Why I Became a Conservative: A British liberal discovers England's greatest philosopher.

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | Wednesday, February 5, 2003 | By Roger Scruton

[JohnHuang2]

Wednesday, February 5, 2003

Quote of the Day by EternalVigilance

[Cicero]

Very nice. I'm bookmarking this about 2/3 through because I've got to get to bed. But it's really an excellent essay.

[marron]

Worth re-reading again tomorrow.

[The Iguana]

Great read.

Thanks for posting it.

[JohnHuang2]

Welcome

[JohnHuang2]

G'nite, amigo.

[Tamzee]

This is truly one of the most incredible essays I have ever read.... it is long, but so very, very worth it.

I'm in awe.

Tammy

[farmfriend]

Fancy finding you on this page, my well worded friend.

[farmfriend]

"The abstract, unreal freedom of the liberal intellect was really nothing more than childish disobedience, amplified into anarchy."

[Byron_the_Aussie]

Marvellous, John. Bookmarking and printing it.

And thanks so much for all you do around here. It's the handful of people like you, searching out the best in writing, like this, that make FR the constant delight it is.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

What interested me in the [Burke's] Reflections was the positive political philosophy,

The wisest person I know suggested this book to me and I still haven't read it...

[Tredge]

*bump*

[JohnHuang2]

Why, thank you, good buddy. Appreciate the kind words.

[The Great Satan]

The trouble with Edmund Burke's philosophy is that it can be used to justify anything. Therefore, it says nothing.

[fella]

"What interested me in the [Burke's] Reflections was the positive political philosophy,"

A few years back in a used book store I found an old paperback that combined Burkes' "Reflections" and Thomas Paines' "Rights of Man". The contrast is stark.

[The Great Satan]

Indeed it is.

[Carry_Okie]

I am uncomfortable with his assertion that hierarchical obedience in service to an established hereditary order is necessity to a free society. I think he misses the true message offered by de Toqueville, that people whose obedience is to God and country as the source of their own freedom, will, as long as they remain vigilant, meet every requirement for both vision and continuity he rightly cites as essential to continued liberty. (Mayhap his infatuation with British law is at root of this unfortunate prejudice.)

It is more a testament to Mann and Dewey and the great wave of immigration that overwhelmed the nation's indigenous Constitutional culture with a European worldview that we have slid so far, much to the delight of European investors who meant us no good will by virtue of its instigation through abetting the Civil War.

I am delighted with the author's observation of the importance of respect for tradition and posterity. He fails, however, to recognize that one who would truly live for one-self enriches that daily life by extending the horizon of one's goals and aspirations beyond that life's own span. No need for kings or riches, as the heavenly one will do.

Ah well, he is young and yet still has time to learn.

[Carry_Okie]

It's the handful of people like you, searching out the best in writing, like this, that make FR the constant delight it is.

And there I thought it was the rest of us peons, sigh. Yea, The King of Ping and I. ;-)

[nickcarraway]

BUMP

[Iris7]

I am impressed with your comment.

The problem is, as I see it, that people will not remain vigilant. They will turn from God. Even in good times only a small minority of God centered people exist; in bad times, only a few. Obedience to social heirarchy need not violate justice unduly, and can make bad times survivable. If your community consists of serious Christians now, there is no guarantee about future generations. And those serious Christians will certainly sort themselves out into a heirarchy, and try to pass on social position to their offspring.