Lost Histories – by William Green

Given today’s political turmoil and polarization, what we’re talking about is not always clear. Again, the militarization of citizenship, the party of chaos, or the war abroad. It may be worth revisiting the old divisions of history that we misunderstood. Reclaiming those pasts may help us restore a common future.

Liberalism refers to American constitutional order based on rights, citizen equality, government limited under law, freedom secured by equality, and religion as a matter of citizen. Conservatism refers to traditions rooted in honor of inherited institutions and cultural norms, priorities of social order and moral obligations, freedom secured by tradition, freedom as a cultural force.

Both are free to appeal, but I remember a variety of sources. Liberalism forgets the origins of individual responsibility. Conservatism forgets the root of prudence. In either case, religion often becomes a projection of partisan morality.

Three voices help us remember what is lost. Roger Scraton states, “The good thing is easily destroyed, but not easily created. In the prominent voice of new conservatism, political theorist Patrick DeNine shows that the historian of liberal thinking is not a demand for liberal missions, but a demand for liberalism.

Scraton Briefs Conservatism Called by Wall Street Journal “One of the most eloquent and moving evocations of conservative traditions in Western politics, philosophy and culture.” Scruton begins by paying attention to how creeds seem irrelevant. It upsetted populism on one side and liberalism on the other. But the relevance is always relative: what ends?

For Scouton, conservatism is important when supporting human prosperity in an already dominant liberal order. Conservatives “Adapt” I won’t refuse.

One insight brings Scouton, Deneyneur and Rosenblatt together. Humans are social before they are free. America’s very good individualism is unhealthy when it means autonomy. We form attachments to family, friends, places, habits and institutions. This natural sociality is a “basic well of conservative thinking,” and claims to ingrain the work of maintaining a network of familiarity and trust about which communities their communities depend on.

Therefore, conservatism is not anti-liberalism, but a correction to liberal excess. Enthusiasm for liberation ignores the fragile value of what constrains us. Liberalism, unconfirmed, erodes the source of tradition and order. It’s not how communities arise, responsibility endure, or people thrive.

DeNine offers parallel criticism, claiming that both conservatives and liberals will reduce politics to market power and management control. Democracy has stripped its citizens. Both may add that freedom is reduced to the autonomy of privilege. Unlimited freedom rooted in the community will degenerate into a license. We defend freedom.

Rosenblatt, Indian The history of lost liberalismthe early Liberals also spoke about obligations on rights, affirming their families and reminding them that they believed religion could be a force for social reform. Liberalism was then narrowed down to the ideology of choice.

These historical insights shed light on our present moment. From the beginning, America has been arguing for itself whether it is based on a unsettling mix of faith, freedom, or both. Today, the argument has intensified into something even more troublesome. During the monthly Christian prayer service at the Pentagon, the minister of defense, who heads the Tennessee Church associated with theocratic (and self-explained “Art-Confederate”) theologian Doug Wilson, led the services. He suggested that Donald Trump was appointed God. Trump’s call to “forget” the separation of church and state, supported by a committee of Maga’s Loyalists, has so far led to little protest from conservatives.

Such a gesture would have hit Scooton as embarrassment – humiliated by the civic-oriented spirit that conservatism seeks to nurture him at his best. DeNine reports on his accusations against liberalism and calls for renewal rooted in tradition and community. Rosenblatt reminds us that liberalism itself is an ongoing debate over what freedom entails.

Keep that argument alive – Democracy wins, not denies true differences and seeks a solution, but aims for a deeper understanding. Competing traditions include the resources they need and their wise critics to clarify the notion of goodness that exposes their caricatures. They are their own most important tasks.

America has always been a lover’s argument. As James Baldwin said, “We can’t change everything we face, but nothing will change unless we face it.” And, as Lincoln declared, “The fiery trials we face will either advance our memories or advance disgrace for generations to come.”

Notes and reading

Disclosure: Patrick DeNine and I share permanent debt with the same leader, the very confused Wilson Carrie McWilliams, although generations apart. DeNine has become one of the most prominent figures in the current conservative movement, and is in demand as a Notre Dame speaker and professor. He was generous in attracting my various views, but the account here is mine only and rich in exchange, but to speak only for myself.

• Roger Scruton, Conservatism: An invitation to great traditions (2018). Scouton was one of the most influential and conservative philosophers of the late 20th and early 21st centuries, presenting conservatism as an intellectual and cultural tradition rooted in loyalty, community and inherited wisdom.

• Patrick J. Denine, Why did liberalism fail? (2018) and Change of government: Towards a post-liberal future (2023). DeNine is a professor of political science and holds a commemorative chair in constitutional research at Notre Dame. His criticism of liberalism shapes the debate about post-liberal reorganization. His early works won the American Political Science Association Leo Strauss Prize for his finest papers in political philosophy.

• Helena Rosenblatt, The history of lost liberalism (2018). Rosenblatt is a professor of history at the Graduate Center at City University of New York. A leading historian of political thought, her work redefines an understanding of the origins and development of liberalism, restoring cultural, intellectual and religious aspects.

• Kathryn Joyce, “American heretic”In these timesMay 29, 2025). She traces the lineage of opponents, from the Covenant of the 18th century to today’s unified and Christian nationalists. They reject the central commitments of liberal democracy, such as rights, pluralism, and the separation of church and state. She positions today’s liberalism in this long and challenging tradition. Joyce is an investigative journalist and author who writes widely about religion and politics.

• Although not directly discussed here, the key in the background is Sheldon S. Wallin, Princeton’s political professor and radical democratic theorist. While criticizing liberalism from the left, he also challenged the orthodox leftist approach, taking responsibility for both conservative and liberal management bias. Unrated as “demotic irrationality,” he warned against “the cheap flattering of the ironic demagogues of right-wing populism.” For Warrin, the job was to “revitalize populism” while continuing to be disciplined by its excess.He would have lamented Donald Trump and the Maga movement..
  – Establishment of democracy: managed democracy and reversed totalitarianism (2017), especially CHS. 12–13; Also The existence of the past (1989), ch. 7, “E Pluribus unum: Representation of differences and reconstruction of collectivity.” Do not postpone the academic tag. Warrin is worth reading.

Tip #224 – Not the first time

Tip #223 – Eternal Mathematics

Approx. 2 + 2 = 5