|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Mar 2, 2022 9:20:15 GMT
Here's an excellent lecture by the "disgraced" historian David Starkey on why he's conservative. Somewhat surprising in that he is a gay atheist (although Douglas Murray is another example...) youtu.be/jGKSvPHIc_MI think his points on the irrational component of conservatism, and indeed of politics, are very profound. Although I think it's rather unfair to call the Church of England "English Shinto". It's long but worth listening to. He calls the French Revolution the genesis of all the ills of our time. That's more or less my view (I realize it's far from original). I don't agree with his dismissive views of the ideals of the American Revolution, though, or his claim that the Americans wisely dispensed with them when it came to building their society. His channel is very good, I really recommend it. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbuck on Mar 2, 2022 14:34:09 GMT
Here's an excellent lecture by the "disgraced" historian David Starkey on why he's conservative. Somewhat surprising in that he is a gay atheist (although Douglas Murray is another example...) youtu.be/jGKSvPHIc_MI think his points on the irrational component of conservatism, and indeed of politics, are very profound. Although I think it's rather unfair to call the Church of England "English Shinto". It's long but worth listening to. He calls the French Revolution the genesis of all the ills of our time. That's more or less my view (I realize it's far from original). I don't agree with his dismissive views of the ideals of the American Revolution, though, or his claim that the Americans wisely dispensed with them when it came to building their society. His channel is very good, I really recommend it. I've not had time for this and alas don't have time right now for this excellent forum . . . and so must soon depart again. But a last thing for now, re: I guess this would be another of our differences, Mal. No doubt 1789 has had massive and appalling consequences, but in terms of " all the ills of our time" (?!) I would need to add quite a long list of others. Many on that list would balance the French side and would come from the Anglo-side including * The 1640s/50s British revolution led by Cromwell * The so-called glorious 1688 revolution * The liberal and materialistic or materialistically leaning Whig/liberal philosophy of figures like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, David Hume, (later Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill etc.) which inspires Voltaire etc. (Arguably: no Hobbes and Locke, no Voltaire, Rousseau, no 1789. The British here are more original than the French and widely seen as such, even in very mainstream secular sources.) * The Anglo-American Capitalism that stems in considerable measure from the libertarian thrust in the above None of these differences with you, Mal. though diminish my great respect for you and your thinking, questioning, probing mind . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Mar 2, 2022 15:24:42 GMT
Here's an excellent lecture by the "disgraced" historian David Starkey on why he's conservative. Somewhat surprising in that he is a gay atheist (although Douglas Murray is another example...) youtu.be/jGKSvPHIc_MI think his points on the irrational component of conservatism, and indeed of politics, are very profound. Although I think it's rather unfair to call the Church of England "English Shinto". It's long but worth listening to. He calls the French Revolution the genesis of all the ills of our time. That's more or less my view (I realize it's far from original). I don't agree with his dismissive views of the ideals of the American Revolution, though, or his claim that the Americans wisely dispensed with them when it came to building their society. His channel is very good, I really recommend it. I've not had time for this and alas don't have time right now for this excellent forum . . . and so must soon depart again. But a last thing for now, re: I guess this would be another of our differences, Mal. No doubt 1789 has had massive and appalling consequences, but in terms of " all the ills of our time" (?!) I would need to add quite a long list of others. Many on that list would balance the French side and would come from the Anglo-side including * The 1640s/50s British revolution led by Cromwell * The so-called glorious 1688 revolution * The liberal and materialistic or materialistically leaning Whig/liberal philosophy of figures like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, David Hume, (later Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill etc.) which inspires Voltaire etc. (Arguably: no Hobbes and Locke, no Voltaire, Rousseau, no 1789. The British here are more original than the French and widely seen as such, even in very mainstream secular sources.) * The Anglo-American Capitalism that stems in considerable measure from the libertarian thrust in the above None of these differences with you, Mal. though diminish my great respect for you and your thinking, questioning, probing mind . . . Fair point, Roger. ALL of the ills is an exaggeration. But I certainly think it was the fountainhead of the ideologies that have plagued us for two centuries now. |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Mar 2, 2022 20:04:41 GMT
I lean towards seeing the Reformation as the source of all our evils..... Apologies to Connacht . Brad Gregory's large tome on the Unintended consequences of the Reformation was probably mentioned here before in previous conversations. It's a dense read at times but worth a look.
Conservatives tend not to emphasise the 16/17th religious (inspired) wars as contributing to the secularising aspect of the Enlightenment but they were a hugely traumatic event in European history and culture.
