|
The
Roots of Conservatism*
By Frank Meyer
Western
civilization arose in southern and western Europe on the ruins of
the Roman empire, the final political form of Classical civilization.
It is and has always been unique among the great civilizations of
the past five thousand years, whose existence is the substance of
recorded history.
For
the first twenty-five hundred years of recorded history men lived
in civilizations of similar styles, a style for which the Egyptian
may stand as the type. These cosmological civilizations conceived
of existence so tightly unified and compactly fashioned that there
was no room for distinction and contrast between the individual
person and the social order, between the cosmos and human order,
between heaven and earth, between what is and what ought to be.
God
and king, the rhythms of nature and the occupations of men, social
custom and the moral imperative, were felt not as paired opposites
but as integral unities. The life of men in these civilizations,
in good times and bad, in happiness and unhappiness, proceeded in
harmony and accord with nature, which knows no separation between
what is and what ought to be, no tension between order and freedom,
no striving of the person for individuation or the complement of
that striving, the inner personal clash between the aspirations
of the naked self and the moral responsibilities impressed by the
very constitution of being.
Exceptions,
modifications, to this basic mode of human life there undoubtedly
were. Man in his essence has always been, as Aristotle long ago
saw, part animal, part spiritual. The clash at the center of his
nature was never totally stilled. We have indeed documents from
Mesopotamia and Egypt which show the stirrings of the impulses that
shaped later ages. Nevertheless these are but stirrings; they do
not express the age or affect the essential character of the cosmological
civilization. They are but premonitions of what is to come.
When
it came, it came with historic suddenness. It came in different
ways and for different reasons among two peoples of two new civilizations-the
Greeks of Classical civilization and the Jews of the Syriac civilization.
The way of its coming was as different as the character of these
two peoples was different, but the new understanding was in essence
the same. It shattered the age-old identity of the historic and
the cosmic. It burst asunder the unity of what ought to be and what
is. It faced individual men for the first time with the necessity
of deep-going moral choice. In a word, it destroyed the unity of
what is done by human beings and what they should do to reach the
heights their nature opens to them. And, in doing so, this understanding
created, for the first time, the conditions for individuation, for
the emergence of the person as the center of human existence, by
separating the immanent from the transcendent, the immemorial mode
of living from its previous identity with the very constitution
of being. The arrangements of society were dissociated from the
sanction of ultimate cosmic necessity; they were desanctified and
left open to the judgment of human beings. But that transcendent
sanction remained the basis of the judgment of human life. The transcendent
was not destroyed; it was reaffirmed in terms more profound and
awesome than ever. The earthly immanent and the transcendent heavenly
remained, but how were they to be related each to each?
The
nexus, the connecting link between the transcendent and the immanent,
between the eternal and the historical, could be no other than the
human person. Living in both worlds, subjected by the demands of
his nature to transcendent value and at the same time maker of history
and master of society, he was suddenly (suddenly as historical process
goes) revealed to himself as a creature whose fate it was to bridge
this newly yawning gulf.
I
am not saying, of course, that the multitudes who made up Hellenic
and Judaic society thought in these terms or even dimly glimpsed
them conceptually. I do maintain two things: first, that the inspires
of the two societies, the prophets of Judah and Israel and the philosophers
of Greece, grasped this new condition of mankind, grasped it in
fear and trembling, and, secondly, that their understanding shaped
the enduring ethos of their societies as surely the ethos of the
Pharaoh God-King shaped the society of Egypt.
This
common understanding of the Judaic and Hellenic cultures was expressed,
of course, in radically different forms-- so different, indeed,
that these cultures have been more commonly conceived as polar opposites
than as different expressions of the same stupendous insight. This
is not to deny what is sharply opposed in the two cultures, most
especially their different understandings of the relationship of
man to the transcendent. But the overriding fact is that in both
these cultures, at their highest level, there emerged a clear distinction
between the world and transcendent, as well as the startlingly new
concept of a direct relationship between men and the transcendent.
In
the Hellenic civilization it was the philosophical movement culminating
with Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle that raised to the level of
the consciousness this new understanding of the nature of men and
their relations to ultimate things. The sense of the individual,
the person as over against society had been inherent in the ethos
of the Greeks from the dim beginnings of Hellenic civilization.
