The Irrational Foundations of Conservatism: Edmund Burke

Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 7 months ago to Philosophy
49 comments | Share | Flag

Edmund Burke is widely considered the founder of (modern) conservatism. His best known work is an analysis of French Revolution. His answer was reason had lead men astray and they needed to follow the course of their ancestors and eschew reason.
“He argued extensively for an appeal to authority based on collective reasoning and organic reform while rejecting the use of abstract principles and individual reason in establishing mass rule.”
There is no such thing as collective reasoning. Conservatism is an attack on reason, the Enlightenment, the scientific revolution, Locke and the founding principles of the United States. It is time that conservatives admit that their whole philosophy is based on irrationalism.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I hope that Dale reads your comments carefully, because
    we do want to improve things by every means available,
    in my humble opinion, just as you say. -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Listed in detail elsewhere. Don't support the opposition in any way, shape, or form, Do what you can to continue making them or helping them look incompetent. At the political level take care of your precinct by working with your neighbors but judging from the name that might be difficult. Attack the weak where there is the least amount of influence as much as possible. By encouraging others to join what is fairly a counter revolution for the restoration of the Constitution by using ballots not bullets and introducing other ideas you'll find posted here. Learn how to counter the progressives and that's a whole series in the Politics Section up at the top. under Catalog. If you know someone in the military politely ask "When are you going to up hold your oath of office?" Point out they have moral and legal right, duty, and responsibility to conduct a counter revolution and reinstate the Constitution and are the last legal authority that can do so. Suggest they have a lot of backing and that we don't consider them cannon fodder nor the women of the country baby factories as does the left. Left meaning RINOS and their supporters all the way to Socialist Progressives.

    Etc. Etc. Etc. Who do I like? Truth to tell. His or Her first name is General or Colonel and his other names are Martial Law if that's what it takes but it must be above all things legal.

    Who would I rather see running? None of the Above for the entire group so far mentioned. But in a form of guerrilla warfare I'm pushing the notion of Carly F. as a way to defuse the Hillary Bomb with Jindal as the VP to bring in a huge amount of votes that otherwise truly will be flushed down the Socialist toilet.

    Think about it it's the most win win win scenario I can devise the others are just the right wing of the left bought and paid for. So's Carly but she's the camel's nose and Jindal is the camel's rump.

    He adds votes big time and more than compensates for the Hillary lovers now she has turned her back on the Progressives and they will presumably to BS Ha Ha.

    the rest post again if would like to hear why that is a win win for the Democrats win for the Republicans and a big WIN for the citizens far better than voting for evil we use her as the Devil's Advocate to gain access but the price is Jindal for VP - or someone like him.

    I combined a lot of past studies in different area but the key is "Man's rational mind is his/her sole means of gaining knowledge, survival and happiness. The lesson of Objectivism. Bottom of the Preface in Objectivism in One Lesson. Why? Because it objectively examines all possibilities and determines what works and what does not work. I have enough faith and enough knowledge of history to know the the socialist fascist system does not work and never has.

    There is always an out, an escape hatch, a twist, a re-definition or a new metaphor or maybe for them methapor. Spin is just another word for deceit and in that effort ..ha ha ha they are also failures. But they'll swallow the Carly Ploy in a DC second cause their asses are on the line and they know it. Hillary figured that out already and that's why she's heading back to the comfort zone in the center of the left.

    And that's how you start a counter-revolution never refer to it as anything else nor as a violence prone or illegal action in any way. It is none of those. Gotta run it's time rip they a new orifice in my on going series.

    One last thought. The Jindal Vote ....and it might end up including Webb...The "Consent Withdrawn Party."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Bethesda-gal 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Oh that's SO depressing. Ok, so who do you like, Bernie Sanders ? Hahahaha. ;)
    But, really, what is your alternative ?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You can scratch Rand Paul and Cruz they came right out in support of one of the hall mark efforts of left wing socialism called A Value Added Tax and attempted to say it was OK because it only applied to corporations. I really hate it when politicians think I'm that stupid and try to shyster such garbage in their search for votes. Any tax on any business is is paid by the consumer of whatever goods or service they provide. The only choice they offer is let's see I'll not buy anything from any corporation or donate to any LLC who backs a charity or a PAC I suippose they are included maybe not .

    It's a sham and it's something heavily favored by the likes of Nancy Pelosillyni. So if they are supporting Comrade Lube Job they are by word and deed to the left of most RINOS. Trump is no conservative by any definition. He's what you call a looter or a moocher. That leaves Rubio and the known Rinos to choose from in labeling them Conservatives and of course the top tier as RINOS are also not conservatives That leaves Rubio He'll go down next the others have to wait on the Bimbo Brigade.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Ditto...and as A. Rand herself said examination of any ideal, idea, question, theory, or even a position backed uip by fact did not negate the need to examine all possibilities with the same care and that is not a quote but from memory.....
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Bethesda-gal 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, the conservative side has sucked up to Christian language more than I would prefer ( my heritage is Jewish but I was raised with absolutely no religious practice at all ) but the Republican side of the spectrum I feel is vastly closer to representing my wishes of the federal govt getting out of my wallet, my ( husband's) gun cabinet, my bedroom and my lady parts. The Dems want to raid the first two, and some Repubs want to make decisions about the second two. But still, overall I feel less intruded on by conservatives. SO, my question is, if neither political party is perfect, isn't it better to at least support the one that is the better of the two, and do one's best to bring it closer to what one ultimately thinks would be best ? Isnt the alternative defacto support of the one that is the worst ? If your answer to both is 'no' then how will things have a realistic chance to improve ?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 7 months ago
    Paine's Rights of Man (written in reply to Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France) is worth reading, too. I doubt anyone here will agree with all of it; in particular he advocates a welfare system financed by inheritance taxes. But he has the right idea about what a Constitution is, and isn't.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 7 months ago
    Reason, being mankind's mode of survival, makes it almost amusing to read how Hume and others try to justify the lack of using it. Conservatism has no more real meaning than the words Republican or Democrat, because all they do is point in a general ever-changing direction much like the space-time continuum.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 9 years, 7 months ago
    Again I may have thought wrong by thinking conservatism was conserving our constitution which was masterfully derived by a community in consensus...(not the liberal collective, [today's connotation] ).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Words have meaning and ideological movements have philosophical foundations. Not everyone in these movements understands or agrees with these foundations, but those foundations define the direction the movement will head. In the case of conservativism it is clear they have pushed irrationalism, including in the form of pushing christianity as a political movement. They have also shown they do not care about the constitution of natural rights, instead they make up myths that the US is a christian nation.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ProfChuck 9 years, 7 months ago
    "Conservatism" is an example of the dangers of trying to simplify a concept by attaching a label. Giving something a name creates the illusion of understanding while avoiding the rigors of real comprehension.
    "Conservatism" is like a sticky ball or Velcro. it's easy to stick something to it without having to explain why.
    One of the problems with the conservative label is the implied connection with theology. Belief in religious principals is more subjective than objective and as such it requires a very different thought process than say economics or physics. As long as the conservative movement retains the dichotomy of subjective and objective reasoning it will be at war with its self. That makes it an easy target.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree. I used to think of myself as a conservative, but now realize I never was. The more I learn about conservatism, the scarier it is. Very good posts.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 9 years, 7 months ago
    Burke clearly was influenced by Hobbes' "Leviathan", in which Hobbes argued that the best interest of the people was served under the rule and guidance of a "great leader" free from the pressures of majority influence to make the decisions that would benefit them best. Rather than conservatism, it appears Burke's arguments support the move toward an imperial President, free from the constraints of republican government.

    Both Liberal and Conservative current strains of American politicians seem to favor an Executive with far more power than delineated in the Constitution, so it would appear both mainstream political parties have adopted Burke's "Hobbesean" position. The concepts of government promoted by Locke and Montesquieu have been abandoned by modern power brokers of political influence, primarily because concentrated power is easier to steer than distributed power.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Bethesda-gal 9 years, 7 months ago
    I think your premise errs in its foundation by lumping all conservatives into one category. Conservatives today encompass everything from Rand Paul to Trump to Carson to Tea Party, and undoubtedly other flavors as well. I'm trying to decide how to label my own affiliation and I think it might end up being: the-opposite-of-whatever-it-is-that-Obama-is.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I did not like the label conservative (in the 80s, when I was in my 20s) and my dad told me to think of it as just meaning conservative with the nations' finances. But that is clearly not what the conservative movement is really about
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 7 months ago
    I read the first paragraph and gagged.
    I think a lot of people label themselves as conservatives because they think the alternative is to be a modern liberal. When anyone asks , I label myself an individualist. I am still learning about Objectivism, a lot from the Objectivists here, and I thank you.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 7 months ago
    I finished it. It makes it seem like maybe Burke was saying he didn't want the French Revolution to go overboard, and then he came up with post hoc rationalizations to get to that conclusion.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 7 months ago
    I agree. It's appeal to popularity and appeal to antiquity.

    I read the first half and hope to go back to the second half and the other article.

    I'd read Burke in college. This makes me remember a little and think I'd get something different out of it reading it at age 40 vs age 20.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo