Judge Bork was being interviewed on C-Span this week when the president of the Federalist Society tried to pin the Burkean tag on him.In his (usual) brusque way he shrugged it off opting for something else. Don't ask me what he called it because I became distracted by his example of what it is not. The current debate over "true conservatism" - an ideological construct - he noted is not for him and probably not for Burkeans or conservatives.
If you go to the newer election-inspired "conservative" blogs, you see a lot of this non-conservative paradigm hunting going on with all the jiggery pokery that calls up.
Ayn Rand's taunt, "Conserve what?" is germane here. Either you go down the path of philosophical analysis with Objectivist-like rigor and face the consequences or you declare yourself, as I do, someone who feels himself conservative. You don't split the difference by producing a half-baked paradigm (Libertarian Party) or by negotiating lists of "principles" that are platform planks (conservative splinter groups).
Unlike Ayn Rand or her target Bill Buckley or today's "true conservative" discussants, most of us are not building, defining, or even joining a movement. We are just being ourselves and "feeling conservative" is as far as many need to go. In arguments with the paradigm hunters, I am told that this attitude lets all sorts of Lincoln Chaffees lurk within the movement.
This is a "top-down" view of the issue. The bottom-up view is to let like minds associate for political benefit, then deal with trouble as it comes.
Bork's point, if I extrapolate a little here, is that there may be something we could call a natural political conservative.
We encounter so many natural (non-political) conservatives in daily life that I wonder why movement-minded people don't do something with them, as many of them are already affiliated or organized by interest. Think of those who own classic cars; who collect antiques; who restore buildings, who raise "heritage" breeds, who restore paintings. The list could go on. (Obviously in this matter, gun owners and shooters have already found their political voice.)
So there is real work available for those arguing out definitions of "true conservative." Why not organize natural conservatives instead?
