For the past year, I've been reading Rod Dreher's posts on American Conservative. I came to Dreher's column after I read the account he wrote of his sister's battle with cancer in The Little Way Of Ruthie Leming. He was honest. He held himself accountable. He put family first. Faith was the center of his life. What was there not to like?
Of course, there was the small fact that he was a conservative. And I don't really cotton to conservatives. but I ordered Crunchy Cons written several years before Little Way and was not disappointed.
Crunchy Cons begins with Dreher's Crunchy-Con Manifesto, ten tenets for this new breed of conservative. The principals cover materialism, economics, culture, the environment, aesthetics, education, religion, family life and go something like this: "We believe that modern conservatism has become too focused on material conditions, and insufficiently concerned with the character of society. The point of life is not to become a more satisfied shopper." I found little to disagree with (except the homeschooling emphasis, but that's just because I'm a tetchy public school teacher, I'm guessing, and I could easily modify the "homeschool" part by substituting "parents' direction and involvement in all things schooling") and I'm guessing many of my liberal friends would agree with Dreher's view of our world. This is the world of reading families, nursing moms, and foodies. Of turning off the TV and church on Sunday and eating organic. My world.
My husband, ever the philosophy student, would point out that this is conservatism in the true sense, with a small "c"--the conservatism that promotes tradition and community and the greater good. Not the Conservatism-with-a-capital-C that plagues informs public discourse today with its emphasis on big business and trickle down and tea parties. And I'd probably reply I don't care about all that--I just like Dreher's thoughtful probing of American culture, our shifting values, and how we can right the ship.
[read more at thisismysymphony.blogspot.com]
Add to book club
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club?
Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Flip to back
Flip to front
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
OK
Crunchy Cons: How Birkenstocked Burkeans, gun-loving organic gardeners, evangelical free-range farmers, hip homeschooling mamas, right-wing nature ... America (or at least the Republican Party) Hardcover – February 21, 2006
by
Rod Dreher
(Author)
|
Rod Dreher
(Author)
Find all the books, read about the author, and more.
See search results for this author
|
-
Print length272 pages
-
LanguageEnglish
-
PublisherCrown Forum
-
Publication dateFebruary 21, 2006
-
Dimensions5.88 x 1.02 x 8.53 inches
-
ISBN-101400050642
-
ISBN-13978-1400050642
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
-
Apple
-
Android
-
Windows Phone
-
Android
|
Download to your computer
|
Kindle Cloud Reader
|
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Every Good Endeavor: Connecting Your Work to God's WorkPaperback$15.99$15.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
Crunchy Cons: The New Conservative Counterculture and Its Return to RootsPaperback$50.98$50.98FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
We Will Not Be Silenced: Responding Courageously to Our Culture's Assault on ChristianityPaperback$13.69$13.69FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
Why Social Justice Is Not Biblical Justice: An Urgent Appeal to Fellow Christians in a Time of Social CrisisScott David AllenPaperback$14.39$14.39FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
Redeeming Science: A God-Centered ApproachPaperback$23.94$23.94FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
What other items do customers buy after viewing this item?
