Conserve What?
Ricochet member Matthew Lawrence sent me a very thoughtful essay which I will reproduce in full below. But the question he poses is basically this: If you're a conservative, what is it that you want to conserve? Read on -- and then tell us what you want to conserve.
“I want to sing the kind of songs that my dad sang to me,
and try to be the man he hoped that I would be…” – When It’s Gone – Nitty Gritty Dirt BandBy admitting one is a conservative, one implicitly aligns with certain appealing aspects of the past. Broadly, conservatism, as discussed here at Ricochet, encompasses certain social issues, economic issues and, of course, political responses to those issues. But setting those considerations aside, there is a broader conservatism that can inform and shape our thoughts about social issues, economic issues and the like. The modes of dress we employ, the music to which we listen (and expose our children), movies, manners, language, technology, and even food and drink have the effect of speaking about us to the world and they also speak to us, shaping who we are. Even more fundamental to cultural survival are conservative philosophies, theologies and epistemologies.
It seems to me the opinions set forth at Ricochet could be viewed as the logical consequences of a conservative worldview. In other words, conservative philosophy, theology and epistemology form scaffolding that support the arguments we make here. In their collection of essays, I’ll Take My Stand, the Southern Agrarians argued for an essentially conservative approach to life based on a worldview informed by traditions that extended generations into the past. Other cultural critics like Richard Weaver, Wendell Berry, Christopher Lasch and Neil Postman argue similarly although in the cases of Berry, Lasch and Postman, it would be an error to identify them as primarily articulating a conservative worldview. But their lamenting the modern obsession to forget the past and unthinkingly embrace the present without reflecting on its impact on the future is, in my opinion, quintessentially conservative.
So the question is, what in our current Western culture is essential to conserve and why? Or, must we reach into the past and resurrect now dead or resuscitate dying cultural “once-norms” to preserve Western culture? Is civility in public discourse essential to retrieve as Os Guinness suggests in The Case For Civility? The recovery of the concept of objective truth as David F. Wells argues in his trilogy on the contemporary evangelical church? Or should the abolition of light beer be at the forefront of cultural renewal?...
By the way, this essay grew out of a conversation at last week's Rico Soiree in New York. More proof -- if more were needed -- that when you mix Ricochet and booze, great things happen.
- Comment (32)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
May '10
Re: Conserve What?
I'd like to conserve the passions and attitudes that animated us at the time of our founding: a yen for freedom; a commitment to personal responsibility; a moral sense; and humility in the face of Providence, God, and the experience of our forebears.
As time marches on, however, the challenge seems to be less about conservatism and more about revanchism.
Edited on Oct 19, 2010 at 10:14amAug '10
Re: Conserve What?
Man is created for freedom, but not unlimited freedom. Even Man's maximal freedom must acknowledge certain constraints -- else it fails to be maximal freedom. (That is to say, for human beings, even freedom requires boundaries.)
To me, conservatism is conserving those boundaries that allow human freedom to flourish.
Edited on Oct 19, 2010 at 10:33amAug '10
Re: Conserve What?
I think "conservatism" needs to be rebranded. Totally. Starting with a name change. Just give away the old one. It's "liberals" who are so ardent about conserving things. Enumerate the things "liberals" love, and you'll find yourself using the adverb still over and over. They still believe in the U.N. They still believe in environmentalism. They still think government knows best. And they still want your money.
Aug '10
Re: Conserve What?
Conservatives are the authentic believers in evolution; holding fast to the idea that governments, modes of thought, actions in war and peace, methods of child rearing - and a dozen other forms of problem solving - have taken the shape they have because they've been proven to work over centuries. Experimentation with these norms is risky, conservatives say.
'Progressives', on the other hand, love to try out new and untested ideas intended to perfect mankind and the world. In spite of all evidence to the contrary, 'progressives' endlessly theorize and experiment with schemes intended to change human nature, and make life "fairer", "kinder", "sustainable", and more abundant. They're willing to act globally with unproven ideas, and their hubris knows no bounds.
It's massively ironic that 'progressives' say they believe in evolution, which depends on nature's harsh law of 'the survival of the fittest'. Yet 'progressives' actively and deliberately strive to eliminate those forces from nature.
Conservatives also largely believe there is a God, or Providence, an orderly mind enveloping all Creation, which has a plan and purpose we can understand only by diligent investigation.
'Progressives' are actively anti-God, because God imposes limits and boundaries to mankind.
Oct '10
Re: Conserve What?
What is worthy about the present culture is the aroma of things past: objective truth; belief in the one God; belief in a higher power above yourself that you're accountable to if you haven't accepted God; traditions for living civilly and responsibly that have been proved over the years to be the best for the individual and best for the society. We can discuss these traditions for quite some time, broadly they are individual responsibility, accountability, and duty--to God, family, country. Morality, as it comes from God, matters and is for our benefit.
I love technology, but without the paragraph above it's disastrous, we don't know what to do with it other than use it destructively.
Light beer is an abomination, as is most American-made beer, but as long as I don't have to drink it, have at it! The best beer in the world, for my mind, is Czechoslovakian--Budweiser, or Budvar in the southern German parlance.
Super article, got me to thinking about the things I love enough to fight for.
Re: Conserve What?
Entrepreneurial, foolhardy, optimistic, courageous, risk-rewarded capitalism, and the bedrock belief that every serious problem we face as a people and a nation can only be solved by unleashing human activity and ingenuity, not by regulating it, controlling it, or taxing it.
Oct '10
Re: Conserve What?
its in one of these two videos by the very best, bill whittle. sorry couldn't find the quote about what we are trying to conserve but the videos, esp the first, are so good that its worth waiting the nine min.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLD6VChcWCE
May '10
Re: Conserve What?
The second paragraph of the Declaration speak more eloquently than anything I could add. (That and Crash Davis' speech about beliefs from Bull Durham.)
Aug '10
Re: Conserve What?
Kathy's post above is getting to what I am asking about: namely, the underlying ways we think about the world and the presuppositions we employ when we interact with it.
For example, I contend one of the most important presuppositions about human nature the founding generation held was its total falleness. Progressives, typically, think that human nature is improvable - i.e. if only we are educated enough, have full bellies, are sexually liberated, then crime will go down, poverty will be eliminated and all will be good with the world.
These differing presuppositions have enormous impact on how we live our lives and how we seek to govern. One would think anyone with a passing familiarity with human history would agree people are fallen or sinful, if you like. Had that presupposition been the prevailing mentality over the past 150 years (as it was during the prior 150 years), then prohibition, the new deal, "criminal justice," the great society, Obamacare, etc. would not have come about.
So, that recognition about man's true nature is an important mode of thinking that ought to be conserved (or resurrected and propagated).
Jul '10
Re: Conserve What?
It's way too deep a question for the likes of me.
But when I visit Independence Hall or Valley Forge or contemplate the phrase, "...our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor..." I think I get a pretty good sense of it.
Edited on Oct 19, 2010 at 12:36pmJun '10
Re: Conserve What?
Would that it were, Matthew. Though I daresay we are treading far into the philosophical debate of whether humanity is in ascent or descent. As a Christ-follower, I am convinced that there is an end to history as it plays out here on earth. As a human being, the impulse to deny my own fallen nature often rages and directs my course of action. To conserve a proper understanding of my own fallen state, and to wish that recognition on the broader spectrum of society, itself seems to contradict its own aims. To conserve an perspective of freedom as the Apostle Paul did is desirable, and to conserve a societal environment that enables both individual freedom and the wisdom to exercise restraint, those are good things. But I don't see future history as reflecting such. Someone will always seek to build the next Tower of Babel, or choose to forget the lessons of the past in favor of the pride of now. To conserve what is ultimately temporary seems a great challenge.
May '10
Re: Conserve What?
I thought right away of Phillipians 4:8 "whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy" let's conserve it.
Aug '10
Re: Conserve What?
One of my favorite passages. That and Romans 12:2.
True enough, but I think this is where the admonition to be "salt & light" comes in - preserving what is good about culture casting light on that which is not.
Jun '10
Re: Conserve What?
Absolutely. Although I submit this is not an entirely human endeavor, without the standard by which good is defined, as well as the Source of the light. The trap of conservatism is the instinct or temptation to institutionalize (such as was suggested on the Mount of Transfiguration) that which really should remain living and free. I suppose what I am trying to voice is the inherent tension between yearning for the fullness of time to be realized, yet determined to preserve a western culture that has so shaped my existence. But then again, this tension has always existed, and is not constrained to our culture.
Thank you for challenging my thinking.
On a lighter note, one thing that should not be conserved or preserved is the BCS - and I say that even as my team aspires to its heights.
May '10
Re: Conserve What?
I would like to conserve the sanctity of certain labels, the term "liberalism" being one of them. The latin root of liberalism is "liber" which of course stands for "free." I label modern "liberals" as collectivists. Furthermore, when economists refer to "liberalization," they are referring to a reduction of government intervention into the economy.
Edited on Oct 19, 2010 at 2:41pmMay '10
Re: Conserve What?
If anyone's interested, here's my argument against labeling collectivists as "progressives."
Re: Conserve What?
I think I brought it up in another thread, and sorry if I'm repeating then, but my definition I've developed for Conservatism, which is all encompassing, is this:
"Conserving the freedom of the individual against the trespasses of government and the trespasses of others."
It is also compatible with my religious belief that the greatest gift God gave me is free will, which can't be exercised when my freedom is not presevered.
When Matthew speaks of this...
"The modes of dress we employ, the music to which we listen (and expose our children), movies, manners, language, technology, and even food and drink have the effect of speaking about us to the world and they also speak to us, shaping who we are."
... I have no issue with preserving his preferences. I hope he does not mean (and I don't suggest that he does) that one view of those things should be forced on others.
Jul '10
Re: Conserve What?
Since so many people here seem to base their conservatism on religious belief, let me ask this: in your opinion, can an atheist be conservative?
May '10
Re: Conserve What?
Very good question. Religiosity seems to be integral to conservatism.
May '10
Re: Conserve What?
Kenneth,
An "atheist conservative" is far more likely to support homosexual marriage contracts, abortion rights, and to oppose drug prohibition and the teaching of creationism in public schools, making him/her a "free market liberal" or "libertarian."