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

To: BlazingArizona

I think Kirk understood Burke very well. Both were deeply suspicious of people who think they have the perfect, logical system on which to reorganize society, so neither would have had much truck with today's libertarians ("Complete free trade! It's perfect! Automatically makes everybody richer!" "Open borders...'cause nobody else has a right to tell me where to go" "Legal drugs...'cause nobody has a right...." --you get the idea.) Burke defended institutions which were anything but ideal, like the British monarchy and aristocracy, because he feared radical change and supported institutions which grew organically out of societal history and were supported by custom. Very few people on FR these days seem to understand or support this brand of conservatism.


88 posted on 11/09/2006 7:53:00 PM PST by hellbender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]


To: hellbender
Both were deeply suspicious of people who think they have the perfect, logical system on which to reorganize society, so neither would have had much truck with today's libertarians

Since libertarianism is an organizing principle for government, not society, I fail to see the relevance of this observation. (A libertarian society is what arises organically when the government is restrained from interfering -- if anything, it is more, not less, in accordance with Burke's view than a society upon which the conservative version of social engineering is imposed by the state.)

113 posted on 11/10/2006 7:41:01 AM PST by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | 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