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Live Not by Lies: A Manual for Christian DissidentsHardcover$14.69$14.69FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
The Benedict Option: A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian NationPaperback$14.99$14.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
Every Good Endeavor: Connecting Your Work to God's WorkPaperback$15.99$15.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
Redeeming Science: A God-Centered ApproachPaperback$23.94$23.94FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 10
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
What do you call people who vote for Bush but shop at Whole Foods? Crunchy cons. And according to Dreher, an editor at the Dallas Morning News, they're forming a thriving counterculture within the contemporary conservative movement. United by a "cultural sensibility, not an ideology," crunchy conservatives, he says, have some habits and beliefs often identified with cultural liberals, like shopping at agriculture co-ops and rejecting suburban sprawl. Yet crunchy cons stand apart from both the Republican "Party of Greed" and the Democratic "Party of Lust," he says, by focusing on living according to conservative values, what the author calls "sacramental" living. Dreher makes no secret of his own faith in Christianity, and his book will resonate most with fellow Christians. His conversations with other crunchy conservatives—e.g., the policy director of Republicans for Environmental Protection, a Manhattan home-schooler, the author's wife—are illuminating, but the book fails to offer any empirical evidence to connect these individuals to a wider "movement." Instead, it works best as an indictment of consumerism and the spiritual havoc it can wreak. While his complaints about consumer culture are similar to those advanced by liberals, Dreher frames his criticism of corporate America in explicitly conservative terms, painting rampant consumerism as antithetical to true conservatism. (Feb.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
From Booklist
*Starred Review* "Ewww, that's so lefty," Dreher's editor at his old National Review job sneered when Dreher said he was picking up some locally grown organic produce. And what's with the sandals I'm wearing, he then thought; am I going liberal? Not a bit, he concluded, though if associating with liberals could help him have healthy, flavorful food and a beautiful, durable home; be involved in his children's education; protect and nurture the environment and other species; and live with religious integrity, then associate, befriend, and work with liberals he would. That made him a crunchy con(servative), and since leaving NR and NY for Dallas, he has just become crunchier--and met scads of comrades, including literary patron saints G. K. Chesterton, Russell Kirk, E. F. Schumacher, and Wendell Berry and articulate representatives of the types recorded in his book's expansive subtitle. His engrossing report on his encounters and his own motivations and endeavors stresses that crunchy cons follow principles more than formulate policies; their most cherished hope is to overthrow the consumerist mentality that has made the Democrats the party of lust and the Republicans the party of greed. Ray Olson
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved
Review
“Rod Dreher is stirring a controversy that has been too long in coming. He has climbed to the top of the ivory tower and started clanging an alarm bell. It is a wake-up call that all who care about conservative ideas should heed.” —Wick Allison, former publisher of National Review
About the Author
Rod Dreher is a writer and editor at the Dallas Morning News, and a conservative journalist who has worked for National Review, the New York Post, and the Washington Times. He bought his first pair of Birkenstocks in 2000 and never looked back.
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Chapter One
What Are Crunchy
Conservatives?
When we were young, the countercultural people had long hair, no socks, and didn't trust anyone over 30. Now, we are the countercultural people. —John Buck, Arkansas psychologist and crunchy conservative
A few summers ago, in the National Review offices on the east side of Manhattan, I told my editor that I was leaving work early so I could pick up my family's weekly delivery of fruits and vegetables from the neighborhood organic food co-op to which we belonged.
"Ewww, that's so lefty," she said, and made the kind of face I'd have expected if I'd informed her I was headed off to hear Peter, Paul and Mary warble at a fund-raiser for cross-dressing El Salvadoran hemp farmers.
Lefty? Moi? But on the subway home to Brooklyn, I had to admit she was right.
A taste for organic vegetables is a left-wing cliche, and here I was, a writer for the premier conservative political magazine in the country, leaving my post on the front lines to consort with the liberals in my neighborhood as I filled my rucksack with the most beautiful and delicious broccoli, carrots, greens, and whatnot in the city. What's up with that?
And come to think of it, what's up with those Birkenstock sandals on my feet? It just about killed me to buy them the summer before, given what Birkenstocks symbolize (you know, patchouli, pot, and ponytails on men). But New Yorkers walk a lot, and my sensible wife persuaded me that durable, comfortable Birks made sense for hot summer sidewalks. She was right. So that's how a pair of hippie shoes found their way onto my right-wing feet, which--alas!--had begun marching to a different beat than many of my conservative chums. Funny, I didn't feel any more liberal.
The summer before, I had been just like my editor, making fun of my wife's friends from her neighborhood moms' group for going once a week to a local church to pick up their vegetables driven in from farms in rural New York State. Just like liberals, I thought, having to have their politically correct eats. And then one day, one of Julie's friends told her that we could have her family's delivery that week, because they would be out of town. Julie and I were knocked flat by the freshness and intense flavors of the co-op's produce. Who knew cauliflower, the Sansabelt slacks of vegetables, could taste so good? I had always thought of it chiefly as a delivery platform for ranch dip and cheese sauce.
We were no doubt responding to the just-picked freshness of the produce, not its organic status, but no matter. At some point, I started hearing more about the kind of lives the farmers who supplied us were living, and the values of simplicity, community, and self-reliance they honored. In all candor, these people were probably to the left of Ralph Nader, but they reminded me of the kind of older farmers and gardeners I grew up around in rural southern Louisiana--deeply conservative folks whose last Democratic presidential vote likely went to JFK.
As city people who nevertheless dislike factory farms, shopping malls, cookie-cutter chain stores, and all the pomps and works of mass consumerism, we admired what the scrappy New York farmers were trying to do. In my Louisiana hometown, some farmers spent the go-go nineties selling their pastures to developers, and the torrent of cash caused McMansions to pop up like toadstools after a summer rain. It's hard to blame folks for cashing in, I suppose, but the community in which I was raised was changing rapidly as economic growth caused it to become a bedroom suburb of Baton Rouge. In their own way, the New York farmers were doing what farmers in my Louisiana birthplace were not: conserving agrarian communal traditions by, to paraphrase William F. Buckley describing the founding mission of the National Review, "standing athwart history yelling Stop!"
Besides, their produce was vastly superior to what was available in the local supermarket. We didn't mind paying a little extra for food this good. The next summer, we joined the co-op, and Julie got a kick out of picking up our weekly deliveries in her National Review tote bag. When you get to our age, you have precious few opportunities to shock the middle class, so you take them where you find them.
Now, it had never occurred to me, except in a jokey way, that eating organic vegetables was a political act, but my editor's snarky remark got me to thinking about other ways my family's lifestyle was countercultural, and why, though we were thoroughly conservative in our morals and our politics, we weren't a good fit on either the mainstream left or right.
Three years earlier, Julie had left a fulfilling position as a magazine editorial assistant to stay at home and raise our young son, Matthew. As much as she loved her job, as useful as that extra paycheck was, and for all the grief she took from other New York women who disdained her for "wasting" her college degree, we both felt strongly that we had a responsibility to our son to put his needs first, as much as we were able.
Once, when Matthew was still an infant, a kind woman in late middle age stopped us to offer admiring comments about our son. She talked about what a disappointment her son was to her, how she and her husband had put him in an expensive private school, but he had become a pothead and a troublemaker. The poor woman lamented how she fought with her husband over disciplining their son, with the boy's father insisting that kids will be kids, and besides, dear, didn't you and I fool around with drugs back in the day? After all that, she asked Julie and me if we had made plans for Matthew's schooling yet--a perfectly rational question in New York City, where parents put their child's name on private-school waiting lists as soon as the blessed babe is conceived. We replied that we were strongly considering homeschooling. The woman recoiled.
"Isn't that what right-wing Christians do?" she spluttered.
The conversation went downhill from there, and we found a way to excuse ourselves as gracefully as we could. A few minutes later, walking home, I remarked to Julie that here was a woman whose heart was broken over what her child had become, and that all the money in the world spent at that posh private school couldn't make up for what permissive parenting and a lax educational environment had done to the boy. Here she was longing for the kind of self-disciplined, responsible son that religiously conservative families tend to produce--but she'd die a thousand deaths before actually making the kind of countercultural sacrifices many such families make for the sake of their children's character and future.
We didn't want to be like this sad woman. In fairness, there are conservative families who find themselves in the same despairing position, having thought that having the correct attitudes, the best of intentions, and enough income to pay for private school would be sufficient to raise good kids. We heard all the time--and still do--from fellow conservatives who are not shy about telling us that our kids are going to be socially maladroit freaks if we don't put them in school. "What about socialization?" they ask anxiously, to which we reply, "Well, look at youth culture today; do you really want your kids socialized into that?"
As he got older, Julie started making plans to homeschool little Matthew, and was delighted to discover that there was a small but vibrant homeschooling association in New York City. Unlike homeschooling parents in her native Texas, most of whom do so out of conservative religious conviction, these were primarily secular liberals who had nonetheless concluded that they could do a better job teaching their kids than the schools. In New York, at least, homeschooling was not what right-wing Christians did. Julie was startled to discover that she shared many of the same concerns about primary education with moms whose views on many political issues were diametrically opposed.
Because our faith is at the center of our lives, and because we believe proper Christian worship should honor both truth and beauty, we committed ourselves to an "ethnic" Catholic church in our neighborhood. The people of Our Lady of Lebanon Maronite Church are of Lebanese descent, and speak Arabic in the main. Going there the first few times was an eerie experience, because we naturally associated that language with Islam; it sounded to our untutored American ears like the PLO at prayer.
