Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AmishDude
Again, I think the main thesis: Bush is ideological as opposed to Buckley's definition which is that conservatism is anti-ideological. Of course, I don't agree with either, 100%, but it's worth pursuing.

It's an interesting thing to think about. I happen to think it's silly to dismiss ideology out of hand, as Buckley apparently does. I think it's a knee-jerk reaction against the ways of the Left, which is hugely ideological and prone to getting lost in abstraction and theory. Buckley probably reacts against that and prefers to think of conservatism as organic and ultimately grounded in experiential wisdom. HOwever, I'd guess that Buckley would also agree that conservatism has a high regard for principle or being principled -- and I'd almost bet that you could trip him up by asking him what the difference is in being ideological and being principled. I mean, isn't calling Bush a rightwing freemarket ideologue just a snotty way of saying that Bush is a principled believer in free markets?

20 posted on 03/12/2006 4:04:13 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: Yardstick
isn't calling Bush a rightwing freemarket ideologue just a snotty way of saying that Bush is a principled believer in free markets?

Yes.

21 posted on 03/12/2006 4:18:14 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: Yardstick

Of course, Buckley was being flippant and would be the first to contradict it, but it reveals a basic point about conservatism and is probably more true than it is false.


28 posted on 03/12/2006 5:46:55 PM PST by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson