Conservatism In An Aqal Context

I SUPPOSE that most folks around the integral world think that conservatism and AQAL are mutually exclusive. After all, we all know that conservatives are blue/amber or business orange, or even red power types. And they really have little understanding of any other levels/stages/spirals.

In the spirit of How the Irish Invented Civilization I would argue that conservatives invented AQAL.

The First Conservative, according to Huston Smith in The World Religions, would have been Confucius. In the Warring States period he devised a philosophy to deal with the unrestrained power-mad egos of the age. He proposed a conscious tradition of venerating the ancestors to replace the unthinking worship of the ancestors that had broken down, thus controlling the war-lords and their warrior retainers by constructing a self-conscious tradition of filial piety. He was building a blue/amber stage of rules to deal with the red power gods that had emerged from the ancient tribal purple culture of China.

In our European culture the first conservative was Edmund Burke. In 1790, three years before the Terror, he predicted that the French Revolution would end in tears. Against the enthusiasts for an Age of Reason he advocated for prejudice and precept.

We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on his own private stock of reason; because we suspect that this stock in each man is small, and that the individuals would do better to avail themselves of the general bank and capital of nations and of ages.

Burke was a reformer, but he insisted that the creative culture of reason should respect the inarticulate culture of tradition.

Conservatism, writes Roger Scruton, is a modernism. It is not an unthinking celebration of traditional culture; it emerges when the unthinking traditional society breaks down, when men and women start to question why we do things the way we do. It asks what would happen if we abandoned the old ways completely, and it steps back from the abyss. On this view, of course, conservatism is reasoning from a higher stage to understand and accommodate a lower stage. It insists that we cannot just throw over the traditional ways and replace them all with new creative answers to the questions of how to live. The new must build on and respect the old. Otherwise we get the disaster of 1793 and the Stalinist Terror of the 1930s.

But all along, conservatives have been critics of the Brave New World of progress. In 1922 when progressives were seeing the future in the Soviet Union and reporting that it worked, the Austrian Jew Ludwig von Mises predicted that socialism could not work because it could not compute prices. In 1944 his student F.A. Hayek predicted that democratic socialism would lead to a future that would not work because the man in Washington could not have the knowledge and flexibility of a million consumers and producers. David Brooks’ piece on today’s social entrepreneurs last weekend was pure Hayek:

The older do-gooders had a certain policy model: government identifies a problem. Really smart people design a program. A cabinet department in a big building administers it.

But the new do-gooders have absorbed the disappointments of the past decades. They have a much more decentralized worldview. They don’t believe government on its own can be innovative. A thousand different private groups have to try new things. Then we measure to see what works.

Then there is the enigmatic Eric Voegelin. In the middle of the twentieth century he attacked the truth vs. lie, knowledge vs. superstition way of comparing the modern era with the past. Humans advance by “leaps in being” he wrote, where we move from compact to differentiated knowledge. In this view, new knowledge does not so much sweep away old knowledge as superstition, but fills in the details of compact ideas and corrects their oversimplifications. You could call it “transcend and include.”

Voegelin’s most well-known idea was his critique of modern secular religions such as socialism, communism, and fascism. He faulted them for “immanentizing the eschaton.” That’s a fancy way of saying that you can never create Heaven on Earth. It is their knowledge of Voegelin that leads conservatives to be skeptical of the Obama phenomenon. Jonah Goldberg, author of Liberal Fascism:

Obamania is doomed to fail for the same reason all such movements are doomed to failure: You can’t create a heaven on earth. You can’t immanentize the eschaton. The perfect life, if it exists at all, must be found in the next life. But even though utopian dreams are forever out of reach, there’s no reason for us to assume that people won’t always strive for them. Such is both the audacity, and the folly, of hope.

Conservatives have of course, made appalling errors. One of them was a reluctance to embrace the civil rights agenda of the 1960s. Another is that the “daddy conservatism” of the last 30 years really did not speak to women conservatives. In my view the “social conservative” wing of the Republican Party and the so-called “Religious Right” are really a movement of conservative women reacting against the destruction of the culture of children and family in the last half century. Even though single “women with needs” are the primary supporters of the welfare state, it is my belief that the welfare state with its hierarchical bureaucratic model is profoundly anti-woman. You organize an army of male warriors with a vertical hierarchy. The community of women is a flat hierarchy where every woman demands to be treated with equal and reciprocal respect.

Conservatism is AQAL aware, although it does not speak in the language of Wilber or of Beck. It is different in another way. Whereas most integral types are interested in progress, in getting on up into second tier and experiencing higher states of consciousness, conservatives look downwards and backwards.

You might say that while most folks at Seattle Integral look to the sunny green uplands of higher consciousness and spirituality, conservatives are more interested in keeping the mountain roads in good working order, so that more people can find the way up out of the hot and dusty plain onto, e.g., the Road to the Middle Class. Most of them will not make it to the second tier mountain peaks, but they could benefit greatly from a well-marked trail into the alpine meadows of the first tier foothills.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at americanmanifestobook.blogspot.com.

Buy his Road to the Middle Class.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

TAGS

Faith & Purpose

“When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of ages—they seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings...”
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990

Mutual Aid

In 1911... at least nine million of the 12 million covered by national insurance were already members of voluntary sick pay schemes. A similar proportion were also eligible for medical care.
Green, Reinventing Civil Society

Education

“We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.”
E. G. West, Education and the State

Living Under Law

Law being too tenuous to rely upon in [Ulster and the Scottish borderlands], people developed patterns of settling differences by personal fighting and family feuds.
Thomas Sowell, Conquests and Cultures

German Philosophy

The primary thing to keep in mind about German and Russian thought since 1800 is that it takes for granted that the Cartesian, Lockean or Humean scientific and philosophical conception of man and nature... has been shown by indisputable evidence to be inadequate.
F.S.C. Northrop, The Meeting of East and West

Knowledge

Inquiry does not start unless there is a problem... It is the problem and its characteristics revealed by analysis which guides one first to the relevant facts and then, once the relevant facts are known, to the relevant hypotheses.
F.S.C. Northrop, The Logic of the Sciences and the Humanities

Chappies

“But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.” —Freddy Arbuthnot
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison

Democratic Capitalism

I mean three systems in one: a predominantly market economy; a polity respectful of the rights of the individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and a system of cultural institutions moved by ideals of liberty and justice for all. In short, three dynamic and converging systems functioning as one: a democratic polity, an economy based on markets and incentives, and a moral-cultural system which is plural and, in the largest sense, liberal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism

Action

The incentive that impels a man to act is always some uneasiness... But to make a man act [he must have] the expectation that purposeful behavior has the power to remove or at least to alleviate the felt uneasiness.
Ludwig von Mises, Human Action

Churches

[In the] higher Christian churches... they saunter through the liturgy like Mohawks along a string of scaffolding who have long since forgotten their danger. If God were to blast such a service to bits, the congregation would be, I believe, genuinely shocked. But in the low churches you expect it every minute.
Annie Dillard, Holy the Firm

Conversion

“When we received Christ,” Phil added, “all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.”
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh

Living Law

The recognition and integration of extralegal property rights [in the Homestead Act] was a key element in the United States becoming the most important market economy and producer of capital in the world.
Hernando de Soto, The Mystery of Capital

Home

American Manifesto

Chapters

Chappies

roadtothemiddleclass

presented by Christopher Chantrill

Follow @chrischantrill • Contact