Goldberg Crunches the Crunchies
I'm hyp-mo-tized (as Letterman would say) by the Crunchy Con debate. I can't imagine the book is nearly as good as the blog since the latter has the benefit of objections, persuasively argued.
Jonah Goldberg is especially sensitive concerning the Crunchy Conifers, and I don't say as I blame him. As a fan of Budweiser, he knows he's skating on thin ice, about to be ex-nayed from the "cool group" of conservatives who drink dark beers and eat organic onions, not necessarily together.
There's always been a tension between libertarians and social conservatives; the latter tend to be far more willing to want to re-make the world in their image, even where that image is righteous (Communism got started that way; it looked damn good on paper). Part of my early and no doubt on-going attraction to conservatism is I like not being told what I can or cannot do, an attitude more in line with "Don't Tread On Me" than one of service to my neighbor. But I say let Christ and the Church tell me what to do and not Rod Dreher, good man though I'm sure he is.
What I like about conservatism, and which Rod arguably doesn't, it's opposed to the trite "I'm this way because fill-in-the-blank made me this way" where "fill in the blank" is society, our parents, modernity, the bishops, sugar in the diet, flouride in the water, etc... Conservatism at least gives one the illusion of freedom and independence, though from a religious perspective it's untenable given our mutual dependence, a dependence so radical that some say another's salvation may partially depend on our efforts inspired by grace.
No comments:
Post a Comment