|Big Ed Fights Back Against For-Profit Colleges||Who Lost Delphi?|
by Christopher Chantrill
October 09, 2005 at 1:13 pm
THE CONSERVATIVE argument over the nomination of Harriet Miers to be associate justice on the Supreme Court is just like the Allied argument in the fall of 1944.
After the breakout from Normandy the British General Montgomery wanted to end the war by getting his Army Group 21 into Germany first with a bold left hook through the Low Countries. The American General Patton had the same idea. He wanted to end the war by getting his Third Army into Germany first with a bold right hook across the Rhine. But their boss, General Eisenhower, chose to advance towards Germany on a broad front, and rejected the high-risk plans of his subordinates. Ever since, military experts have criticized Ike for his timidity and lack of imagination.
In the Supreme Court battle, its the hot-shot Federalist Special Forces that want to assault the vital liberal citadel, the Supreme Court, in a daring coup de main. But President Bush has decided against such a risky scheme. He has chosen the Eisenhower strategy, and nominated Harriet Miers to the court. The Special Forces guys are fit to be tied.
But how smart is the ruthless coup de main strategy? Citadels cannot be successfully held or defended unless you have infantry all around them. That was the lesson of the Belgian fortresses in 1914, and the same lesson applies to the Supreme Court in 2005. Republican presidents have successfully infiltrated conservatives into the court time and again. But because conservatives on the court are surrounded by a liberal legal culture they find it very difficult to hold out against the endless siege of liberal opinion. Most of them give up.
The conservative raiding strategy for the Supreme Court is not a strategy, it is a tactic. The only way to achieve a conservative court for the long term is to change the legal culture of the United States. That, of course, is a much bigger, and much harder task than the decisive tactics of the coup de main. It requires conservatives to win the argument of ideas not just in economic policy and in national politics, but in the moral-cultural sector as well. It is with the moral-cultural sector that conservatives have their big problem.
F.S.C. Northrop pointed out 50 years ago that Anglo-Americans are fighting the battle of ideas with the seventeenth-century ideas of Locke and the eighteenth-century ideas of Burke while our opponents are fighting with the cultural ideas of the twentieth century, the precipitate of two hundred years of German philosophy. Look at the great cultural edifices of the present era. Compulsory education comes from Prussia. The research university comes from Prussia. Social insurance and pay-as-you-go pensions come from Imperial Germany. Modern science comes from Kants idea that we cant know things-in-themselves, only appearances. Modern psychology? Its German.
All these themes come together in the central article of liberal faith that a creative life is a Life, while a life of creating children is a cop-out.
This revolutionary program also took on the noble project of Anglo-American constitutionalism and irradiated it with postmodernism, an invention of French poseurs, its true, but founded on German ideas. Middle-class constitutional democracy wasnt about the rule of law or a high-minded separation of powers, they said, it was a cunning bid for power. All knowledge was a narrative of power, an apology for the ruling elite and its shameful path to power.
Conservatives think that all this is ridiculousa politically correct fantasy that no sensible person would consider for a moment. The trouble is that sensible people do believe it. Not only do they believe it, they proselytize it throughout the culture: in the government schools, in the elite universities, and above all in entertainment and the arts. Conservatives cannot easily hold the Supreme Court until they conquer and hold the cultural territory around it.
Conservatives must master the German canon. Then we can use the liberals weapons against them. Could it be, we could ask as conservative postmodernists, that the whole liberal narrative of the last centurythe noble government programs for education, health, pensions, environment, even perhaps civil rightsamounts to nothing but a crude apology for power?
Conservatives will be able to dominate the Supreme Court when and only when we have cured liberals of their cultural confidence.
To do this, we need a conservatism rooted not just in the ideas of the founders, but expert in the ideas of the German tradition, the ideas that were used to marginalize us over the century of socialism from 1850 to 1970 and in the culture to this very day. Then we will win the culture war not in bloody confirmation battles in the United States Senate but in the way recommended by the great masters of strategyby defeating our adversaries without even the need for battle.
Buy his Road to the Middle Class.
[W]hen I asked a liberal longtime editor I know with a mainstream [publishing] house for a candid, shorthand version of the assumptions she and her colleagues make about conservatives, she didn't hesitate. Racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice fascists, she offered, smiling but meaning it.
Harry Stein, I Can't Believe I'm Sitting Next to a Republican
Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism
[To make] of each individual member of the army a soldier who, in character, capability, and knowledge, is self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility [verantwortungsfreudig] as a man and a soldier. — Gen. Hans von Seeckt
MacGregor Knox, Williamson Murray, ed., The dynamics of military revolution, 1300-2050
For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008
Imagining that all order is the result of design, socialists
conclude that order must be improvable by better design of some superior mind.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
[Every] sacrifice is an act of impurity that pays for a prior act of greater impurity... without its participants having to suffer the full consequences incurred by its predecessor. The punishment is commuted in a process that strangely combines and finesses the deep contradiction between justice and mercy.
Frederick Turner, Beauty: The Value of Values
[The Axial Age] highlights the conception of a responsible self... [that] promise[s] man for the first time that he can understand the fundamental structure of reality and through salvation participate actively in it.
Robert N Bellah, "Religious Evolution", American Sociological Review, Vol. 29, No. 3.
But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family.
Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
[T]he way to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis,
Brown II, 349 U. S., at 300–301, is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop
discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Roberts, C.J., Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District
A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is merely relative, is asking you not to believe him. So dont.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy
Paul Dirac: When I was talking with Lemaître about [the expanding universe] and feeling stimulated
by the grandeur of the picture that he has given us, I told him that
I thought cosmology was the branch of science that lies closest to religion.
However [Georges] Lemaître [Catholic priest, physicist, and
inventor of the Big Bang Theory] did not agree with me. After thinking it over he
suggested psychology as lying closest to religion.
John Farrell, The Creation Myth
Within Pentecostalism the injurious hierarchies of the wider world are abrogated and replaced by a single hierarchy of faith, grace, and the empowerments of the spirit... where groups gather on rafts to take them through the turbulence of the great journey from extensive rural networks to the mega-city and the nuclear family...
David Martin, On Secularization