albeit one of a restorationist, traditionalist and counterrevolutionary nature. This conservative counterinsurgency should strive to displace the hegemonic ideology of the transnational elites. Cognizance of the modus operandi of the Left, apparently has led Samuel Francis to believe that we must emulate their tactics to effectively fight and win a culture and political war. Gramsci, of course, proposed "a long march through the institutions," which would lead to the creation of a veritable state within a state. The Leftist ideology would topple the "bourgeoisie superstructure" from within, graft itself onto the existing state and gradually throw residual elements of the old order off.
It seems, however, that the cultural overlords have already accomplished their Fabian goal of gradual change when conservatives break from traditional conservatism to become in Francis words Middle American Radicals (MARS). I reckon traditional Old Right conservatives can find fault with him for conflating conservatism to some kind of ideology. Neoconservatism is after all an ideology, and not representative of an authentic American conservatism, but rather retooled New Deal liberalism designed to pacify America's nominally conservative elements as a ersatz opposition to the alternative of modern statist liberalism. Nonetheless, Francis' pessimism is not tainted with the resignation that so many other avowed conservatives have. Francis obvious thinks Middle America shouldn't go out with just a mere whimper, but fight to the end.
In analyzing some of the finer points of Francis' conservative counterrevolution, which may be familiar to Buchananites of the Old Right, he itinerates an America First platform of opposition to globalization as well as opposition to runaway immigration, which is displacing the distinctively European-Western culture upon which the U.S. was founded. Though, he feels that Middle America's interests lie in preservation of the social insurance schemes wrought out in the New Deal and basically empowering the Welfare State for Middle America. I cannot concur with this point nor I can I fully assent to all of Francis' contentions and positions. It was the Welfare State that paved the way for egalitarian leveling and dependence-breeding, which has debilitated Middle America's power. However, his essential point is that Middle America needs to be forceful in asserting itself. It must assert Middle America's interests while concurrently upholding, fortifying and restoring our Western culture and traditions. If Middle America fails to respond accordingly, Middle America will face certain extinction. It will become detached from its cultural and traditional roots. Middle America will then be submerged into an amalgam underclass numbed by mass-media and material fodder from the transnational elites.
Perhaps, true blue American conservatism has already died. And if so residual elements of the old order in the South, Midwest, and the Western U.S. are having a hard time coming to grips with this reality. In this case, these musings are just a sad obituary by a reactionary on the Right. Or perhaps this prophetic book is a foreshadowing of deepening conflict between an increasingly self-conscious Middle America and its cultural tormentors: the liberal, cosmopolitan, transnational elites.
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Adequate and repetitive, July 15, 2008
Samuel Francis was an excellent writer, but I can't endorse this "book." I use quotes because it is simply a collection of his essays over a number of years. The essays have a simple, but coherent theme: white middle-class people are being screwed by an unholy combination of elite leftists. While I agree with most of his premise, the "book" is highly repetitive. Once you read the first 3-4 essays, you pretty much have read enough.
|
|
|
|
by Samuel T. Francis
See all 7 books citing this book
