Hard Truths About the Culture War - Robert Bork

firstthings.com via Orthodoxy Today ^ | June/July 1995 | Robert Bork

[Joe 6-pack]

"Pity what the liberals did to skewer him many years back...."

Outside of Chappaquiddick, I would aver that the smears on Bork was the most shameful episode of Ted Kennedy's life, which was replete with a long record of shameful episodes.

[GenXteacher]

“It would be difficult to contend that, the end of racial segregation aside, American culture today is superior to, or even on a par with, the culture of the 1950s.”

+1

[jobim]

Thank you Joe 6-pack. Thank you. The great Robert Bork seemingly has a crystal (Kristol?) ball into which he peered to see so stunningly, so presciently, in such detail, the movement of our culture. His essay deserves our meditations, as well as a national conversation.

[Cheerio]

"This nation is lost without a ‘code’ to unite us to a common cause." Much of that 'code' is articulated in the Declaration of Independence.

And even better was this......"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other," John Adams declared.Adams, John, message to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts, October 11, 1798. "Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of republicanism and all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society."Adams, John, Letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, August 28, 1811.

[Joe 6-pack]

That line caught my attention as well. I remember the film Pleasantville and how it promoted just the opposite view; how 1950's America was sooo repressive, and how things started to get better only when the female protagonist had sex with an unsuspecting high school date. It was clearly driven by, and symptomatic of, mass media's effort to undermine that which is good about traditional values.

And yet one of the chief criticisms I hear of Santorum is that he's trying to take the country back to the 1950's (racial segregation aside).

[Ken H]

Just think how different things might have been if we’d have had Bork on the SCOTUS instead of Anthony Kennedy...

With Bork on the Court, Heller might have gone the wrong way:

____________________________________________________________

The Second Amendment states somewhat ambiguously: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The first part of the Amendment supports proponents of gun control by seeming to make the possession of firearms contingent upon being a member of a state-regulated militia. The next part is cited by opponents of gun control as a guarantee of the individual's right to possess such weapons, since he can always be called to militia service. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that there is no individual right to own a firearm.

The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possible tyrannical national government. Now that the federal government has stealth bombers and nuclear weapons, it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose.

-footnote, Slouching Toward Gomorrah, Robert Bork

[microgood]

He seems to have a real problem with individualism, or what he calls radical individualism. Rugged individualism is what made this country great, not conformance with “society” as defined by whoever.

[Yardstick]

It’s no wonder the left hated this guy.

[microgood]

The Second Amendment states somewhat ambiguously: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Bork obviously does not understand the English language or what an independent clause is.

[Joe 6-pack]

I’ve never said Bork was perfect, and certainly I disagree with some of his 2nd Amendment stances over the years. That’s one of my primary personal issues, and is one reason I support Santorum who has higher lifetime ratings from both the NRA and GOA than does Newt.

[ImpBill]

Great find, even if it was written in 1995.

"Modern liberalism is most particularly a disease of our cultural elites, the people who control the institutions that manufacture or disseminate ideas, attitudes, and symbols-universities, some churches, Hollywood, the national press (print and electronic), much of the congressional Democratic party and some of the congressional Republicans as well, large sections of the judiciary, foundation staffs, and almost all the "public interest" organizations that exercise a profound if largely unseen effect on public policy. So pervasive is the influence of those who occupy the commanding heights of our culture that it is not entirely accurate to call the United States a majoritarian democracy. The elites of modern liberalism do not win all the battles, but despite their relatively small numbers, they win more than their share and move the culture always in one direction."

That was Judge Bork's thesis 17 years ago. Barack Obama and his minions are truth positive the elites of modern liberalism win more than their share and move the culture always in one direction ... LEFT!

I have been lamenting for 3 decades now about the coarsening of our culture. Only a small example can been seen in all the trashing of the Republican candidates by supposed conservatives, one to the other here on Free Republic.

I do believe we have crossed the Rubicon and the coming result will not be pretty at all.

[Joe 6-pack]

"He seems to have a real problem with individualism, or what he calls radical individualism. Rugged individualism is what made this country great, not conformance with “society” as defined by whoever."

I'd invite you to read Bork's Slouching Towards Gomorrah where he explains the differences between "individualism" or "rugged individualism" (which he agrees are good things) and the concept of "radical individualism" which has a deleterious effect on both jurisprudence and society at large. Since you seem intent on knocking Bork on this point, you probably won't, but just in case you are interested in approaching this on an intellectually honest level, I'd encourage you to read the book.

[microgood]

Since you seem intent on knocking Bork on this point, you probably won't, but just in case you are interested in approaching this on an intellectually honest level, I'd encourage you to read the book.

Actually I do not know him that well, which is why I noted his use of the words "radical individualism" versus just individualism. Obviously anything can be taken to an extreme, so as long as he does not believe "society" trumps indivdualism, I am Ok with that.

[ishmac]

Ping

[Ken H]

Does Bork still support Romney?

__________________________________________________________

Judge Robert Bork Endorses Mitt Romney

December 15, 2007

Joining Romney for President, Judge Bork said, “Throughout my career, I have had the honor of serving under several Presidents and am proud to make today’s endorsement. No other candidate will do more to advance the conservative judicial movement than Governor Mitt Romney.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1939895/posts

[Joe 6-pack]

"Obviously anything can be taken to an extreme, so as long as he does not believe "society" trumps indivdualism, I am Ok with that."

That's essentially Bork's contention as well...that things have been taken to extremes and the traditional concept of "personal liberty" has been perverted into some grotesque form of personal license.

[Joe 6-pack]

Unfortunately he did back him again as of last summer. I was disappointed in his doing so, particularly because Rick has been a much more consistent proponent of much of Bork’s longstanding judicial philosophies that got him nominated by Reagan in the first place.

[bboop]

I did not read this all — too long - but read Bork’s book back a while ago. I personally think when you chuck Christianity, all moral constraints go. It’s like the French Revolution, and the chaos then invites a ‘Napoleon’ who sees things clearly and then wants to establish order. His way. And the people go for it, because they are tired of the chaos.

History repeats itself endlessly, as the source of the evil is always that selfish tendency in the human heart.

[nathanbedford]

We will be coerced into virtue, as modern liberals define virtue: a ruthlessly egalitarian society. This agenda is, of course, already well advanced.

Quite true. But what is the political response, coercion the other way into virtue as we define it? Bork, at the end of this essay stipulates that there is not a political answer to this threat citing with second sight Newt Gingrich by name nearly 2 decades ago. In other words, taking back the Congress after 40 years does not change the culture, neither does welfare reform, or electing Ronald Reagan.

Yet Bork's indictment of our condition in 1994 is even more dreadfully vindicated in 2012 so, what do we do? We, as sons of liberty must be aware of the limitations of the power of the state to enforce virtue whether virtue as defined on the left or virtue as defined by the right. If we rigorously enforce laws against pornography we risk creating a tyranny. If we stand by passively we watch the culture deteriorate.

I have come to believe that ultimately culture trumps politics. I am sure the left has come to this conclusion long before I have and they have done something about it long before I woke up. What did they do? They created, The Frankfurt School, they devised methodology for revolution by people like Saul Alinsky, they deliberately fomented economic disintegration by people like Cloward-Piven. Today they contrive from top-down the occupy movement.

Perhaps Bork was a touch naïve in his judgment that the war on the body politic and on the culture by the left was not a conspiracy.

To wage our counterculture war we had our churches but this institution like virtually other institution catalogued by Bork in his essay, has been infiltrated and corrupted against our sense of virtue by the left.

So, just as there is no political solution, there is no institutional solution.

Bork ends by exhorting us to optimism but I see very little to warrant optimism. If there is any salvation for us as conservatives it is to have resort to an individual salvation of our fathers quite apart from any culture or political trend.

[Popman]

BM