Greg R. Lawson's Blog: Recent Comments

Comment on What Must a Conservatism for the 21st Century Look Like?

2010-05-07T00:12:25Z

I understand where you might be coming from. I will readily concede to not necessarily being a doctrinaire conservative, however, conservatism itself is not really a doctrine anyway, so is that necessarily a sin?

Edmund Burke was a classical liberal who believed in progress, but believed it to be a slow moving process, not a radical, revolutionary movement that eradicates the tradition accumulated over generations in order to enshrine abstract principles in the halls of power where they end up often devouring, quite literally, human lives.

I think this describes part of my perspective. The progressive movement is dangerous because of its hubris and because of its ignorance of flawed human nature. At the end of the day, it believes in eventual perfectability, I think a more conservative position believes in some movement up the "culture" scale, but ever mindful of the very limitedness of any concepts of "perfectability."

The rest of my perspective, and probably the most influential part of why I write the way I write, is simply what I articulate in this piece regarding virtue. A people that loses its virtue, and I do mean Platonic, Judeo-Christian virtue, is a people that no longer really understands freedom and may be incapable of governing itself. I fear greatly that this is where we are headed. This is the realm of the Nietzschean "Last Man" which is actually a rather pathetic creature to follow in the footsteps of the giants of human history.

I want to conserve this Greatness, even if it is a pat greatness, in the face of the levelling of man that modernity, and certainly post-modernity, heralds. However, to do this requires some type of aspirational goal, even if it might, at first blush, appear to be bizarre. "

One could be a citizen of any nation, but to be a citizen of the world, one must truly be 'American.'" This should be perceived as aspirational and desirous of enobling Americans to take on challenges that the newer generations may not appreciate due to their own disconnectedness to their past. Instead of buying into vauge, fuzzy cosmopolitanism, we attempt to concretize a reverse cosmopolitanism that brings people to us rather than seeking to homogeneize Americansby dispersing our values into the vast milieu of the "global commons."

I am fully aware there is no universality, at least not temporally, however, again, we must enoble and seek to find greatness once more rather than mere technical skill, which seems to be ever more popular as the sine qua non of success in this world. From another of my postings:

"To be a conservative is to recognize the limitations of man and be willing to even take pride in some of the very things that make him parochial. This doesn’t mean we should remain standing in one place forever with feet of clay, but it should sober us to the prospects of what is the best that can happen in this world.

Progress appears; often only in retrospect, to be linear, but really occurs in fits and starts. Two steps forward and one back. There are no “final solutions” that will ever be final. That is the central tenet of conservatism.

Civilizations die when their youthful vigor peters out. This happens because man becomes so convinced of his “solutions” to the exigencies of the moment that he fails to remain connected even to shards of tradition and memories that stir deeply in the unconscious. In a sense, the desire to seek unbounded “progress” destroys the foundations necessary for society to exist in a healthily functional way. A void emerges like a Black Hole that eventually will suck all goodness and hope into its infinite vortex.

Perhaps, then, civilizations are the most ironic of human constructs- both the highest culture and the beginning of the end of that culture.

Globalization is not universalism, “westernization”, or “Americanization.” It is merely a tool that can be used by any number of cultures. Some will reap its fruits more than others.

Fundamentally, the question is- will globalization bring man together or will it find new ways to tear him apart? An unyielding adherent to progress will believe it to bring man together, a conservative anticipates the absurdity of this “final solution” to history’s grand problems and recognize the transience of the moment. A conservative will also smell decay long before the rot has decimated the structures underpinning their civilization, because it as an odor only tradition and history rightfully appreciates.

A conservative must defend what has been great, because to defend what “may be great” is a leap of faith more difficult than believing in God and far more likely to sow seeds of bitterness when the inevitable disappointment saps that once youthful vigor. At that point, a rootless, existential ambiguity consumes those once well meaning hopes.

Tradition is posterity and the cumulative total of history’s lessons. Losing tradition will kill civilization."

We must become young again and in America's youth, there was a certain element of prosyletism in its dream of being a "Shining Beacon on a Hill." Indeed, I may be trying to recapture a past lost long ago, but, to me, that is my brand of conservatism even if I can acknowledge it to be bordering on the quixotic.

Comment on Will Atlas Shrug?

2010-05-04T19:54:45Z

Nice job. My wife and I were invited to attend your BBQ with Rob and Jane. Not sure we can make it, but appreciate your support of Rob. We had a fundraiser for Rob at our house in UA.

Comment on What Must a Conservatism for the 21st Century Look Like?