Yet these people's ancestors were worshipping Jesus Christ when our European ancestors were still praying to trees. Besides, where it really mattered, we all spoke the same language. It was an Eastern-rite parish, where the aesthetically rich, awe-filled fifth-century liturgy was celebrated partly in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus, and the priests were decidedly uninterested in the trendiness. We couldn't take the smarmy, white-bread, middle-class American masses at the Roman-rite parishes around us, where the liturgies were washed out and banal, and the moral and theological grandeur of the historical Christian faith was discarded in favor of a piety that demanded no more of you than that you feel good about yourself. This was a form of Catholic Christianity that demanded more from us, and because of that, it was more rewarding. And it seemed so much more solid than Our Lady of What's Happening Now around the corner, where the priests embarrassed themselves trying to be hip and relevant.
The key thing is, we didn't become members of Our Lady of Lebanon parish because it sounded like a neat experiment in religious tourism. We did so beca...
What Are Crunchy
Conservatives?
When we were young, the countercultural people had long hair, no socks, and didn't trust anyone over 30. Now, we are the countercultural people. —John Buck, Arkansas psychologist and crunchy conservative
A few summers ago, in the National Review offices on the east side of Manhattan, I told my editor that I was leaving work early so I could pick up my family's weekly delivery of fruits and vegetables from the neighborhood organic food co-op to which we belonged.
"Ewww, that's so lefty," she said, and made the kind of face I'd have expected if I'd informed her I was headed off to hear Peter, Paul and Mary warble at a fund-raiser for cross-dressing El Salvadoran hemp farmers.
Lefty? Moi? But on the subway home to Brooklyn, I had to admit she was right.
A taste for organic vegetables is a left-wing cliche, and here I was, a writer for the premier conservative political magazine in the country, leaving my post on the front lines to consort with the liberals in my neighborhood as I filled my rucksack with the most beautiful and delicious broccoli, carrots, greens, and whatnot in the city. What's up with that?
And come to think of it, what's up with those Birkenstock sandals on my feet? It just about killed me to buy them the summer before, given what Birkenstocks symbolize (you know, patchouli, pot, and ponytails on men). But New Yorkers walk a lot, and my sensible wife persuaded me that durable, comfortable Birks made sense for hot summer sidewalks. She was right. So that's how a pair of hippie shoes found their way onto my right-wing feet, which--alas!--had begun marching to a different beat than many of my conservative chums. Funny, I didn't feel any more liberal.
The summer before, I had been just like my editor, making fun of my wife's friends from her neighborhood moms' group for going once a week to a local church to pick up their vegetables driven in from farms in rural New York State. Just like liberals, I thought, having to have their politically correct eats. And then one day, one of Julie's friends told her that we could have her family's delivery that week, because they would be out of town. Julie and I were knocked flat by the freshness and intense flavors of the co-op's produce. Who knew cauliflower, the Sansabelt slacks of vegetables, could taste so good? I had always thought of it chiefly as a delivery platform for ranch dip and cheese sauce.
We were no doubt responding to the just-picked freshness of the produce, not its organic status, but no matter. At some point, I started hearing more about the kind of lives the farmers who supplied us were living, and the values of simplicity, community, and self-reliance they honored. In all candor, these people were probably to the left of Ralph Nader, but they reminded me of the kind of older farmers and gardeners I grew up around in rural southern Louisiana--deeply conservative folks whose last Democratic presidential vote likely went to JFK.
As city people who nevertheless dislike factory farms, shopping malls, cookie-cutter chain stores, and all the pomps and works of mass consumerism, we admired what the scrappy New York farmers were trying to do. In my Louisiana hometown, some farmers spent the go-go nineties selling their pastures to developers, and the torrent of cash caused McMansions to pop up like toadstools after a summer rain. It's hard to blame folks for cashing in, I suppose, but the community in which I was raised was changing rapidly as economic growth caused it to become a bedroom suburb of Baton Rouge. In their own way, the New York farmers were doing what farmers in my Louisiana birthplace were not: conserving agrarian communal traditions by, to paraphrase William F. Buckley describing the founding mission of the National Review, "standing athwart history yelling Stop!"
Besides, their produce was vastly superior to what was available in the local supermarket. We didn't mind paying a little extra for food this good. The next summer, we joined the co-op, and Julie got a kick out of picking up our weekly deliveries in her National Review tote bag. When you get to our age, you have precious few opportunities to shock the middle class, so you take them where you find them.