Such a sense is apparent already in Hesiod and Homer. It inspires
the human scale of the archaic temples, as contrasted with the monstrous
inhumanity of scale of ziggurat, pyramid, and sphinx. But this inherent
tendency of the Greek spirit did not, for a number of reasons, decisively
shape Hellenic society. In the beginning, in the Northern war bands
from which it arose, the collectivity of the pack contended always
against the individual spirit; also, from that heritage it drew
a religious practice and a pantheon of gods almost devoid of transcendence.
Further, Hellenic civilization developed in its youth under the
looming influence of the great cosmological civilizations of the
East, and when the aridity of its inherited pantheon drove men to
search further, the mystery religions which arose were saturated
through and through with Eastern concepts. Finally, when the civilization
reached maturity, the classical social form it assumed was the polis,
the city-state, which was a tight unity of society, government,
and religion. Despite the fact that within that form there was immeasurably
greater room for the development of the individual personal consciousness
than in the older civilizations, the shadow of the past and the
limiting shackles of the life of the polis smothered and distorted
the full emergence of the new consciousness.
The
Judaic experience was extraordinary parallel to the Hellenic, although
its content was very different. The Hebrew prophets, like the Greek
philosophers, expressed, at the highest level, the consciousness
of a people broken loose from cosmological civilization to confront
transcendence. As Exodus is the symbol of that breaking away, the
content of the Judaic experience of transcendence is the belief
in a unique, personal, revealed God.
But
here also, as among the Greeks, a social structure distorted the
individual experience of transcendence. The potentialities for full
individuation inherent in the concept of a God of Righteousness
were collectivized. The concept of the b'rith, the compact between
God and the Chosen People, placed the collectivity of the Judaic
people, rather than the individuals who made up that collectivity,
as the receptor of the interchange with transcendence. The Prophets
strove mightily with these circumstances, as the Greek philosophers
struggled with the circumstances of the polis. Future events have
taken from them both an inspiration and an understanding that are
derived from the thrust of their struggle towards individuation,
but neither the philosophy of Hellas nor the prophecy of Israel
ever completely threw off the conditioning influence of their social
and intellectual heritage.
At
the heights of the philosophical and Prophetic endeavors, in a Plato
or a proto-Isaiah, as occasionally among their predecessors and
followers, the vision cleared and a simple confrontation between
individual men and transcendence stood for a moment sharply limned.
But at these heights of understanding another problem arose, one
I have referred to above when discussing the Hellenic experience
and have called the problem of Utopianism. A clear vision of the
naked confrontation of individual men with transcendence created
a yawning gap in human consciousness. It was something of the effect
of eating the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
On the one hand stood the perfection of transcendence, and on the
other the imperfection of human existence. The temptation was enormous
to close that intolerable gap, to grasp that understood transcendent
perfection and by sheer human will to make it live on earth, to
impose it on other human beings--by persuasion if possible, by force
if necessary.
The
same temptation beset the Hellenic philosophers at their highest
reach of vision. The effect of this temptation was portentous for
the future, because of its continuing impact upon both the Hellenic
and the Judaic traditions, the twin sources from which our Western
civilization derives so much of its content. Its effects can be
perceived in the most diverse areas: in the effect on Western thought
of the concepts of molding human life implicit in the Utopian society
of Plato's Republic or in the dictatorial powers of the Nocturnal
Council in his somewhat less rigid Laws; or in the actual political
absolutism, derived from the Judaic tradition, of such politics
as Calvin's Geneva or Spain of the Inquisition of Cromwell's England.
Secularized with the passage of time, the Utopian desire to impose
a pattern of what the imposers considered perfection becomes ever
more rigid, total, and terrible, as in the all-powerful Nation of
the French Revolution or the Dictatorship of the Proletariat of
the Communists.
The
Utopian temptation arises out the very clarity of vision that tore
asunder the cosmological world-view. Released from the comforting,
if smothering, certainties of identification with the cosmic order,
men became aware of their freedom to shape their destiny--but with
that freedom came an awesome sense of responsibility. For the same
leap forward that made them fully conscious of their own identity
and their own freedom made them conscious also of the infinite majesty
and beauty of transcendence and of the criterion of existence that
perfection puts before human beings, who in their imperfection possess
the freedom to strive to emulate perfection. A yawning gulf was
opened between infinity and finity.