|
|
|
|
Post by cato on Mar 2, 2022 21:44:01 GMT
Here's an excellent lecture by the "disgraced" historian David Starkey on why he's conservative. Somewhat surprising in that he is a gay atheist (although Douglas Murray is another example...) youtu.be/jGKSvPHIc_MI think his points on the irrational component of conservatism, and indeed of politics, are very profound. Although I think it's rather unfair to call the Church of England "English Shinto". It's long but worth listening to. He calls the French Revolution the genesis of all the ills of our time. That's more or less my view (I realize it's far from original). I don't agree with his dismissive views of the ideals of the American Revolution, though, or his claim that the Americans wisely dispensed with them when it came to building their society. His channel is very good, I really recommend it. I just watched that video and second Maolsheachlanns recommendation. Starkey is intelligent and provocative in that he stimulates thought. He is entertaining and witty which is a pleasant bonus. I liked his plea for evangelical conservatism at the end too. |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Mar 2, 2022 22:07:20 GMT
Here's an excellent lecture by the "disgraced" historian David Starkey on why he's conservative. Somewhat surprising in that he is a gay atheist (although Douglas Murray is another example...) youtu.be/jGKSvPHIc_MI think his points on the irrational component of conservatism, and indeed of politics, are very profound. Although I think it's rather unfair to call the Church of England "English Shinto". It's long but worth listening to. He calls the French Revolution the genesis of all the ills of our time. That's more or less my view (I realize it's far from original). I don't agree with his dismissive views of the ideals of the American Revolution, though, or his claim that the Americans wisely dispensed with them when it came to building their society. His channel is very good, I really recommend it. I just watched that video and second Maolsheachlanns recommendation. Starkey is intelligent and provocative in that he stimulates thought. He is entertaining and witty which is a pleasant bonus. I liked his plea for evangelical conservatism at the end too. It's also funny when he says that homosexuality is now compulsory. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbuck on Mar 2, 2022 23:39:09 GMT
I lean towards seeing the Reformation as the source of all our evils..... Apologies to Connacht . Brad Gregory's large tome on the Unintended consequences of the Reformation was probably mentioned here before in previous conversations. It's a dense read at times but worth a look. Conservatives tend not to emphasise the 16/17th religious (inspired) wars as contributing to the secularising aspect of the Enlightenment but they were a hugely traumatic event in European history and culture. OK . . . I'm unexpectedly back again. Taking a break from round the clock video production. Because this thread has hit me in an extraordinary way. Still haven't seen Starkey, but not only do I lean much more to your thinking here Cato re the Reformation vs 1789 . . . but . . . but . . . How to say this? I fear being too argumentative or provocative with you, Mal. But I have spent the last hours startled, slightly shocked that people like yourself or Starkey (who I absolutely trust must be knowledgeable and intelligent) could consider 1789 a "fountainhead" for the "ideologies that have plagued us", as you put it. And now, for me, here is where things gets stranger. Not only is it startling for me to realise knowledgeable, intelligent people think this . . . But the very video that I'm slaving away on round the clock is about the very opposite idea! So I've been producing a video that is in fact a refutation of an idea you assert here Mal and that I didn't even know was out there! It is surreal for me to realise this. The video is about, as Cato points out, Protestantism being at the fountainhead of liberalism, but more particularly Anglosphere Protestantism/Whiggery including what I mentioned earlier re Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Smith, Mill et al. But at a risk of being overly provocative, I'm pasting in a 20 second preview of my upcoming video with stuff filmed days ago. I reel slightly at being in an apparently an "alternate reality" to Starkey and you on this one, Mal. 20 Second Preview of My "Alternate Reality", for anyone who wants to see
Not sure anyone will want to see this, but must note this video will not be up for long (for reasons too complex to explain) and is private for those who have this link. |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Mar 3, 2022 0:01:06 GMT
Well, that's fair enough, but my problem with the French Revolution is not so much liberalism as progressivism/radicalism/utopianism...the idea of Year Zero and permanent revolution. Classical liberalism is a very noble thing in many ways and not, I think, nearly as decadent as progressivism. I've even noticed that "liberal" tends to be a term of disparagement for "advanced" radicals of every kind.
I don't think that idea of permanent revolution is there so much with the American Revolution, which as I understand is derived mostly from Locke (I don't really know much about Locke). The American Revolution was more about restraining the state and preserving individual rights. I think the difference is enormous...I totally understand why Burke celebrated one and denounced the other. And, as little as I know about Hobbes and Hume, I understand both were generally conservative and more concerned with preventing radical change than bringing it about.
The reason I can't see Protestantism as the genesis of all this is because the French Revolution, as far as I know, was the first social movement since Christianization to reject Christianity completely. And not just Christianity, but tradition and custom. Protestantism obviously didn't. I know it's common to trace a line from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, but they seem totally different to me. Luther famously called reason "a whore", a long way from the Cult of Reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Mar 3, 2022 9:20:52 GMT
Well, that's fair enough, but my problem with the French Revolution is not so much liberalism as progressivism/radicalism/utopianism...the idea of Year Zero and permanent revolution. Classical liberalism is a very noble thing in many ways and not, I think, nearly as decadent as progressivism. I've even noticed that "liberal" tends to be a term of disparagement for "advanced" radicals of every kind. I don't think that idea of permanent revolution is there so much with the American Revolution, which as I understand is derived mostly from Locke (I don't really know much about Locke). The American Revolution was more about restraining the state and preserving individual rights. I think the difference is enormous...I totally understand why Burke celebrated one and denounced the other. And, as little as I know about Hobbes and Hume, I understand both were generally conservative and more concerned with preventing radical change than bringing it about. The reason I can't see Protestantism as the genesis of all this is because the French Revolution, as far as I know, was the first social movement since Christianization to reject Christianity completely. And not just Christianity, but tradition and custom. Protestantism obviously didn't. I know it's common to trace a line from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, but they seem totally different to me. Luther famously called reason "a whore", a long way from the Cult of Reason. Probably both our "takes" are too simplistic here. Ideas obviously don't come from nowhere. The French Revolution didn't come from nowhere, nor did the Reformation. There were various proto-Reformation movements before that. I do think the French Revolution is distinctive in that it tried to "reboot" society, renaming the months and introducing a ten-day week and so on. I'm not aware of any previous movement in European history that did that. And I think the whole idea of "rebooting" society, using abstract reason divorced from tradition, is what is the most pernicious thing about progressivism. |
|