Now, it had never occurred to me, except in a jokey way, that eating organic vegetables was a political act, but my editor's snarky remark got me to thinking about other ways my family's lifestyle was countercultural, and why, though we were thoroughly conservative in our morals and our politics, we weren't a good fit on either the mainstream left or right.
Three years earlier, Julie had left a fulfilling position as a magazine editorial assistant to stay at home and raise our young son, Matthew. As much as she loved her job, as useful as that extra paycheck was, and for all the grief she took from other New York women who disdained her for "wasting" her college degree, we both felt strongly that we had a responsibility to our son to put his needs first, as much as we were able.
Once, when Matthew was still an infant, a kind woman in late middle age stopped us to offer admiring comments about our son. She talked about what a disappointment her son was to her, how she and her husband had put him in an expensive private school, but he had become a pothead and a troublemaker. The poor woman lamented how she fought with her husband over disciplining their son, with the boy's father insisting that kids will be kids, and besides, dear, didn't you and I fool around with drugs back in the day? After all that, she asked Julie and me if we had made plans for Matthew's schooling yet--a perfectly rational question in New York City, where parents put their child's name on private-school waiting lists as soon as the blessed babe is conceived. We replied that we were strongly considering homeschooling. The woman recoiled.
"Isn't that what right-wing Christians do?" she spluttered.
The conversation went downhill from there, and we found a way to excuse ourselves as gracefully as we could. A few minutes later, walking home, I remarked to Julie that here was a woman whose heart was broken over what her child had become, and that all the money in the world spent at that posh private school couldn't make up for what permissive parenting and a lax educational environment had done to the boy. Here she was longing for the kind of self-disciplined, responsible son that religiously conservative families tend to produce--but she'd die a thousand deaths before actually making the kind of countercultural sacrifices many such families make for the sake of their children's character and future.
We didn't want to be like this sad woman. In fairness, there are conservative families who find themselves in the same despairing position, having thought that having the correct attitudes, the best of intentions, and enough income to pay for private school would be sufficient to raise good kids. We heard all the time--and still do--from fellow conservatives who are not shy about telling us that our kids are going to be socially maladroit freaks if we don't put them in school. "What about socialization?" they ask anxiously, to which we reply, "Well, look at youth culture today; do you really want your kids socialized into that?"
As he got older, Julie started making plans to homeschool little Matthew, and was delighted to discover that there was a small but vibrant homeschooling association in New York City. Unlike homeschooling parents in her native Texas, most of whom do so out of conservative religious conviction, these were primarily secular liberals who had nonetheless concluded that they could do a better job teaching their kids than the schools. In New York, at least, homeschooling was not what right-wing Christians did. Julie was startled to discover that she shared many of the same concerns about primary education with moms whose views on many political issues were diametrically opposed.
Because our faith is at the center of our lives, and because we believe proper Christian worship should honor both truth and beauty, we committed ourselves to an "ethnic" Catholic church in our neighborhood. The people of Our Lady of Lebanon Maronite Church are of Lebanese descent, and speak Arabic in the main. Going there the first few times was an eerie experience, because we naturally associated that language with Islam; it sounded to our untutored American ears like the PLO at prayer.
Yet these people's ancestors were worshipping Jesus Christ when our European ancestors were still praying to trees. Besides, where it really mattered, we all spoke the same language. It was an Eastern-rite parish, where the aesthetically rich, awe-filled fifth-century liturgy was celebrated partly in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus, and the priests were decidedly uninterested in the trendiness. We couldn't take the smarmy, white-bread, middle-class American masses at the Roman-rite parishes around us, where the liturgies were washed out and banal, and the moral and theological grandeur of the historical Christian faith was discarded in favor of a piety that demanded no more of you than that you feel good about yourself. This was a form of Catholic Christianity that demanded more from us, and because of that, it was more rewarding. And it seemed so much more solid than Our Lady of What's Happening Now around the corner, where the priests embarrassed themselves trying to be hip and relevant.
The key thing is, we didn't become members of Our Lady of Lebanon parish because it sounded like a neat experiment in religious tourism. We did so beca...
Tell the Publisher!
I'd like to read this book on Kindle
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
I'd like to read this book on Kindle
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product details
- Publisher : Crown Forum; First Edition (February 21, 2006)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 272 pages
- ISBN-10 : 1400050642
- ISBN-13 : 978-1400050642
- Item Weight : 13.6 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.88 x 1.02 x 8.53 inches
-
Best Sellers Rank:
#518,341 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #465 in Political Parties (Books)
- #1,511 in Political Conservatism & Liberalism
- Customer Reviews:
Customer reviews
4.4 out of 5 stars
4.4 out of 5
66 global ratings
How are ratings calculated?
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzes reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in the United States on July 29, 2014
Verified Purchase
11 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Reviewed in the United States on March 10, 2014
Verified Purchase
Generally speaking, I loved this book. I have always considered myself a conservative, with strong libertarian tendencies which sometimes struggle against a stronger Christian ethic. However, in the past few years, and much more strongly in the past few months, I've begun to question some of the old "conservative" dogmas such as: oil is inherently good, it makes all life possible, and oil companies must be protected no matter what the cost; the free market is good because it provides for opportunity and freedom, businesses drive the free market, and huge corporations are businesses, therefore they are good; environmentalism is one giant indistinguishable lie geared toward making my life more expensive and inconvenient; etc. With increasing frustration, I've begun to draw a line between "Republican" and "conservative," for lack of a better way of understanding/explaining the differences I felt between myself and the stuff generally touted by the pundits. This is where Dreher does an amazing job--highlighting how these dogmas fail to provide meaningful distinctions and often alienate groups of people who share much more in common than they disagree on (despite differing political affiliations).
The first chapter is on consumerism generally. This was eye-opening for me in that it drew from the back of my mind to the forefront issues about which I had been vaguely concerned for some time. For example, our obsession with smart phones. While I use mine regularly, the need for regular short bursts of entertainment it provides is a significant weakness. Also, although lots of TV that I watch might not be "bad," it is far from uplifting and productive. Dreher's discussion of these types of issues provided me with a perspective that is lacking in public discourse generally. His other chapters cover some issues like environmentalism, food, "home" (which I expected to be more generally about families and home life, but which he seems to have intended more literally as a discussion of the building in which one lives), and education. Each of these chapters provided me with new ways of looking at some issues that I may have been ruminating on for a while, or perhaps hadn't yet realized I needed to worry about.
The drawback to this book as I dove in was more in presentation than content. And it was more true of chapters closer to home for Dreher than others which covered more remote topics. In chapters discussing education and home, Dreher has taken very concerted steps in his own life to live deliberately. Therefore, he has more personal experience from which to draw. He also ended up using this experience to form a very substantial basis for these chapters. As a result, it came across as more of a preaching tone than simply a discussion of how “crunchy cons” do it. ("We do things this way because it is simply the best way to do it.") In other chapters, especially the one on environmentalism, and the one on food in so far as he discusses agriculture, his experience is less personal and therefore his discussion relies on the experience of others. These chapters were more enjoyable because there was less of a moralizing sentiment. All this being said, I don’t believe these criticisms decrease the substantive value of his book. But my concern is that someone who’s generally more liberal and exploring the conservative world through this book might be turned off by what might seem like a “we do it this way, which is the only good way to do it,” sort of attitude. Not all truly conservative families homeschool, or choose to live in an old craftsman-style home.
This book is a great resource for primarily two groups of people: conservatives who sometimes feel like they’re wandering in the wilderness of political discourse, and liberals who feel similarly discontent with their liberal friends, dogmas, and community. I think a liberal can use this book to understand that many conservatives, who generally vote for Republicans, don’t mindlessly love all big companies (especially Monsanto) and any form of sub-surface mineral extraction. Similarly, a conservative can use this book to understand that being a conservative does not necessitate, and in fact, probably militates against, lock-step adherence to the usual Republican party line. Perhaps most importantly, this book can provide many of us, irrespective of political parties, the encouragement to start pushing friends, family, and representatives to start discussing critical issues without fear of being seen as too “liberal” or “conservative.”
The first chapter is on consumerism generally. This was eye-opening for me in that it drew from the back of my mind to the forefront issues about which I had been vaguely concerned for some time. For example, our obsession with smart phones. While I use mine regularly, the need for regular short bursts of entertainment it provides is a significant weakness. Also, although lots of TV that I watch might not be "bad," it is far from uplifting and productive. Dreher's discussion of these types of issues provided me with a perspective that is lacking in public discourse generally. His other chapters cover some issues like environmentalism, food, "home" (which I expected to be more generally about families and home life, but which he seems to have intended more literally as a discussion of the building in which one lives), and education. Each of these chapters provided me with new ways of looking at some issues that I may have been ruminating on for a while, or perhaps hadn't yet realized I needed to worry about.
The drawback to this book as I dove in was more in presentation than content. And it was more true of chapters closer to home for Dreher than others which covered more remote topics. In chapters discussing education and home, Dreher has taken very concerted steps in his own life to live deliberately. Therefore, he has more personal experience from which to draw. He also ended up using this experience to form a very substantial basis for these chapters. As a result, it came across as more of a preaching tone than simply a discussion of how “crunchy cons” do it. ("We do things this way because it is simply the best way to do it.") In other chapters, especially the one on environmentalism, and the one on food in so far as he discusses agriculture, his experience is less personal and therefore his discussion relies on the experience of others. These chapters were more enjoyable because there was less of a moralizing sentiment. All this being said, I don’t believe these criticisms decrease the substantive value of his book. But my concern is that someone who’s generally more liberal and exploring the conservative world through this book might be turned off by what might seem like a “we do it this way, which is the only good way to do it,” sort of attitude. Not all truly conservative families homeschool, or choose to live in an old craftsman-style home.
This book is a great resource for primarily two groups of people: conservatives who sometimes feel like they’re wandering in the wilderness of political discourse, and liberals who feel similarly discontent with their liberal friends, dogmas, and community. I think a liberal can use this book to understand that many conservatives, who generally vote for Republicans, don’t mindlessly love all big companies (especially Monsanto) and any form of sub-surface mineral extraction. Similarly, a conservative can use this book to understand that being a conservative does not necessitate, and in fact, probably militates against, lock-step adherence to the usual Republican party line. Perhaps most importantly, this book can provide many of us, irrespective of political parties, the encouragement to start pushing friends, family, and representatives to start discussing critical issues without fear of being seen as too “liberal” or “conservative.”
4 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Top reviews from other countries
S. Painchaud
4.0 out of 5 stars
A very interesting read
Reviewed in Canada on December 31, 2012Verified Purchase
I've known about Mr. Dreher ever since his articles were published in my hometown's newspaper, back in 2004. And even though I don't agree with him on some issues (mostly social), I've always found him very interesting, stimulating albeit, at times, frustrating. His articles have stopped being published in my newspaper shortly after Bush's reelection but I kept reading Mr. Dreher's articles through his blog. I'm left-leaning but it's important, to me, to also get information from knowledgeable people on the right to have a better understanding of things and he, along with Andrew Sullivan and a handful of others,is one of those people. At least for me.
In this book, I was surprised at times to see a certain naivete usually associated to people on my side of the spectrum (even though I see more and more, as I get older, this question of «side» as pure b*****it). And it was also frustrating to feel like he sees liberals all the same (especially when sex is concerned), when this book is about trying to make us learn about a different kind of conservatism, as opposed to what the GOP has offered for the last couple of years. But that being said, I was also pleasantly surprised to find myself agreeing with the author on a lot of subjects (mainly food, overconsumption and materialism).
All in all, that book was to me what Mr. Dreher has been on a regular basis ever since I've known about him since 2004: frustrating, provoking, but also interesting, stimulating and refreshing.
In this book, I was surprised at times to see a certain naivete usually associated to people on my side of the spectrum (even though I see more and more, as I get older, this question of «side» as pure b*****it). And it was also frustrating to feel like he sees liberals all the same (especially when sex is concerned), when this book is about trying to make us learn about a different kind of conservatism, as opposed to what the GOP has offered for the last couple of years. But that being said, I was also pleasantly surprised to find myself agreeing with the author on a lot of subjects (mainly food, overconsumption and materialism).
All in all, that book was to me what Mr. Dreher has been on a regular basis ever since I've known about him since 2004: frustrating, provoking, but also interesting, stimulating and refreshing.
Pages with related products.
See and discover other items: homeschool science, culture and values




