Liberal Fascism, Islamism And The 21st Century

Another fine post from Wretchard at The Belmont Club republished in it's entirety:

Hugh Hewitt interviews Jonah Goldberg about his book, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History Of The American Left From Mussolini To The Politics Of Meaning. Hewitt goes over the evolution of liberalism from its impeccable fascist pedigree with Goldberg, a kind of spoiler of the book. But what's really interesting was this exchange:

HH: And you know, it’s the same temptation over and over again, and it’s one abroad in the land right now, which is why I want to pause on this, which is Rousseau believed that man was good, you know, that the state came along, or that society came along and screwed things up, but that actually, that men were innately good. And that’s simply not a conservative view, Jonah Goldberg. It’s anti-conservative. It’s also anti-theology in most senses.

JG: Right. I mean, I think the fundamental difference, the difference that defines the difference between American, Anglo-American conservatives and European welfare states, leftists or liberals, is Locke versus Rousseau. Every philosophical argument boils down to John Locke versus Jacques Rousseau.

HH: Yup.

JG: Rousseau says the government is there, that our rights come from the government, that come from the collective. Locke says our rights come from God, and that we only create a government to protect our interests. The Rousseauian says you can make a religion out of society and politics, and the Lockean says no, religion is a separate sphere from politics. And that is the defining distinction between the two, and I think that distinction also runs through the human heart, that we all have a Rousseauian temptation in us. And it’s the job of conservatives to remind people that the Lockean in us needs to win.

This exchange captures the link between the 20th century struggle against Communism and Fascism and the 21st century's epic battle against radical Islamism. The key difference between those ideologies and the Lockean view is where they put God -- or if you prefer Ultimate Legitimacy -- in relation to society. Both liberal fascism and Islamic fundamentalism put God on earth; both are theocracies in the sense they believe that God actually rules temporally. In the first case the Deity takes the form of an enlightened vanguard; in the second case Allah rules through the Caliphate via Sharia law.

But the price of putting God on earth is dragging Him through the mud of politics. If one truly believes that God looks like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama one eventually comes to the view that the Almighty isn't everything He's cracked up to be. By contrast, locating God outside of politics is, to use a current buzzword, "de-weaponizing" the numinous; removing what is too great and awesome for our complete understanding from the sphere of political manipulation.

That doesn't mean the Lockeans remove God from the Universe. On the contrary they keep him there. But when God is invoked, it is always as our understanding of Him rather than as God Himself. In other words human organization can never attain to the sanctity of the Koran or the Communist Manifesto. It never becomes a divine instituion. It is only ever a government -- by the people, of the people and for the people.

And only if we keep it so shall it never perish from the earth. The words "My Kingdom is not of this world" preserves both God's Kingdom and our freedom. We may come to God, through the perils of life and danger of damnation. But we arrive before Him as free beings. Sans the muttawa and sans the scourge of political coercion.

Book Blogging

I am enjoying my holiday downtime by clearing the decks of a few books which, surprise, surprise, are not historical, political or biographical. All in preparation for settling into my winter reading of the first two volumes of Winston Churchill's official biography which has just been reprinted by Hillsdale College Press and gifted to me by my wonderful children.

Richard Russo is my long time favorite author of fiction. He generally writes about quirky working class people in upstate New York, with which I have some familiarity. Bridge of Sighs is his latest novel and while not as good as Empire Falls for which he won a Pulitzer, still a serviceable read none the less.

I also finally finished The Contrary Farmer by Gene Logsdon. Logsdon has written so many fine books about farming and gardening that I now consider him to be my own personal guru; especially since he lives in Upper Sandusky, Ohio, a mere hour drive from here. I love his contrary, some might even suggest curmudgeonly, take on all aspects of life - be they animal, vegetable or mineral. It certainly sounds like wisdom to me.

Team of Rivals

I just finished listening to Team of Rivals - The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. While, admittedly, not for those with just a passing interest in Lincoln and the Civil War era of US history, Team of Rivals presents an intriguing look at Lincoln's cabinet which was composed mostly of men that felt they were better suited to be president than he.

Throughout the book Goodwin shows how Lincoln intuitively understood people and then placed them in positions where they could best serve during a time when their country needed them most. Lincoln exhibited a leadership style which was almost egoless and likely without peer in the history of our nation. Couple that with his legendary political acumen and you have the story of a man that seemed to have been plucked out of obscurity by Providence to lead the country through it's most difficult hours. Eventually, even Lincoln's most bitter rivals understood that he was the only man that could have held the Union together.

Liberals Read More Than Conservatives?

Leave it to Pat Schroeder, the liberal former Congressional Representative from Colorado and current president of the American Association of Publishers, to make something like reading, political. Here are her comments from a recent interview:

"The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple slogans: 'No, don't raise my taxes, no new taxes’. It's pretty hard to write a book saying, 'No new taxes, no new taxes, no new taxes' on every page."

Then, of course, it takes a conservative woman, author and publisher, Mary Matalin, to bring something like common sense into the discussion when she said "As head of a book publishing association, she probably shouldn't malign any readers," It seems that the APP might want to reconsider their choice of association president since I didn’t notice “Alienate conservative readers” anywhere in their mission statement.

While the AP-Ipsos poll apparently found that liberals out-read conservatives, the truly disheartening news was that 27% of respondents had not read a single book during the last year. How are we to have a vigorous and informed debate of the issues if citizens do not read? And those that did read were reading mainly popular fiction and religious books, not political works.

So, in rebuttal to Ms. Schroeder I would say “Patsy – I’d be willing to bet that once you subtracted the pop-up books the liberals counted in their responses, the conservatives would have a commanding lead.”

After all, there is something to be said for quality over quantity.

I just finished reading Strictly Right - William F. Buckley Jr. and the American Conservative Movement. It provides a warm and insightful view of the godfather of the Conservative movement as well as a look at how Buckley pulled libertarians, traditional conservatives and former communists together to write for National Review. By doing so and keeping the ship afloat, Buckley more than any other conservative managed to move the country to the right.

An excellent read.

Kitchen Confidential

I recently took a break from all of the history and politics I have been reading to breeze through Kitchen Confidential by Anthony Bourdain. What a wild ride! Sex, drugs and rock n roll is what his kitchen seems to be all about as he tells about the culinary underbelly of New York City. You don't even have to be a "foodie" to appreciate it - but it helps.

Lincoln At Cooper Union

I just finished reading Lincoln At Cooper Union by noted Lincoln scholar Harold Holzer. Holzer manages to take the occasion of the Cooper Union speech and show how all the surrounding events such as the iconic Brady portrait taken of Lincoln the same day propelled Lincoln to the presidency. Not only that but Holzer makes it all very interesting as well. Lincoln came to New York City at the end of February, 1860 as a prairie politician best known for his debates with Stephen Douglas during the Illinois Senate race in 1858. He left the Northeast two weeks later as a serious contender for the Republican nomination. And Lincoln did not make another speech until his First Inaugural. A little different type of presidential campaign than what we are subjected to these days.