[KC Burke]

Russell Kirk, the author of The Conservative Mind is considered by many to be the midwife of the rebirth of conservative thought in the twentieth century. Along with Hayek's Road to Serfdom, Kirk laid the foundations of connecting the broad development of conservative thought from Burke to Elliot that became the underpinnings for the interest that publisher William Buckley and politicians Goldwater and Reagan built upon in the following twenty-five years.

This appendix gives Kirk's findings about the roots of the term "Conservatism" or "Conservative", a political and social force grounded as much in politcal prudence and reform as in the "preserving" action implied by the root word "conserve" itself. Conservatism then has never been principly about "conserving" Most conservatives in the beginning were more about reforming impulses as carried forward by the original Whigs, the roots of classical liberal thought. Burke fought his whole life for these Whiggish issues like Prescriptive law, equality under the law, the rule of law and the freedom from arbitrary power.

The broad stream of conservatism has carried along many waters to the sea. The Anti-Federalists have been seen to contribute, even while the founders of the Constitution are acknowledged as the main flow. What is sometimes termed the White Nile and the Blue Nile have carried principled libertarianism along with the main body. Rationalism, ideology, "the armed doctrine", and anarchism, however, have been roundly excluded when they have been flushed out.

All branches of conservatism have used distinctions to claim the helm of whatever river boat is in the lead or of one that is trying to catch up. We see this in countless articles posted here and elsewhere. The River flows on, regardless.

.

[The emphasis given in bold is mine, as well as typos. I have added paragraph breaks to help readability, but otherwise the appendix is given in full. The link goes to Reflections.. in full as Kirk's biography of Burke is not on the web. The link at Hayek's name is to the Hayek Center, a trip worth taking. Ten Conservative Principles a thread about that chapter by the same name in Kirk's The Politics of Prudence is available for a review of what Kirk's lifelong study of conservative thought grouped together as the fundamentals of conservatism in general.]

[KC Burke]

You are working on a thread of parallel distinctions, I know, but your comments here in the mean time would be welcome.

[JohnGalt]

Norman Podhoretz and David Frum called Kirk an anti-Semite and since the neoconservatives are dictating the parameters of the debate these days, should you really be posting this piece?

Kirk Bump.

[farmfriend]

ping

[marron]

I'm sure any of my remarks are going to strike you as old arguments, but I offer them just the same; its not often I get to kick these ideas around, and I would appreciate the feedback.

I have read some of Burke, and some of Kirk as well, and while I have always counted myself as a conservative in terms of voting patterns, I have come to see quite a distinction between myself, and a classic conservative in the Russell Kirk mode.

I would be much more comfortable to count myself as a classic liberal, had that name not been so badly besmirched in recent decades. I am a conservative in the sense that I value constitutional government, and I value the traditions that lead back to that. But my political philosophy is pure classic liberalism; limited government, respect for individual liberty, respect for private property, and all of these informed by a moral sense.

Kirk's conservatism includes these, as do Burkes, so we are not on opposite sides of the chasm. But the difference is in our view of tradition and the past. They see the past, apparently, through gauze, or a lens wiped in vaseline. Their stated concern is the preservation of the ideals and values of the past. But, obviously, not just any past; motivated as they both were by a love of liberty, and of morality, they were choosy about which past they wanted to preserve. So, again, we are not on opposite sides of any divide.

But I look back and see barbarism, and monstrous evil, and chaos, and I see valiant struggles to overcome those. Where they see a culture that is basically good, I see a culture that is deeply flawed, and that in every generation the highest calling is to reject conformity, to reject the evil of the dominant culture, and to struggle always forward.

If I value any traditional culture, it is only that tradition of noble struggle, which is a only a very definite subset of the larger culture.

I have long believed that we are on this earth to build, to create, to seek truth, and never ever rest on the received truths of generations past. America was formed by people who rejected the traditions of the ages, who came here specifically because they couldn't abide being smothered by social and economic and political stagnation another day, even if they lost their lives in some nameless place on the frontier.

So when Kirkean conservatives start going on about preserving the traditions of past generations, I get the hives; I can't help but think that my people left Europe, and the east coast, and the old south, moving ever westward just to get away from all of that. To be free to invent oneself anew in accordance with one's own principles, without the received traditions of oligarchs and royalists and slavers to distort one's conscience and stunt your existence.

Since Kirk, and Burke, both were deeply moral men, and both loved liberty, I suspect that my differences with them may be one of degree, or even occasionally merely semantic. But their reverence for a past that never was leaves me cold. And conservatism without a clear moral vision is doomed to be dragged around by the currents of the day, only always three steps behind. Far better, in my view, a conservatism that has a clear moral vision, and is capable of charting a course, and knowing why it is going there, and not simply reacting to history.

I love Hayek, by the way.

[Constitution Day]

Bump for later.
I got a copy of The Politics of Prudence from an Intercollegiate Studies Institute reception at CPAC and haven't made time to read it yet.

[KantianBurke]

bump :>

[Carthago delenda est]

Mega-bump, baby!

Kirk and Hayek are AWESOME!

[Dajjal]

Russell Kirk bump

[Cacique]

Edmund Burke ping

[Clint N. Suhks]

Good article! I liked your 10 Conservative Principles thread especially the first Principle.

"First, the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order. That order is made for man, and man is made for it; human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent."

So many Liberaltarians think they’re Conservatives but in reality social conservatism goes hand in hand with fiscal conservatism 100% of the time.

[KC Burke]

try this as well