The birth of the right and left

7916-square-400The great divide in American politics can be traced back to the French Revolution and the ensuing ‘argument’ between these two dudes.

Yuval Levin’s book The Great Debate: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, and the Birth of Right and Left is out, sounds pretty awesome.  Jonah Goldberg has a few thoughts (in advance of a full-blown review) here:

As Levin shows, Burke, the father of modern conservatism, and Paine, an early champion of progressivism, were liberals in the sense that both defended a free society. But their assumptions about human nature and society led them to very different places. In a sense, they were protagonists in the earliest rounds of a two-century-old culture war.

Paine saw the individual as the irreducible unit of society, and the state as the guarantor not just of liberty but of personal empowerment. He held that with the right application of scientific principles, an egalitarian utopia could be achieved. It would simply require tearing down the prejudices, customs, and habits of the old order, just as the French revolutionaries were doing. Paine eventually saw few distinctions between legal and cultural impediments to liberty, which is why he came to denounce Christianity as “repugnant to reason.”

For Burke, no man is an island. We are born into families and communities, and it is these and other institutions that give our lives meaning. Society is a complex and mysterious ecosystem, and no set of experts or “sophisters . . . and calculators” can impose scientific perfection on it. Any attempt to do so would threaten to destroy all that makes life meaningful. A reformer and proponent of progress, Burke nonetheless believed that progress must be accomplished gradually, not in one fell swoop of a social engineer’s pen.

Perhaps Levin’s most telling insight is that all of Burke’s metaphors about government are about space, while Paine’s are about movement. The Burkean believes government is there to give all of the institutions of society room to thrive and discover what is good through trial and error. The Paineian sees progress as a society-wide movement, led by government, with no safe harbors from the Cause. This is why Paine was one of the earliest advocates of a welfare state — funded by a massive inheritance tax — that would intervene to empower every individual.

President Obama’s second inaugural was a thoroughly Paineian document. In his telling, America is made up of individuals and a government with nary anything in between. And because “no single person” can do the things that need to be done, “we must do these things together, as one nation,” leaving no room for the diverse institutions of civil society.

The debate over homosexuality and gay marriage is part of a much larger debate that includes everything from Obamacare — particularly its hostility to religious exemptions — to school vouchers, federalism, and the “wars” on women, Christmas, trans fats, and inequality.

The children of Burke form the philosophical core of what was called the “leave-me-alone coalition,” a broad group of institutions and individuals who rightly, and occasionally wrongly, rejected a top-down effort to impose a one-size-fits-all vision of society. The children of Paine, empowered by their sense of cosmic justice, want all of society’s oars to pull as one. And if you don’t pull your oar to the beat of their drum, prepare for their wrath.

This entry was posted in Freedom, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The birth of the right and left

  1. Thomas Paine made his name as a critic of big government. But, tragically, he fell into the fallacy (prepared by Rousseau) that if the government was democratic then big government was O.K. – indeed more than O.K.

    Paper (fiat) money, government financed education, care for the old. for the sick, for the poor (for …….) was all desirable – as long as the government was democratic.

    Edmund Burke also looked beyond the individual – but NOT to the state, Burke looked to voluntary cooperation, mutual aid – to the “small platoons” of Civil Society (indeed Burke believed that an expanding government undermined and, eventually. destroyed Civil Society).

    To Alexis de Toqueville the great difference between the French Revolutionary tradition and that of the Americans was that the French looked to the government – and the Americans looked to themselves (refusing to fall for the fallacy of Rousseau, and the later Thomas Paine, that a democratic government was the people) .

    Sadly the American tradition has been undermined – now “community” too often means “Community Organisers” organising POLITICS (looking for government hand outs).

    And yes “atomistic individualism” is NOT the idea of “the right” – it was, in fact, the idea of the Jacobins – the idea that there is only the government and individuals (no voluntary institutions – such as churches – but also no independent secular clubs, other than the Jacobins themselves). Even to this day (since 1905) church buildings are owned by the government in France.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s