2010-04-20T07:18:02Z

Piffle. You're a split-the-difference conservative. I see little creativity in your ideas, and it's too bad.

This is a typical pseudo-profundity, I fear. "One could be a citizen of any nation, but to be a citizen of the world, one must truly be 'American.'" Even were I sure of your meaning I surely wouldn't agree.

Sorry I can't be more congratulatory.

Comment on The Meaning of Socrates

2010-03-21T18:55:14Z

Hi, just thinking about the picture over your mantle.

- Athens was under the protection of the goddess Athena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena#Overview, last sentence)

- Socrates was the city's inquisitive son (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apology_%28Plato%29#The_charges_against_Socrates)

- Athens badly lost in the Peloponnesian War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War)

- Maybe the tolerance Athens had for Socrates' ideas made Athena turn her back on the city? To appease her and encourage her to come back to them, Athens had Socrates, as resident atheist of a sort, put to death. So it starts.

Don't forget to hug your little emperor.

Peace,
-the freethought mom

Comment on Demography as Destiny?

2010-03-04T17:17:30Z

This is an important issue that is raised. Immigration has been a dirty word for the last several years and for the types of concerns that I understand. The types of immigrants that illegally come into the country are not the type that will prove vital to long term economic growth and American primacy. But we certainly need to change Americans' views on immigration overall. The important need here is the fact that we need to attract the right type of immigrants. Ones who come to America for college and choose to stay to utilize their knowledge and skills to help America compete in the global marketplace. Americans would benefit from this type of immigration because it benefits our economy and demogrpahically keeps us growing as well in comparison to the nations you mention where they are facing bleaker futures. The reasons these nations face dire situations is b/c a society based upon social welfare system is one that will add further obligations and pressures on the rising generations. So they must face an ugly alternative of either ending their utopian societal views or continue to raise fees and taxes to cover the costs b/c their population growth is not keeping up. That's what we will face sooner or later here in the States. This Administration and all public officials are being deceitful when they discuss not raising taxes when talking about adding to our social welfare costs. But thats for another blog and another day. Thanks Greg for your blog. One of my favorites!

Comment on David Brooks on the Power Elite

2010-02-20T19:45:47Z

I would just say that I think Mr. Brooks does see why our leaders are out of favor. What he is attempting to do is to discern why they have been so bankrupt in their leadership. I think considering this at a deeper level could be fruitful.

To be dismissive or reflexively critical without thinking what can be done to improve things is probably not a constructive course of action to embark upon. We owe to ourselves as a nation to demand leadership, but in order for us to demand it, we need to understand from where leadership really comes from. As a society at large, I am not sure we do understand this anymore. This could well be the reason so much mediocrity becomes ensconced in Washington.

We must begin to realize just how deep the problems are and be willing to accept some of the pain necessary to start rectifying them.

Our current leadership seems incapable. But can we find an alternative any more worthy? That, to me, is the real question we must wrestle with today.

Comment on David Brooks on the Power Elite

2010-02-20T19:31:43Z

Mr. Brooks can not figure out why the ruling elite is out of favor when they can not balance our budgets, win our wars, secure our borders, or do just about any other normal operating functions of a state. I'm not going to explain it to him.

Comment on The Slow Disarming of America

2010-02-20T19:29:02Z

Yes we do spend more money than most of the rest of the world combined. We also are the relative guarantor of global stability which necessitates a much larger expenditure on military matters.

I am looking at the long-term trends of a potential neo-Middle Ages accentuated by proliferating WMDs and I think the world would not be better off dealing with that. Consequently, any actions that undercut our ability to to prevent that I perceive as being deeply problematic.

I simply am trying to raise the issue. Unlike some, I am not ready to go jump off a bridge over this, but I do think we should not be cavalier about allowing a capacity that we have built up over several generations to atrophy.

By the way, did you read the link I included in the article. That provides much of the context to what I said, so I would suggest you at least peruse it before asserting that one needs a paper bag.

Comment on The Slow Disarming of America

2010-02-13T03:17:01Z

Your goal is not to "hyperventilate", but what do you call it when you make an absurd assertion, and offer no data or evidence?
We already spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined. Just what are your worried about? Breathing into a paper bag might help.

Comment on States as Zombie Economies

2010-02-09T23:38:09Z

This is going to get a lot, lot worse later in the year and all through 2011 when the adjustable rate mortgages are beginning to reset across the board and we'll see government debt default (by the way, not for the first time in US history). Recovery? What recovery?