User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: The Conservatism of Robert Nisbet

  1. #11
    Points: 395,069, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 58.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    388317
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    133,074
    Points
    395,069
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    12,387
    Thanked 35,885x in 26,715 Posts
    Mentioned
    1581 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Now I remember where I heard of him before, in Hawley's Right-wing Critics of American Conservatism. He's mentioned throughout the book actually but gets a section in a chapter on what the author calls localism. The Quest for Community is summarized. In it Nisbet defines community as encompassing all forms of relationship characterized by personal intimacy, emotional depth, moral commitment. social cohesion, and continuity in time. In that book and a later Twilight of Authority, Hawley says the key idea is that the central state grows as intermediate institutions decline.

    Nisbet did not see democracy as preventing totalitarianism. He aimed at disentangling the unitary view of democracy from the pluralistic. The unitary view, similar to Rousseau's General Will, called for an end of previous social loyalties to regional and local authorities and the "construction of a scene in which the individual would be the sole unit, and the State the sole associate, of society." On that view all intermediate institutions fractuare society and hinder social harmony. A state built on this philosophy may have the formal attributes of democracy such as equality, but it creates "conditions of social dislocation and moral alienation." Such a democracy is no guarantor of freedom.

    The pluralistic view of democracy maintains the importance of institutions and sources of authority that stand between the individual and the unitary state. Small-scale institutions that grow from the family, common interest and social needs protection against the totalitarian impulse. "Only in their social interdependencies are men given to resist tyranny that always threatens to arise out of any political government, democratic or otherwise. Where the individual stands alone in the face of the State he is helpless."

    (The quotes are Nisbet's.)
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Mister D (01-13-2018)

  3. #12
    Original Ranter
    Points: 201,371, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 40.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    389234
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    80,294
    Points
    201,371
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    15,696
    Thanked 26,176x in 18,938 Posts
    Mentioned
    839 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Now I remember where I heard of him before, in Hawley's Right-wing Critics of American Conservatism. He's mentioned throughout the book actually but gets a section in a chapter on what the author calls localism. The Quest for Community is summarized. In it Nisbet defines community as encompassing all forms of relationship characterized by personal intimacy, emotional depth, moral commitment. social cohesion, and continuity in time. In that book and a later Twilight of Authority, Hawley says the key idea is that the central state grows as intermediate institutions decline.

    Nisbet did not see democracy as preventing totalitarianism. He aimed at disentangling the unitary view of democracy from the pluralistic. The unitary view, similar to Rousseau's General Will, called for an end of previous social loyalties to regional and local authorities and the "construction of a scene in which the individual would be the sole unit, and the State the sole associate, of society." On that view all intermediate institutions fractuare society and hinder social harmony. A state built on this philosophy may have the formal attributes of democracy such as equality, but it creates "conditions of social dislocation and moral alienation." Such a democracy is no guarantor of freedom.

    The pluralistic view of democracy maintains the importance of institutions and sources of authority that stand between the individual and the unitary state. Small-scale institutions that grow from the family, common interest and social needs protection against the totalitarian impulse. "Only in their social interdependencies are men given to resist tyranny that always threatens to arise out of any political government, democratic or otherwise. Where the individual stands alone in the face of the State he is helpless."

    (The quotes are Nisbet's.)
    Interesting. That's a common conservative theme (bold).
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Critical Acclaim
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO