home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |
  An American Manifesto
Wednesday April 16, 2014 
by Christopher Chantrill Follow chrischantrill on Twitter

TOP NAV

Home

Blogs

Opeds

Articles

Bio

Contact

BOOK

Manifesto

Sample

Faith

Education

Mutual aid

Law

Books

BLOGS 14

Apr 2014

Mar 2014

Feb 2014

Jan 2014

BLOGS 13

Dec 2013

Nov 2013

Oct 2013

Sep 2013

Aug 2013

Jul 2013

Jun 2013

May 2013

Apr 2013

Mar 2013

Feb 2013

Jan 2013

BLOGS 12

Dec 2012

Nov 2012

Oct 2012

Sep 2012

Aug 2012

Jul 2012

Jun 2012

May 2012

Apr 2012

Mar 2012

Feb 2012

Jan 2012

BLOGS 11

Dec 2011

Nov 2011

Oct 2011

Sep 2011

Aug 2011

Jul 2011

Jun 2011

May 2011

Apr 2011

Mar 2011

Feb 2011

Jan 2011

BLOGS 10

Dec 2010

Nov 2010

Oct 2010

Sep 2010

Aug 2010

Jul 2010

Jun 2010

May 2010

Apr 2010

Mar 2010

Feb 2010

Jan 2010

BLOGS 09

Dec 2009

Nov 2009

Oct 2009

Sep 2009

Aug 2009

Jul 2009

Jun 2009

May 2009

Apr 2009

Mar 2009

Feb 2009

Jan 2009

BLOGS 08

Dec 2008

Nov 2008

Oct 2008

Sep 2008

Aug 2008

Jul 2008

Jun 2008

May 2008

Apr 2008

Mar 2008

Feb 2008

Jan 2008

BLOGS 07

Dec 2007

Nov 2007

Oct 2007

Sep 2007

Aug 2007

Jul 2007

Jun 2007

May 2007

Apr 2007

Mar 2007

Feb 2007

Jan 2007

BLOGS 06

Dec 2006

Nov 2006

Oct 2006

Sep 2006

Aug 2006

Jul 2006

Jun 2006

May 2006

Apr 2006

Mar 2006

Feb 2006

Jan 2006

BLOGS 05

Dec 2005

Nov 2005

Oct 2005

Sep 2005

Aug 2005

Jul 2005

Jun 2005

May 2005

Apr 2005

Mar 2005

Feb 2005

Jan 2005

BLOGS 04

Dec 2004

Big Ed Fights Back Against For-Profit Colleges Who Lost Delphi?

print view

Changing The Supreme Court: The Real Problem

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, it’s 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 Kant’s idea that we can’t know things-in-themselves, only appearances. Modern psychology? It’s 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, it’s true, but founded on German ideas. Middle-class constitutional democracy wasn’t 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 ridiculous—a 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 century—the noble government programs for education, health, pensions, environment, even perhaps civil rights—amounts 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 strategy—by defeating our adversaries without even the need for battle.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com.

Buy his Road to the Middle Class.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS


Chappies

“But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.”  —Freddy Arbuthnot
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison


Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust


Hugo on Genius

“Tear down theory, poetic systems... No more rules, no more models... Genius conjures up rather than learns... ” —Victor Hugo
César Graña, Bohemian versus Bourgeois


Education

“We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.”
E. G. West, Education and the State


Faith & Purpose

“When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of ages—they seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings, and that a refusal to use the means appointed was a damning sin.”
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990


Conversion

“When we received Christ,” Phil added, “all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.”
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006


China and Christianity

At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing


Religion, Property, and Family

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


Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity


US Life in 1842

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


mysql close

 

©2012 Christopher Chantrill