The split among conservatives really began in the 1950's and 1960's, between Russell Kirk and Willmoore Kendall, that is, between traditional, ordered, religious-grounded society, and free-market ultra-individualism.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
On Conservatism
I love America and feel patriotic toward my country. I take my stand with those who see the government mainly as a protector of the freedom and liberty of the individual states within the light federalism of the government. This includes government protection of our manufacturing base, which free-market libertarians don't agree with. I approve of the creative free-enterprise system, but there is a limit to economic growth related to dwindling resources, and to survival ethics, and this still needs to be understood by the free-enterprise philosophy.
The split among conservatives really began in the 1950's and 1960's, between Russell Kirk and Willmoore Kendall, that is, between traditional, ordered, religious-grounded society, and free-market ultra-individualism.
The split among conservatives really began in the 1950's and 1960's, between Russell Kirk and Willmoore Kendall, that is, between traditional, ordered, religious-grounded society, and free-market ultra-individualism.
In the 1970's the “neoconservatives”
crossed over from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party in
protest against the antiwar movement, and also in dual support of Israel
and the United States. The neocons strongly influence the
big-government, war-interventions of the Bush years. They also more or
less rejected from the Republican establishment Russell
Kirk-oriented "paleoconservatives," like Pat Buchanan and Thomas Fleming.
The Republican Party establishment
continues to support many neoconservative programs and has persuaded
many social conservatives, using religious interpretations of the end times, to go along with their military adventures
in the Middle East and elsewhere. The libertarian wing of
conservatism does oppose these foreign military interventions, even if many of
their members don't mind the foreign interventions of global
corporations.
Evolution is sacred in my religious
philosophy, yet my position on change and order relate well to the
slow and careful changes affirmed by Burke and Kirk. The future goal of evolving
to Godhood requires a degree of change over time that Burke and Kirk would not
affirm, but successful survival and evolution takes place best in
stable conservative societies, where positive mutations have the
chance to be incorporated in the gene pool.
The decentralization of the states from
the central government relate well to evolutionary variety and natural cooperative competition. If given the proper independence
affirmed by the original United States Constitution, the growth of
multiple ethnic groups and cultures can be accommodated in the
various states of the union.
And finally, the religious roots of
society, emphasized by Burke and Kirk, is affirmed in the Twofold Path
of the Theoevolutionary Church. But this requires a
Revitalized Conservatism which includes the goal of Ordered Evolution
all the way to Godhood. The God first seen, and mirrored, in the
Inward Path of traditional religion, is the Godhood of the Outward Path evolved to in the
cosmos.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment