« The Greatest Action Story Ever Told | Main | K-Lo's Double Standards » 12 Mar 2007 04:41 pm Burke and ConservatismBrad DeLong, a writer consumed with hatred of conservatism in any form, argues that even Burke just made it all up as he went along, supporting tradition when it agreed with his principles and junking it when it didn't. Money quote:
Well, yes and no. Burke's fundamental point is that everything in society is contingent and that change must always begin with what came before and is most successful when it works inferentially from that tradition rather than being imposed from outside according to abstract theories or texts. Tradition is also a very expansive term. An American can reach back deeply into the American past and resurrect an ancient tradition and make it fresh again - thus appearing to be quite radical, while still fitting into the definition of a Burkean conservative. It is always up to the statesman at any period of time to make a prudential judgment about what change is good and what isn't. Hence, to a liberal who wants a clear and timeless theory about what makes something just or unjust, right or wrong, Burke looks unprincipled. To a conservative, however, he seems, well, prudent. Conservatives in the Anglo-American tradition have many strains to draw on - Schmittian and Burkean, among many others. Increasingly, it seems to me, there is a divide between conservatives who look to Madison and Burke, and those who look to more authoritarian impulses. The crisis in American conservatism came to a head when the South took over. The South has never been fertile soil for Madisonian or Burkean conservatism. And I doubt whether any party based in the South will ever be conservative in the manner I admire. TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c45669e200d835410ba753ef Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Burke and Conservatism' |

