text: The fatalistic view of Conservativism is expressed by Kirk even before the first chapter concludes as he states, "[Edmund] Burke, could he see our century, never would concede that a consumption-society, so near suicide, is the end for which Providence has prepared man".  But wait. The Conservative Mind was first published in 1953, the mythical golden age of America with Ward and June Cleaver and Normal Rockwell. Meanwhile, Burke, a contemporary of the 18th century is pining for the 14th century. What a depressing ideology to think that we always live in the worst of times.
  
  There are certain ideological threads that carry throughout the book including a belief in the stratification of society. Voting should be the privilege of a small minority rather than universal democracy which Kirk saw as contributing to a degradation of society. Kirk writes, "What men really are seeking, or ought to seek, is not the right to govern themselves, but the right to be governed well" but what he offers is a lack of true representation. The author pines for the days of the aristocrat and although he defines the elites by wealth, intellect and lineage he clearly includes race and gender. Is it so surprising that Kirk lauds some of the worst racists in American history like Nathanial Bedford Forrest whom he describes as `magnificent' before quoting his racist vitriol? In a particularly galling move he referrers to pro-slavery advocate John C. Calhoun as a `defender of minorities' and praises John Randolph for, among other things, opposing doctrines of racial equality. Kirk goes on about Calhoun's support for states rights but his support only extended to southern states as he supported the Fugitive Slave Act which forced federal officials and law officials in Northern states to return runaway slave under penalty of $1000 fine. He supported laws that would make it illegal for northerners to even protest slavery. For Calhoun states rights were nothing more than a self serving attempt to keep slavery safe. Kirk shows his own racist stripes when he refers to northern `anti-slavery agitation' and supports Calhoun for choosing racial preservation over liberty, although Calhoun has an extremely warped view of liberty. One wonders if Kirk could even fathom the supreme irony in stating the Calhoun mounted a `strong protest against domination by class or region'.
  
  Another thread is his desire to see the reunification of church and state. The duty of the church is to keep the unclean masses in line. Quoting Samuel Coleridge, the author makes it clear that the truth or falsity of the church is irrelevant; it is an institution that must be preserved as the primary means of social control. Sounding like the inspiration for disgraced Chief Justice Roy Moore, Russell Kirk urges that, "state and church ought never to be separate entities, true religion is not merely an expression of national spirit; it rises far superior to earthly law, being, indeed, the source of all law". Kirk sees a difference between the faulty laws of man and the laws of God but never draws a distinction. I have to wonder if, like the modern Reconstructionist, Kirk wanted to see the laws of Leviticus imposed including executing homosexuals and blasphemers. He never explains how one might recognize a law of God besides using prejudice.
  
  The third thread would be Kirk's anti-intellectual (or perhaps pro-stupid) stance. He refers to human reason as `puny' and `impotent' and claims that we find the mind of God in prejudice and tradition. `Prejudice', he writes, `is of ready application in the emergency; it previously engages the mind in a steady course of wisdom and virtue, and does not leave the man hesitating in the moment of decision, skeptical, puzzled, and unresolved'. Actually what he is advocating is for the general population to turn over rational thought to the church and those higher up the social chain. Citizens are encouraged to exhibit awe and veneration for God and those in higher stations and authority.
  
  In order to grab the golden fleece of populism Conservatives have lately had to abandon overt stratification although veneration of wealth is certainly still evident. Like Calhoun the support for states rights remains a complete faade. I found Russell Kirk's salesmanship of Conservativism generally repellent but recommend the book because it remains a fairly enlightening view of an ideology that continues to thrive to this day.
  