Advertisement

Conservative Theory in Context

  • Paul Edward Gottfried
Chapter
  • 78 Downloads

Abstract

One does not require a fixed definition of conservatism to recognize the postwar American movement’s misapplication of that term. So loose was its usage that the meaning of “conservative” continued to change over several decades. As the foregoing review of these changes demonstrates, any attempt to create conservative rallying points by appealing to values independently of social authorities is doomed to one of two outcomes: either being bypassed in a phantasmagoria of competing values or succumbing to pressures or artifices to affirm identifiably Leftist notions as eternal “conservative” truths. This is not because those who engage in these actions necessarily wish to deceive. The neoconservatives who took over the American establishment Right resisted the “conservative” label before eventually having it thrust on them. Throughout the seventies and into the eighties, they made distinctions between themselves as Harry Truman and Scoop Jackson Democrats and Zionists and the older American Right. Although by the present century they had come to consider themselves the only proper conservatives and to treat anyone to their right as an “extremist,” this was not always their attitude. The older generation of neoconservatives had winced at the term “conservative” for its alleged association with the nativist or anti—New Deal Right; only when they were able to impose their dominant values and policies did this initial distaste turn into an eager acceptance of their conferred identity.

Keywords

Academic Freedom Early Nineteenth Century French Revolution National Review Conservative Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. Michael Oakeshott (New York: Macmillan, 1962), 39–40;Google Scholar
  2. Peter J. Stanlis and André Robinet, “Pensée et langage chez Hobbes,” Revue Internationale de Philosophie 33, no. 129 (1979): 443–51.Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    Karl Mannheim, Konservatismus: Ein Beitrag zur Soziologie des Wissens (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1984), 137–84.Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    See Paul Gottfried, The Search for Historical Meaning: Hegel and the Postwar American Right (DeKalb: University of Northern Illinois Press, 1986), 104–34; and the review essay for this work by Robert Nisbet, National Review May 22, 1987, pp. 39–44.Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    See Henry Regnery, “Russell Kirk and the Making of the Conservative Mind,” Modern Age 21 (Fall 1977): 338–53;Google Scholar
  6. W. Wesley McDonald, “Russell Kirk of Piety Hill,” The Alternative, February 1971, pp. 9–11;Google Scholar
  7. Henry Regnery and Russell Kirk, The Surly Sunken Bell (New York: Fleet Publishing, 1962).Google Scholar
  8. 11.
    Eugene Genovese, The Southern Tradition: The Achievement and Limitation of an American Conservatism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994). Genovese combines sympathy for his subject with a residual social determinism, traceable to his Gramscian-Marxist background.Google Scholar
  9. 13.
    Frank S. Meyer, “Richard M. Weaver: An Appreciation,” Modern Age 14 (Summer 1970): 243.Google Scholar
  10. 14.
    See Carlo Galli, I Controrivoluzionari. Antologia di scritti politici (Bologna: Il Molino, 1981), esp. intro.;Google Scholar
  11. Panajotis Kondylis, Konervativismus. Geschichtler Gehalt und Untergang (Stuttgart: Ilett, 1986);Google Scholar
  12. Carlo Galli and Nisbet, Conservatism: Dream and Reality (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986).Google Scholar
  13. 16.
    Kondylis, Konservativismus. Geschichtlicher Gehalt und Untergang, (Stuttgart: Klett, 1988), 51, 387–441.Google Scholar
  14. See also Gottfried, “Panajotis Kondylis and the Obsoleteness of Conservatism,” Modern Age 39, no. 4 (Fall 1987): 403–10.Google Scholar
  15. 19.
    Adam Müller, Über ICönig Friedrich II und die Natur, Würde und Bestimmung der preussischen Monarchie (Berlin: n.p., 1810), 49.Google Scholar
  16. 24.
    Kevin P. Phillips, The Emerging Republican Majority (New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, 1969);Google Scholar
  17. Kevin P. Phillips and Gottfried, The Conservative Movement, rev. ed. (New York: Macmillan-Twayne, 1993), 30–50.Google Scholar
  18. 25.
    Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 29.
    John B. Judis, “The Conservative Crackup,” American Prospect 3 (Fall 1990): 30–39; I. L. Horowitz, conversation with the author, May 7, 1989; and John B. Judis, “The Conservative Wars,” New Republic, August 11, 1987, pp. 15–16.Google Scholar
  20. 32.
    Gary Dorrien, The Neoconservative Mind: Politics, Culture, and the War of Ideology (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993), 369.Google Scholar
  21. 33.
    Richard J. Neuhaus, “Will Herberg Pluralist,” National Review, January 22, 1988, p. 54.Google Scholar
  22. 34.
    Victor S. Navasky, A Matter of Opinion (New York: Farrar, Strauss, Giroux, 2005), 419.Google Scholar
  23. 39.
    Peter Steinfels, The Neoconservatives: The Men Who Are Changing America (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979), 55.Google Scholar
  24. 44.
    Buckley, ed., Did You Ever See A Dream Walking? American Conservative Thought in the Twentieth Century (Indianapolis, IN: BobbsMerrill, 1968), 228.Google Scholar
  25. 46.
    See Irving Kristol, “‘Family Values’—Not a Political Issue,” Wall Street Journal, December 7, 1992, p. 14; and Gerson, The Neoconservative Vision 328–33.Google Scholar
  26. 48.
    Kristol, “ The Coming Conservative Century,” Wall Street Journal, February 1, 1993, p. 18.Google Scholar
  27. 49.
    See Kristol, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea (New York: Free Press, 1995), 386.Google Scholar
  28. 50.
    Willmoore Kendall, “Do We Want An ‘Open Society’?” National Review, January 31, 1959, p. 493;Google Scholar
  29. Willmoore Kendall The Conservative Affirmation (Chicago: Regnery, 1963), 108–16.Google Scholar
  30. 51.
    Linda C. Raeder, John Stuart Mill and the Religion of Humanity (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2002), 234–67;Google Scholar
  31. Joseph Hamburger, John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999);Google Scholar
  32. and Maurice Cowling, Mill and Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963).Google Scholar
  33. 52.
    William A. Donahue, Twilight of Liberty: The Legacy of the ACLU (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1994).Google Scholar
  34. 54.
    Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987), 202.Google Scholar
  35. 59.
    See Benjamin Hart, The Third Generation: Young Conservative Leaders Look Toward the Future (Washington, DC: Regnery, 1987), introductory note by President Reagan and 11–28.Google Scholar
  36. 61.
    George Will, “Silliness on Stem Cell Research,” Washington Post, August 7, 2005.Google Scholar
  37. 62.
    William Bennett, The Broken Hearth: Reversing the Collapse of the Family (New York: Doubleday, 1996), 47–66.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Paul Edward Gottfried 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Edward Gottfried

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations