Contrasting positions on American exceptionalism go to the heart of what distinguishes the 2016 Republican presidential field from its Democratic counterpart.
Progressivism marches relentlessly toward its destination: the one true secular kingdom.
The College Board wants to ensure that students learn about America only at its worst.
Israel has long sought both a distinctively Jewish identity and modern nationhood. Wise leadership can enable it to achieve each.
[Subscription Required] Of all the strange and remarkable features of politics in the Trump era, among the least surprising is the alliance between conservatism and populism.
The world continues to feed Palestinians’ delusions that they will one day return to land that is now part of Israel—encouraging the Palestinians to spurn peaceful solutions that could actually be attained.
In “Why Liberalism Failed,” Patrick Deneen contends that today’s liberal regimes deserve to perish because they do not live up to the classical conception of political excellence. But the spirit of his critique clashes with the purpose of the ancients’ examination of the best regime.
Patrick Deneen’s disdainful review last month in the Washington Post of George Will’s splendid new book, “The Conservative Sensibility,” reasserts fashionable misconceptions about liberalism, conservatism, and America. The review — and, more importantly, the book — provide an occasion to clarify the character of the conservatism that takes its bearings from the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and from the ideas about human nature and freedom that undergird them.
A nation that “encourages its citizens to challenge authority, ask the next question, and defy the obvious.”
Conservatives have always had their differences. Uniting them in this fractious age means reconciling two things: freedom and tradition.
Colleges and universities honor free inquiry in theory, but not always in fact. How to keep higher education true to its values.
“Nothing is so obscure it does not deserve to be found.” These words are from Delba Winthrop’s 1974 dissertation on Book III of Aristotle’s Politics, a document high on the list of things that deserve to be found. When Winthrop died in 2006, her dissertation was still unpublished despite the protestations of her husband, Harvey Mansfield, perhaps the dean of conservative political philosophy in this country.
The swearing in of the 116th Congress next month returns divided government to Washington. A Democratic-controlled House coupled with a fortified Republican Senate majority is likely to exacerbate the rancor and vitriol that have suffused national politics since long before Donald Trump’s theatrical announcement in the summer of 2015 that he was running for president.
In back rooms and think tanks, Republicans are already mourning their party—and plotting the fight over who’s going to be in it after Trump.
In “Why Liberalism Failed,” Patrick Deneen makes an eye-opening contribution to the critique of liberalism. Equating liberalism with the modern tradition of freedom, he distills abuses of state power, nature, culture, technology, and education that are undertaken in freedom’s name yet leave citizens less self-sufficient, less disposed to cooperate, and less capable of looking beyond material goods and social status to the cultivation of character and to the claims of duty.
Why do conservatives believe in free markets and limited government? Because they make life better—especially for those in need.
Europeans have failed to cherish, and now to defend, the nation-state system. Americans must pay heed.
A new theory of Jewish nationalism promises to be more liberal than the old one. But it profoundly misunderstands Zionism—and liberalism.