I'd like to find more time, after a first cursory reading of it, to give a more specific critique, but who knows if I'll get around to that. So I'll go ahead and shoot from the hip for now-
I'm largely in agreement with the critiques of liberal democracy as understood today, and I agree with his end thought that the documents of the Anglo-American tradition aren't faulted in themselves, but there seemed a fair amount in there that in my eyes was trying to hard to make distinctions that weren't necessary. But I suppose, as there is an effort to form a new understanding of what conservatism in America is, there is going to be a period of rough arguments that need refining. I'd put this in that category.
I'd like to find more time, after a first cursory reading of it, to give a more specific critique, but who knows if I'll get around to that. So I'll go ahead and shoot from the hip for now-
ReplyDeleteI'm largely in agreement with the critiques of liberal democracy as understood today, and I agree with his end thought that the documents of the Anglo-American tradition aren't faulted in themselves, but there seemed a fair amount in there that in my eyes was trying to hard to make distinctions that weren't necessary. But I suppose, as there is an effort to form a new understanding of what conservatism in America is, there is going to be a period of rough arguments that need refining. I'd put this in that category.