At the beginning of his well-written, erudite, and humane book, Anthony T. Kronman, now approaching a half century of teaching at Yale Law School, suggests that contemporary conservatism “has lost its way.” “True conservatism,” he argues, must above all remain faithful to the “sovereignty of excellence.” It must not be loud and shrill, defining itself by what it rejects or, even worse, emulating the frenzied anger of the party of negation. Nor should it lose sight of enduring verities because of an inordinate preoccupation with short-term political effectiveness. Kronman wants conservatism to avoid vulgarity and an excessive preoccupation with quotidian politics, and to place at its center the ennobling ideals of civilization.
The meaning and relevance of conservatism in an age marked by the unremitting conflict between an ever “more strident and self-assured” radicalism dedicated to the repudiation of our civilized inheritance, and an increasingly “ferocious response” to such “moral madness” from its populist critics, puts philosophically minded conservatives in a difficult position. Kronman’s moderating counsels are a welcome contribution. Yet he arguably desires a conservatism that is too “intellectual” and not spirited enough. No less a “conservative” authority than Aristotle argued that anger in the right manner, at the right time, and for the right reason is “in accord with virtue,” with a role to play in defending against assaults on one’s own and on what is true, good, and beautiful. The great conservative thinker and agent, Edmund Burke, likewise showed that one can be both wise and spirited in a way that is principled, firm, and judicious. Kronman’s conservatism runs slightly too cool for our heated times.
Comments