The
history of Western civilization is the history of the struggle to
carry forward its insight of tension, both against the remaining
inherited traumas of the cosmological attitude in its social structure
and in its intellectual outlook and against the continuing recrudescence
of Utopianism. For Western civilization inherited, as the Hellenic
and Judaic did before it, much continuing influence from the long
eons of cosmological life. And, although the forms of its thought
and the content of its spirit rise directly out of the Hellenic
and the Judaic themselves, it broke as far beyond them as they broke
beyond the cosmological civilization. It founded itself, in its
inmost core, on acceptance of the tension between the transcendent
and the individual human person and on the reconciliation of that
tension implicit in the great vision of the Incarnation--the flash
of eternity into time.
The
history of Western civilization, since it came into being out of
the fermenting remnants left behind by the death of Classical civilization,
is distinguished by a preeminent regard for the person. This is
not to say that this regard has always, or indeed generally, been
ideally reflected in its institutions and social reality; but it
is to insist that, at the heart of the concept of being that forms
the limiting notions by which the West has lived, the preeminence
of the person has prevailed. And this is true of no previous civilization.
It is of course a concept, a view of reality, at the opposite of
the scale from that of the cosmological civilizations. But it also
goes radically beyond the intermediate experience of the Hellenic
and Judaic civilizations. Although they, each in its own way, broke
through the cosmological unity, they did so not in the name of the
person as such but rather in the name of collectivities of persons,
the polis and the Chosen People.
The
characteristic concepts, institutions, and style of the West, where
they stand in the sharpest contrast to those of other civilizations,
are shot through and through with tension. And this is true from
the most matter-of-fact levels of existence to the most exalted.
Everywhere, impossible contradictions maintain themselves to create
the most powerful and noble extensions of the Western spirit. At
the most mundane level, the economic, the Western system takes leave
of hard matter, etherealizing money, the very foundation of production
and exchange. The Gothic cathedral, thrusting to the heavens, denies
the weighty stone of which it is built, while rising from the center
of its city it affirms the beauty of materiality. The doctrine of
the Lateran Council, central to the philosophical tradition of the
West, proclaimed, after a thousand years of intellectual effort,
the pure tension of the Incarnational unity, in radical differentness,
of the material and the transcendent. This is the mode of the West
at its highest and most typical. But always the human heritage of
the cosmological civilizations has pressed upon it, distorting its
understanding, exerting a pull dragging it down from the height
of its vision.
In
radical contrast, the vision of the West, splitting asunder the
transcendent and the earthly, placed their meeting point in tension,
in the souls of individual men. The individual person became, under
God, the ultimate repository of meaning and value. That world-view
demanded a consonant political structure, one in which the person
would be primary and all institutions--in particular the state--secondary
and derivative. But Western civilization in Europe never achieved
this in serious measure, either in practice or in theory. The continuing
heritage of cosmologism, which again and again, in all spheres,
arose to resist, weaken, and destroy the Western vision, here, in
the political sphere, combined with the natural lust of men for
power to maintain in large measure the age-old sanctification of
the state as enforcer of virtue.
The
basic thrust of Western political theory on the European continent
(and in England, though to a lesser degree) was bound always within
categories of the Hellenic philosophers and the Hebrew prophets.
Neither of these influences allowed the expression of the full drive
of the Western spirit towards the primacy of the person and the
limitation of political powers. The one, bounded by the polis, could
only conceive of full freedom of the person in the emancipated flight
of the philosopher beyond temporal conditions; the other, inheriting
the concept of the Chosen People--even when it enlarged that concept
to all humanity in the manner of a proto-Isaiah, could grasp the
freedom of the person only in other-worldly relationships between
man and God. Both the Hebrew and the Hellenic influences bore strongly
against the development of a political philosophy that would provide
the basis for a political structure solidly based towards achieving
he greatest possible freedom of the person.
The
stage was set when the American experience reached its critical
point and the United States was constituted. The men who settled
these shores and established an extension of Western civilization
here carried with them the heritage of the centuries of Western
development. With it they carried the contradiction between the
driving demands of the Western ethos and the political system inconsonant
with that ethos. In the open lands of this continent, removed from
the overhanging presence of cosmological remains, they established
a constitution that the first time in human history was constructed
to guarantee the sanctity of the person and his freedom. But they
brought with them also the condition, which is tempted always by
the false visions of Utopianism.
The
establishment of a free constitution is the great achievement of
America in the drama of Western civilization. The struggle for its
preservation against Utopian corrosion is the continuing history
of the United States since its foundation, a struggle which continues
to this day and which is not yet decided.
*Edited version of Meyer's "Western Civilization."
For the complete version: click
here
|