In this highly interesting and informative book, the reader will be introduced to the main currents in conservative thought, and in a manner that is objective and with only a few exceptions free from an excess of bias. There are many names and ideas associated to American conservatism, and readers may find that they hold much more in common with it than they might have first realized. Its history and content have been tarnished greatly in recent years, due mostly to the popularity of `neoconservatism' (which is discussed in the book), and the current regime in Washington. This book will hopefully assist in putting conservative thought into its proper perspective, and illustrate to the uninitiated reader its great diversity in ideas. The average reader will probably not read every article in the book, but will instead concentrate on those of interest. There is a fair representation of the major (and minor) philosophical trends that have dominated American conservatism, along with those that have or are losing credence.
By far the best article in the book is the one entitled `Liberalism' and written by Peter Augustine Lawler. In spite of its length, it gives a fair and interesting overview of what constitutes liberal thought and some of its intersections with conservative thinking. It is a refreshing alternative to the vituperation that so frequently occurs in discussions of liberal philosophy. The author does refer to `liberalism' as being `elitist' but this is put in the context of its belief that individuals must be liberated from religion, morality, and other traditional beliefs in order to become fully human. In this sense it is `elitist' in that it makes special and frequently exclusive claims to knowledge about what it means to be fully human. Also interesting (and it is fair to say accurate) is the author's statement that American liberalism has been a mixture of conservatism and liberalism. There is fairly good evidence that suggests even more so, namely that liberals have actually switched places with conservatives in recent decades. Both liberals and conservatives will deny this vociferously of course, but the conservative thought of George Will, who is also included in the book, is a good example of this crossover effect, with his notion of "statecraft through soulcraft", which sounds suspiciously like the belief from liberalism that governmental institutions should be used to promote beneficial social change. The next article entitled `Liberalism, Classical' offers more insight into the nature and philosophy of liberalism, and in fact reinforces this `crossover' effect between the liberal and conservative camps, albeit in a much longer time scale (on the order of a few centuries rather than decades).
It is very surprising to see an article on Ayn Rand appear in this book, given that she chose to distance herself from `conservative' thought throughout her lifetime. She also despised `Whittaker Chambers' due to his extremely negative review of one of her novels. But an article on Whittaker Chambers of course appears in this book. The ideological distance between Chambers and Rand is infinite but they find themselves in close proximity in this book, separated only by a little over six hundred pages. They both are no doubt turning over in their graves over this inclusion, but if the truth be told, Rand does qualify as being a conservative, if one thinks of libertarianism as an element of conservative thought (as it is in this book, having an entire article devoted to its elucidation). Rand's atheism is no doubt one of her most annoying features, but ironically, the renowned Sidney Hook, who is also included in this book, and who was mentor to Leonard Piekoff, Rand's designated heir, was also an atheist. His atheism was apparently excused however, due possibly to his strong anti-communist stance (but Rand was strongly anti-communist?). Edward S. Shapiro, who wrote the article on Hook in the book, is careful to note that Hook did not believe in the "goodness of mankind", and it is fair to say that most conservatives consider it naive or misguided to believe otherwise. They stumble greatly here though, since statistically most people throughout history have conducted themselves honorably, even if measured by a conservative yardstick. To believe in the "goodness of mankind" is to accept the overwhelming evidence supporting the belief.
Conservatives though, it might be fair to say, have had some difficulties with empirical reasoning, and this is especially true in the scientific realm. This is brought out to some degree in the article entitled "Science and Scientism" by M.D. Aeschliman. Scientific and technological progress is at odds with most conservative thought, due to the latter's anathema for change. Most of the article concerns the effect of "scientism" on the individual person in that it negates purpose and meaning. C.S. Lewis (who is also written about in the book) is quoted in this article as support for the alienating effects of scientism, and its capacity for the "abolition of man." But interestingly, the area of science that studies human behavior and its connection with the brain, namely neuroscience, seems to support to some degree conservative thought, due to its contention that thought patterns via neuronal processes are heavily influenced by cultural inputs and are difficult to change once they are learned. On the other hand, neuroscience, and science in general, has learned to live without the concept of a soul, and even some research circles in neuroscience have given up even the notion of free will and personal identity. These two notions are hard for conservatives (and liberals) to give up, with the prospect of doing so even considered extremely frightening. The scientific doctrine of evolution is also of great concern to conservatives, as one will notice in the articles in the book, one being on the Scopes trial.
The only troubling omission in the book is an article entitled "War" or one that would shed more light on the conservative philosophy of war. The article on Neoconservativism says a lot, as does their behavior in real life, but one would like to see an article that compares the different schools of conservative thought on war. Many individuals, who refer to themselves as conservatives, and who are popular in the national press, such as George Will and Patrick Buchanan, have come out strongly against the current conflicts.
As this book reveals, sometimes succinctly, conservative thought and liberal thought are intertwined, and to omit any influence of liberalism on conservatism (and vice versa) is to destroy both systems. One cannot view them as two separate dogmas, and both will have to deal with the unique challenges of the twenty-first century. Maybe one could say that conservatives generally view themselves as cautious and pragmatic, while liberals generally view themselves as future pointing and idealistic. But the twenty-first century is about change, extremely drastic change, and conservatives are intimidated by change, even perhaps frightened by it. It is difficult to predict what elements of conservative (and liberal) thought will survive this century, but whatever strands are left will no doubt be chastened by radical technological changes. The technology itself will create its own ideas, its own history, and its own politics, all of which it might indeed classify as being conservative.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Customer reviews
4.6 out of 5
We don’t use a simple average to calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star. Our system gives more weight to certain factors—including how recent the review is and if the reviewer bought it on Amazon. Learn more
26 global ratings
