What do you think?
Rate this book
The Conservative Affirmation in America
More than twenty years ago a maverick political scientist named Willmoore Kendall predicted the triumph of conservatism. Upon the 1963 publication of Kendall's The Conservative Affirmation , his former Yale student William F. Buckley, Jr. called him "one of the most superb and original political analysts of the 20th century," but even Buckley shook his head at what appeared to be Kendall's "baffling optimism."
During the 60's, Kendall stood apart from the mainstream conservative movement which he accused of being anti-populist and of "storming American public opinion from without" by wrongly assuming that the American people were essentially corrupt and "always ready to sell thier votes to the highest bidder." Kendall believed that Americans would come to actively realize the conservatism which they had always actually lived. Seventeen years after his death in 1967, Kendall's predictions come to fruition.
During the 60's, Kendall stood apart from the mainstream conservative movement which he accused of being anti-populist and of "storming American public opinion from without" by wrongly assuming that the American people were essentially corrupt and "always ready to sell thier votes to the highest bidder." Kendall believed that Americans would come to actively realize the conservatism which they had always actually lived. Seventeen years after his death in 1967, Kendall's predictions come to fruition.
- GenresPolitics
272 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1985
4 people are currently reading
116 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
April 23, 2020
First, the official Goodreads description of this book is appallingly bad. To paraphrase Wolfgang Pauli, not only is it not right, it’s not even wrong. I’m tempted to post a line-by-line refutation. But no, let’s stick with the task at hand.
Kendall is a largely forgotten conservative political theorist who seems to have thought so long and so deeply about enduring questions that he was paralyzed when it came to producing significant scholarship. He was, however, wickedly insightful when critiquing the works of others, which yields two reasons this volume is worth reading:
First, he intriguingly challenges received wisdom about American politics. He attacks, for instance, the notion that the U.S. Founders were direct intellectual descendants of John Locke, whom he hogties, shoves into a barrel with John Stuart Mill, and rolls off George Washington’s enormous Mt. Rushmore forehead.
This foray is part of a larger attack against the concept of the open society, wherein free speech is the highest good. The open society, Kendall argued, invites increasing dispersal of opinion in communities, which depend on shared beliefs and values. As if anticipating the modern American cultivation of individually tailored worldviews, each sustained by Twitter feeds and “news” sources of our choice, Kendall argued that this dispersal of opinion invites “irresponsible speculation and irresponsible utterance. As time passes, moreover, the extremes of opinion will—as they did in Weimar—get further and further apart, so that...their bearers can less and less tolerate even the thought of one another, still less one another’s presence in society.” I challenge you to find a better pre-1970 prophecy about modern American politics.
The second reason to read this volume is that Kendall’s turns of phrase are what one might achieve after cross-breeding G.K. Chesterton with a honey badger. Because I feel no need to offer more organization and thematic constraint than Kendall himself did, I’ll leave you with a few hand-curated gems:
“One begins to suspect that the true American tradition is less that of our Fourth of July orations and our constitutional law textbooks, with their cluck-clucking over the so-called preferred freedoms, than, quite simply, that of riding somebody out of town on a rail.”
“My own instinct would be to let [American Communist Party leader] Gus Hall speak freely pretty much anywhere—until such time as the American people have the good sense to deport him to the Soviet Union.”
“The man or woman who wishes to exercise a right to be heard has a logically and temporally prior obligation to prepare himself for participation in the exchange.”
Regarding the radical who wants to undo American society: “The stigmata by which he is to be recognized are the various forms of the wish to live off our Civilization and benefit from the commitments it imposes upon others, but not live within them.”
Regarding the liberal Christian activist: “He speaks of the new religion just over the horizon in language that suggests he is thinking of founding it.”
Kendall is a largely forgotten conservative political theorist who seems to have thought so long and so deeply about enduring questions that he was paralyzed when it came to producing significant scholarship. He was, however, wickedly insightful when critiquing the works of others, which yields two reasons this volume is worth reading:
First, he intriguingly challenges received wisdom about American politics. He attacks, for instance, the notion that the U.S. Founders were direct intellectual descendants of John Locke, whom he hogties, shoves into a barrel with John Stuart Mill, and rolls off George Washington’s enormous Mt. Rushmore forehead.
This foray is part of a larger attack against the concept of the open society, wherein free speech is the highest good. The open society, Kendall argued, invites increasing dispersal of opinion in communities, which depend on shared beliefs and values. As if anticipating the modern American cultivation of individually tailored worldviews, each sustained by Twitter feeds and “news” sources of our choice, Kendall argued that this dispersal of opinion invites “irresponsible speculation and irresponsible utterance. As time passes, moreover, the extremes of opinion will—as they did in Weimar—get further and further apart, so that...their bearers can less and less tolerate even the thought of one another, still less one another’s presence in society.” I challenge you to find a better pre-1970 prophecy about modern American politics.
The second reason to read this volume is that Kendall’s turns of phrase are what one might achieve after cross-breeding G.K. Chesterton with a honey badger. Because I feel no need to offer more organization and thematic constraint than Kendall himself did, I’ll leave you with a few hand-curated gems:
“One begins to suspect that the true American tradition is less that of our Fourth of July orations and our constitutional law textbooks, with their cluck-clucking over the so-called preferred freedoms, than, quite simply, that of riding somebody out of town on a rail.”
“My own instinct would be to let [American Communist Party leader] Gus Hall speak freely pretty much anywhere—until such time as the American people have the good sense to deport him to the Soviet Union.”
“The man or woman who wishes to exercise a right to be heard has a logically and temporally prior obligation to prepare himself for participation in the exchange.”
Regarding the radical who wants to undo American society: “The stigmata by which he is to be recognized are the various forms of the wish to live off our Civilization and benefit from the commitments it imposes upon others, but not live within them.”
Regarding the liberal Christian activist: “He speaks of the new religion just over the horizon in language that suggests he is thinking of founding it.”
December 25, 2019
Kendall's conservatism is based on the Federalists, not Locke nor Burke, which sets him apart from thinkers like Russell Kirk and Frank Meyer. Very interesting analysis of the philosophy within the structure of the congressional and presidential elections in the US. His conservative attack on Millian free speech is also worth reading and comparing to the conservatism of America today. Finally, his analysis of contract theory and pacifism is superb.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews