Thursday, September 22, 2016

Publius Decius Mus imagines there is a transcendence which is outside of religion

Yes, there is. They used to call it "idolatry".

In any event, this excerpt shows that Decius simply fails to take the Protestantism of the American Founding seriously. One could blame the Founders for being too particular in this regard, but that's a different topic altogether.

The Old Right was, in my view, too particular in that it tried to base everything on tradition, on kith and kin, blood and soil and so on. It rejected any transcendence (beyond the religious) as “universalist” and liberal. This is my ultimate problem with Kirk, Bradford and the like.  They want to say that certain things are good while rejecting any fundamental, permanent ground for the good.  The New Right swung way to the other direction and insists on universals and sees all particulars—at least when asserted by Americans and Europeans—as insular and racist. The truth is that both are true in their sphere and both are necessary. Restoring a proper relationship between the universal and the particular is in my view the paramount theoretical challenge for whatever it is that follows conservatism.

No comments:

Post a Comment