Replies

prescription
1 a : the establishment of a claim of title to something under common law usually by use and enjoyment for a period fixed by statute b : the right or title acquired under common law by such possession
2 : the process of making claim to something by long use and enjoyment
3 : the action of laying down authoritative rules or directions
4 a : a written direction for a therapeutic or corrective agent; specifically : one for the preparation and use of a medicine b : a prescribed medicine c : something like a doctor's prescription 5 a : ancient or long continued custom b : a claim founded upon ancient custom or long continued use
6 : something prescribed as a rule

I am in the process of reading The Conservative Mind, and think that as I find particular passages of interest or relevance I will take a moment to type them in and share them.

You are reading the best book on conservatism ever written. Bar none. Had I quoted every passage I found stunningly relevant, this site would not have the bandwidth to service it.

Russell Kirk is without a doubt the most articulate, ideologically pure conservative I've read. The Conservative Mind should be second only to the Bible for our troops on the Right.

To Burke's analysis of revolutionary theories, philosophical conservatism owes its being.

He, much more than Jefferson or any of the American founders, is our philosophical father. To those who claim conservatism started with Goldwater, I say "Bosh!" Read Kirk and you'll know the truth.

Goldwater stood on the shoulders of giants.

Kirk is rather superficial on Burke. I just finished rereading Burleigh Wilkins' The Problem of Burke's Political Philosophy and commend that to you.

It's true, I think, that most Freepers are not intellectuals and most discussions here rarely involve the deep consideration of ideas anymore. We are for the most part reliably conservative, but differ very widely in our definitions of conservative, ranging from libertarians and that ilk to ultramontagne religious conservatives who are probably properly regarded as reactionaries in that the social order they would be most comfortable with would a be a theocracy in which the Founders would not be at home.

Innovation (as Burke, and Jefferson, knew) comes from the cities, where man uprooted seeks to piece together a new world; conservatism always has had its most loyal adherents in the country, where man is slow to break with the old ways that link him with his God in the infinity above and with his father in the grave at his feet

I disagree with the sentiment of "innovation" as an unworthy objective. Obviously, a conservative is against change for change's sake, but the idea that he should be against innovation, or that it is somehow nefarious, seems a bit of an insult. There is nothing wrong with learning and improving. Should I be against the innovations that resulted in this online forum? Should I be against the innovations that allow us to feed more people with less work? That allow us to cure disease, to allow my parents and my future (god willing) wife and children to live healthier lives?

Maybe I am misinterpreting someting, but the idea that innovation is the the result of an "uprooted man" seeking a "new world" seems a bit cynical and shortsighted.