Mar 5, 2023·edited Mar 5, 2023Liked by Adrian Vermeule, The Postliberals
Fabulous pieces; thank you for posting! Each one has tremendous explanatory power for the moment in which we find ourselves. In addition to the wonderful quotes Sally pulls, I'd add, "First, when society is affluent, stable and well-functioning, skepticism about the common good is a viable luxury for the intellectual classes . . ." These two clauses speak to an issue I often grapple with. If the intellectual classes control everything--academia, government, culture, press, news media, NGOs (I could go on)--then what leverage do the majority of Americans have when, as Professor Deneen accurately points out, " . . . the “populace” is generally not a revolutionary, but a conservative party"? The intellectual classes to which Professor Vermeule refers are in fact actualizing their notion of the common good, and it looks like liberalism, replete with the deleterious effects for those not part of the intellectual classes.
What is the leverage the "populace" has to effect changes that would instantiate the political commitments outlined on the Postliberal Order and the other outlets (print, internet) Professor Pappin lists in his piece? Because, for better for worse, all these common good conservatives are also part of the intellectual class?
Chock full of nutritious food for thought. Thanks for a great one.
Impossible to list all the points with which I fully agree. Allow me 3 to start:
"Liberalism is an 'elitist' political philosophy—advancing the material and social interests of a select set of individuals who flourish under the conditions I’ve described. Yet, it has “sold” itself as an egalitarian philosophy." IMV, this is the part that is the most objectionable - a deceptive label to the detriment of those whom it self-represents it serves.
"I emphasize that the common good is as much a legal and juristic concept as a philosophic and theological concept. That is, I am influenced even more heavily by the practical and juristic side of the classical tradition, the great civilian lawyers, than by the philosophical and theological side of the tradition. The common good is built into the text and principles of the law, into the fabric of the law itself, whether as public order, public interest, general welfare, or similar concepts." Seems to me the common good permeates the air we breathe, the water we drink. It in fact is what we all share. Any dishealth is systemic; likewise health inures to all. That is why ancient sages saw it as the genesis of moral virtues.
"It was traditionalists and reactionaries who accurately sensed that the new order was unsustainable, and that human nature would have its revenge." In my Eastern way of thinking, I wholeheartedly agree with this observation. What is human nature in the final analysis but a reflection of Nature? Humans cannot break or overrule Nature. Humans must respect Nature.
Fabulous pieces; thank you for posting! Each one has tremendous explanatory power for the moment in which we find ourselves. In addition to the wonderful quotes Sally pulls, I'd add, "First, when society is affluent, stable and well-functioning, skepticism about the common good is a viable luxury for the intellectual classes . . ." These two clauses speak to an issue I often grapple with. If the intellectual classes control everything--academia, government, culture, press, news media, NGOs (I could go on)--then what leverage do the majority of Americans have when, as Professor Deneen accurately points out, " . . . the “populace” is generally not a revolutionary, but a conservative party"? The intellectual classes to which Professor Vermeule refers are in fact actualizing their notion of the common good, and it looks like liberalism, replete with the deleterious effects for those not part of the intellectual classes.
What is the leverage the "populace" has to effect changes that would instantiate the political commitments outlined on the Postliberal Order and the other outlets (print, internet) Professor Pappin lists in his piece? Because, for better for worse, all these common good conservatives are also part of the intellectual class?
Chock full of nutritious food for thought. Thanks for a great one.
Impossible to list all the points with which I fully agree. Allow me 3 to start:
"Liberalism is an 'elitist' political philosophy—advancing the material and social interests of a select set of individuals who flourish under the conditions I’ve described. Yet, it has “sold” itself as an egalitarian philosophy." IMV, this is the part that is the most objectionable - a deceptive label to the detriment of those whom it self-represents it serves.
"I emphasize that the common good is as much a legal and juristic concept as a philosophic and theological concept. That is, I am influenced even more heavily by the practical and juristic side of the classical tradition, the great civilian lawyers, than by the philosophical and theological side of the tradition. The common good is built into the text and principles of the law, into the fabric of the law itself, whether as public order, public interest, general welfare, or similar concepts." Seems to me the common good permeates the air we breathe, the water we drink. It in fact is what we all share. Any dishealth is systemic; likewise health inures to all. That is why ancient sages saw it as the genesis of moral virtues.
"It was traditionalists and reactionaries who accurately sensed that the new order was unsustainable, and that human nature would have its revenge." In my Eastern way of thinking, I wholeheartedly agree with this observation. What is human nature in the final analysis but a reflection of Nature? Humans cannot break or overrule Nature. Humans must respect Nature.