The essays in this volume demonstrate that the debate among conservatives about which principles and practices are most urgently in need of protection is also a debate with the larger liberalism that undergirds the American constitutional order. The essays suggest as well that this larger liberalism, with its bedrock devotion to individual liberty and equality before the law, serves as the common ground on which the contending camps within conservatism—and indeed conservatives in their contentions with progressives—can come together, debate civilly, and discover ways to advance the public good.
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
From the Publisher
Answers to the questions that divide conservatives in America today
Although conservatives may all look alike to their critics, they disagree among themselves about what it means to be a conservative and who is entitled to bear the name. This book examines the questions that divide conservatives today and presents the variety of answers put forward by classical conservatives, libertarians, and neoconservatives.
The contributors—drawn from varied professional backgrounds—each bring a distinctive voice to bear, illustrating the book’s overarching argument that conservatism in America represents a family of opinions and ideas rather than a rigid doctrine or settled creed. At the same time, the contributors clarify the moral underpinnings of the varieties of American conservatism and shed light on the political implications of each variety.
The essays in this volume demonstrate that the debate among conservatives about which principles and practices are most urgently in need of protection is also a debate with and within that larger liberalism that undergirds the American constitutional order. The essays suggest as well that this larger liberalism, with its bedrock devotion to individual liberty and equality before the law, serves as the common ground on which the contending camps within conservatism—and indeed conservatives in their contentions with progressives—can come together, debate civilly, and discover ways to advance the public good.
Peter Berkowitz teaches at George Mason University School of Law and is a fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the author of two books, and the editor of several, including the companion to this volume, Varieties of Progressivism in America (Hoover Institution Press, 2004).
Contributors: Randy E. Barnett, Joseph Bottum, Richard A. Epstein, Jacob Heilbrunn, Mark C. Henrie, Tod Lindberg
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
11 of 36 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Neoconservatives are not Conservatives,
By
This review is from: Varieties of Conservatism in America (HOOVER INST PRESS PUBLICATION) (Paperback)
Peter Berkowitz's books, Varieties of Conservatism in America and Varieties of Progressivism in America, are collections of essays by authors seeking to make the point that you need to know more about American politics than that there are conservatives and progressives. Under the big tents of conservatives and of progressives are sub-groups who even reject some others labeled as conservatives or as progressives. Over time, American politics re-balances itself via two major political parties seeking to win majorities by assembling sub-groups and their conflicting goals.
According to the authors, the varieties of conservatism are: (1) classical conservatism (consisting of traditionalist and of social conservatism) (2) libertarianism (3) neoconservatism. Paleoconservatives, such as Patrick Buchanan (editor of The American Conservative magazine), have only a footnote in the chapter on traditionalist conservatism and brief mentions elsewhere. A major flaw in this book is the editor's failure to include essays by leading supporters of each variety of conservatism. The editor could claim only that each author had some sympathy for the variety of conservatism. Joseph Bottum, an editor of the neoconservative Weekly Standard, wrote the essay on social conservatism. Jacob Heilbrunn's "The Neoconservative Journey" was the best essay on neoconservatism. Unlike neoconservatives who deny or fail to mention their ties to Trotsky, Heilbrunn explained the origins of neoconservatism in the Soviet Union. Trotsky advocated exporting communist revolutions around the world. In 1920, Lenin learned from the Red Army's failed invasion of Poland that the Polish workers and peasants rallied to defend Poland against communist invaders. Lenin, Stalin, and later leaders of the Soviet Union understood, unlike Trotsky, that workers of the world will not unite to create a communist world run by the Soviet Union. To casual observers of American politics, neoconservatives are anti-communists because they opposed the détente policies of Presidents Nixon and Carter and they supported President Ronald Reagan's attempts to cause the collapse of the Soviet Union. The neoconservatives gained political influence by having activists in both the Democratic and Republican parties. Richard Perle, for example, is a registered Democrat who has held positions in Democratic and Republican administrations. However, Heilbrunn did not explain Richard Perle's scandals for leaking national security documents to Israel while serving on the staff of the late Senator Henry Jackson (Democrat-Washington). Tod Lindberg's "Neoconservatism's Liberal Legacy" includes a review of neoconservatism's anti-capitalist positions while centrally-planned economies were failing. The neoconservative essayists did not explain why neoconservatives are supporting using America's military power to establish communist governments in the world today. The authors ignored the MEK (or MKO or Rajavi cult), the Marxist terrorists who have murdered American military officers, Rockwell International employees, and large numbers of innocent people in Iran and in Iraq. When American troops entered Iraq in 2003, they attacked Camp Ashraf and killed many of the communists. The neoconservatives in the Department of Defense were able to reverse the policy and have American troops protect Marxist terrorists in Iraq. Neoconservatives are not Conservatives.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
