In 30 short chapters (the book is 220 pages) D'Souza takes us on a whirlwind tour of the worldview of the conservative. Because of the brief treatment each subject receives, he cannot approach a thorough defense of any of them. Nevertheless, by the end a coherent picture emerges and he concludes by offering a reading list that should more fully satisfy the appetite he was only able to whet.
In an historical overview we learn that both conservatism and modern liberalism have their roots in classical liberalism with its emphasis on freedom for the individual. But with the changes brought about in the 1930's under FDR and in the 1960's "liberation" movement, the two have diverged to the point that they really stand opposed to one another. They have a fundamental difference in their understanding of human nature.
Liberals, following Rousseau, believe we are basically good, that human nature is malleable if only we apply the right social engineering. Conflicts in the world are not seen in terms of good versus evil, but as misunderstandings. Society at large, and not individuals themselves, are to blame for bad situations such as crime and poverty. Absolute autonomy and personal subjective relativism are the twin dogmas of modern liberalism.
Conservatives, on the other hand, believe in an external, objective moral order. Terms such as good and evil refer to this moral order and thus are not inventions of the human mind. A less sunny diagnosis of human nature leads to a greater emphasis on individual responsibility since conservatives are more realistic about what we are capable of and therefore cannot deflect the blame like liberals do. It also allows for a recognition that some regimes in the world are actually evil, so force, not dialogue, may be necessary in dealing with them. While personal autonomy is important to some degree for the conservative, he finds he must balance this autonomy with duty and virtue which he recognizes from the objective moral order.
D'Souza's discussion of multiculturalism was a particularly interesting example of the clash of worldviews. He distinguishes between authentic and "bogus" multiculturalism, the former referring to a proper recognition of living in a multiracial society, but the latter referring to a leftist political ideology. A case can be made for attempting to balance university curricula to include more great books from the non-Western world. However, "it is impossible to understand multiculturalism in America without realizing that it arises from the powerful conviction that bigotry and oppression define Western civilization in general and American in particular." Consequently representative literary works from other cultures are rejected because they reflect the same bigotry and discrimination that the West is accused of. Instead marginal works are selected, ones which do not reflect their culture but do speak of victimization and oppression. So it is called bogus multiculturalism because "it views non-Western cultures through the ideological lens of Western leftist politics." True multiculturalism, in contrast, would teach the greatest works of Western and non-Western cultures. Its goal would be to study, in the words of Matthew Arnold, "the best that has been thought and said."
Liberal judicial activism also comes under fire for undermining the democratic process by imposing the left wing ideology of the judiciary on the American people. Conservatives, on the other hand, insist that in a democratic society, the people make the laws and the judges apply them. Liberals generally feel that "judges should have the power to make a ruling that specifically contravenes the Constitution and also goes against the wishes of the American people." One egregious example of liberal judicial activism is the so-called "right to privacy" that the Supreme Court found in the Constitution on which to base the legalization of abortion: this right was not found but fabricated.
Conservatives are generally pro-life while liberals are almost certainly pro-choice. In fact, being pro-choice is a litmus test for liberals hoping to have any success in politics, because it is here that personal autonomy, one of the two dogmas of liberalism, is most put to the test. Conservatives are pro-life because their less radical insistence on personal autonomy can be tempered by the overriding concern for another human being's right to life. Initially I disagreed with D'Souza's pro-life strategy. He calls hard line pro-lifers "fools" because their insistence on preventing all abortions will, in his opinion, have the result of preventing none. The reason is that the prolife movement does not enjoy the support of the American people that it would need to achieve this. Instead, he says we should focus on reducing the number of abortions as a step toward the ultimate goal of ending it. He reminds us of the strategy employed by Abraham Lincoln with the slavery issue. Although antislavery, Lincoln was not an abolitionist but instead worked toward curtailing the spread of slavery to the territories. During the Civil War, the outcome of the war was very much in question and Lincoln did not want the border states, which did have slaves, to also secede from the Union. So he carefully framed his case against the Confederacy not as one of slavery but as one of saving the Union. In this way his coalition was maintained, "a coalition whose victory was essential to the cause of antislavery." I find D'Souza's reasoning intriquing, and wonder if the pro-life movement might have more success by thinking along those lines.
Of all the chapters in the book, the one I am wary of is the one dealing with the environment. The title of the chapter, "Who cares about the snail darter?" raised a red flag from the start. His cavalier playing down of global warming concerns me. I am also not convinced by his dismissal of organic farming as inefficient, in favour of high-yield farming, assisted by bio-engineering and pesticides. He does claim that conservatives are concerned with the environment, admitting that "the stewardship of nature is now a human responsibility." He would, however, distinguish this reasonable concern with the liberal environmentalists, who "tend to operate in perpetual alarmist mode." He believes that they are opposing the solutions that have the greatest chance to work, solutions arising from growth, affluence, and technology.
D'Souza has given us an easy to read, informative overview of the terrain on which the conservative/liberal ideological battles are fought. Even a conservative doesn't have to agree with all his points to gain much from this valuable contribution.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet or computer – no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera, scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Top reviews from other countries
C.D.
Excellent Handbook for Young Conservatives
Reviewed in the United States on June 24, 2010Verified Purchase
Victoria
Inspirational - D'Souza analyzes today's political world...and how conservative young adults can join the conversation
Reviewed in the United States on September 15, 2012Verified Purchase
Art Vandelay
How to harpoon a liberal
Reviewed in the United States on April 29, 2011Verified Purchase
Y. Li
Funny Read
Reviewed in the United States on August 9, 2007Verified Purchase
Patrick Regan
an interesting introduction to conservative thought but only an introduction
Reviewed in the United States on September 10, 2006Verified Purchase
