Word: belled
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1970-1979
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
First, American conservatism of the type both of us are talking about--that which postulates an organic, collective and hierarchical vision of society with a network of rights and responsibilities appropriate to each social group--is not a "deeply embedded tradition in this country." On the contrary, Bell's list of European-influenced literati and academics only reinforces my point: this brand of conservatism has never received a popular following in America, owing largely to the absence of a feudal aristocratic past. We have been "generally free of what Europeans would call men of the Right"--Right in the sense...
Second, it is true, as Bell says, that his intention (in his terms) is to separate economic "hedonism" from democratic rights and liberties, restraining the former and preserving the latter. But this is precisely what I could not grant him in the review (stated in my terms). In a society which justifies itself in terms of opportunity and mobility, we cannot restrain social groups in their economic demands--and historically "restraint" under corporate capitalism means sacrifices mainly borne by the working class--without restraining them politically. This would entail, in practice, vastly curtailing the power of the labor unions...
...Professor Bell who does not advocate this solution outright, then has only one alternative: he postulates the creation of a new culture (the old one, he says, has run its dissolute course) which may differentiate between the "sacred" and the "profane." The growth of a culture of restraint, as opposed to one of hedonism, might well avoid the need for an end to the political freedom we have known: social groups would moderate their own economic demands, making political repression superfluous. But the creation of such a culture out of whole cloth--against the traditions created by a more...
...initial paper to the Trilateral Commission because of the "sharp debate" it provoked among the commission's members. The reason for the criticism was, as I understand it, the Huntington paper's anti-democratic tone. In substance, this constitutes enough of a "rejection" for me, if not Professor Bell...
...glad for the opportunity to debate Professor Bell, although if I take any of his courses I will do so on a pass/fail basis...