Posted on 01/03/2024 1:17:44 AM PST by spirited irish
Kirk understood conservatism to be “a disposition of character rather than a collection of reified, abstract political doctrines. It is the rejection of ideology rather than the exercise of it.” This, too, is the understanding of conservatism laid out by the champion of conservatism in the 21st century, my former teacher Sir Roger Scruton.
This understanding may help one realize why conservatism fails as an ideology — because it is not an ideology. As Kirk humorously notes early on in one of the early chapters of this book, conservatives who attempt to ideologize conservatism make the first and most egregious error in understanding conservatism.
If, though, conservatives are united in “a disposition of character” and “rejection of ideology,” what is that “disposition” and what does the “rejection of ideology” entail?
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotandliberty.com ...
The Neocons slandered, dismissed, and/or purged authentic conservatives such as Kirk, Joseph Sobran, Sam Francis and Pat Buchanan.
And by extension, all middle class conservatives.
His point was that the Constitution is powerless to govern a nation populated by people who are not morally self-restrained by faith in, and allegiance to God. In such a case, the freedom provided by the Constitution only becomes a license to do evil. Self-restraint instilled by devotion to God is therefore more important than valueless ideological principles. This is why the majority of Republican elected officials who shy away from discussing what they call “social issues” during election season are dead wrong. This country cannot function without getting the “social issues” (in other words, moral self-restraint) right first, just as Adams said. Without a people who can restrain their own passions because of faith in God, conservatives can talk all they want about “conservative ideology”, and it will just be so many empty, ineffectual words.
I’ve always been tremendously irritated by the irreligious conservatives who seem to be driven by nothing more than pure pragmatism. These are the same people who constantly dismiss out of hand any suggestion of addressing society’s steep moral decline. They are fools who, exactly like the liberals, want the benefits provided by America’s system that is founded upon Judeo-Christian morality, but don’t want to be held to that standard of behavior themselves. These people are really just unrepentant sinners who want to hold onto their sin, but enjoy the benefits that only a nation largely populated by penitent believers can provide.
That approach will never work. At best, it might lower our taxes slightly while the entire country slides into oblivion.
In many respects, conservatism is a rejection of groupthink, which is why it often fails as a “movement”. It doesn’t have a central purpose because its ideology is individualism. It has no need for “revolutions” and societal change as long as individuals are allowed to govern their own lives. Modern liberalism, on the other hand, is about strength through numbers for the purpose of forcing the world to do what they want. And they intentionally misunderstand conservatism for the purpose of demonizing it. They are willing to sacrifice individualism for what they consider a greater central purpose.
The fight is not between Conservatives and Liberals or between Republicans and Democrats.
The battle is between honest people and criminals.
The fight is between those who believe in using intellect and hard work to get ahead versus those who believe in using fraud and strong-arm tactics to get ahead.
Pragmatism is ideology, and what does ideology do but unfetter the fallen will of man who becomes the measure of all things. Of course when a majority of fallen wills and souls have been unfettered, chaos, madness, and evil ensues.
This why I have said that our forefathers made a mistake in saying “God given rights”. God has given us the desire for freedom and rights but not the rights themselves. Government give or take away our rights because they have the guns and will to enforce the giving or taking of rights.
The Golden Age of Virtue, which many attach to our early republics, never existed.
Democracy is always dead wherever it goes. It’s mass rule. Only a representative republic, as laid out in the Constitution, has any hope of surviving.
If you measure a culture by it’s morality, by Western standards, Islam has its large share of immoral atrocities. Yet, Russel Kirk says nothing. For not doing so, he is as hypocritical as they get.
Formatting an image is not your savvy.
Agreed. My html skills are minimal. I feel duly chastised.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.