Conservative Minds

Russell Kirk was an early aggregator of conservative thought. He traced conservative intellectual history from Edmund Burke to Kirk's own lifetime. Writing in the 1940s and 1950s, Kirk was nearly alone in his interest in establishing conservatism as a viable political philosophy in America. In this book, he distills the conservative outlook into a concise and readable volume.

Sohrab Ahmari published his essay, "Against David French-ism," that criticized David French's civil libertarianism and his use of civilized tactics to fight for social conservative values. David French pushed back. We discuss the essays and the implications.

Charles Murray uses sociological research to show how white America is dividing into classes based on cognitive ability. Access to college and the college sorting system has facilitated what he calls a 'new upper-class' with its own culture and tastes unique in American history. He posits that higher-IQ individuals are congregating in high-income areas of the country and are increasingly separating themselves from the rest of society. He explores the ramifications of this new dynamic for the working class.

Sowell introduces us to his concept of competing visions in American political life. The constrained vision sees progress limited by human nature. Whatever solutions humans develop to restrain or ameliorate human evils will themselves impose costs or create new social ills. Thus, public policy must always deal in trade-offs rather than absolutes. The unconstrained vision believes human moral improvement has no fixed limits, thus all human problems are entirely solvable. These two visions find themselves talking past one another in the political sphere.

Fukuyama evaluates whether history has moved in a discernable diretion. The "End of History" is a concept introduced by Hegel and Kant. They argued that history will end when no further social progress can be made in society. Fukuyama's task is to determine whether liberal democracy constitutes this best possible society.

In Episode 21, we discuss Fukuyama's evaluation of the alternatives to liberal democracy - namely, authoritarianism, communism/socialism, and Islam.

In Episode 22, we dive into his insights related to the human need for "recognition." He argues that the desire for recognition drives how humans judge social progress. But the Right and the Left view recognition in fundamentally different ways. The upshot is a tension that casts doubt on whether history has ended.

This book may be the best reading we have done for the podcast. We discuss Fukuyama's most fascinating insights in Episode 22.

Fukuyama evaluates whether history has moved in a discernable diretion. The "End of History" is a concept introduced by Hegel and Kant. They argued that history will end when no further social progress can be made in society. Fukuyama's task is to determine whether liberal democracy constitutes this best possible society.

In Episode 21, we discuss Fukuyama's evaluation of the alternatives to liberal democracy - namely, authoritarianism, communism/socialism, and Islam.

In Episode 22, we dive into his insights related to the human need for "recognition." He argues that the desire for recognition drives how humans judge social progress. But the Right and the Left view recognition in fundamentally different ways. The upshot is a tension that casts doubt on whether history has ended.

This book may be the best reading we have done for the podcast. We discuss Fukuyama's most fascinating insights in Episode 22.

Ayn Rand developed a foundation for morality called Objectivism. Objectivist ethics holds that the standard by which one judges good or evil is one's own life - or that which is required to survive. Whatever is proper to ensure survival is good, while whatever opposes or destroys life is evil. Objectivism carries heavy implications for politics and government. Society should elevate rationality, productivity, independence, and freedom that facilitate survival. It should discount parasites, moochers, looters, and brutes that act as a drag on society and individual flourishing. Rand has no patience for government programs geared to the needs of the latter group.

Sullivan believes that conservatism is more a disposition than an ideology. He says the defining characteristic of the conservative is that he knows what he doesn’t know. While not denying that the truth exists, the conservative is content to say merely that his grasp on it is always provisional. He may be wrong. According to Sullivan, conservatism is an anti-ideology, a nonprogram, a way of looking at the world.

Strauss sees a lowering of the sights of political life from a classical focus on values and the Good to a Modern fetishizing of facts and causes. He believes humans can discern right versus wrong according to Nature. He wants to reclaim Natural Right from the misguided critiques from historicism and social science. Strauss believes that all natural beings have a natural destiny that determines what kind of life is good for them.

We also consider whether the text implies anything with regard to Neoconservatism or the Iraq War, as Strauss was somehow implicated in the Bush foreign policy. Spoiler alert: we find absolutely nothing.

Conservative Minds has come a long way since we started this project four months ago. With these first 16 episodes, we declare the end of Season 1. For Episode 17, we talked about our reasons for starting the podcast. And we looked back on what we've read so far, with an eye to finding common threads between thinkers. So far we seem common themes related to federalism/decentralization, individualism, free market capitalism, and tradition.

If you enjoy the podcast, please take a minute to provide us with your feedback. What do you like? What should we change? Leave us a comment on Facebook or Twitter. Or drop us an email at [email protected]. Thanks for listening.