The Lamentable Death of Conservatism

The January 2020 death of my teacher, Roger Scruton, marked the end of serious conservative thought.

In 1996 I wrote my master’s thesis on Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France under the guidance of my then professor, Roger Scruton. Burke heavily influenced Scruton—especially Burke’s idea of society as a partnership “not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.”

Sir Roger Scruton, 27 February 1944 – 12 January 2020

Roger once told me that culture—customs, manners, morals, literature, music, and art—should be viewed as akin to valuable property in a family trust that no single generation is at liberty to squander.

In a cultured and civilized nation, each generation receives a fragile inheritance that is extremely difficult to build, but very easy to destroy with wanton, imprudent, and reckless behavior.

Sir Roger died on January 12, 2020. I was greatly saddened to hear the news, but now, looking back, it occurs to me that at least he was spared from witnessing what has happened to his beloved England over the last six years.

It pains me to realize that Conservatism of the sort that he taught me is dead. Those who now claim to be “conservative” have no defining philosophy. While they are rightfully outraged by leftist ideological insanity and U.S. government overreach, they take little action to oppose it.

For example, in my affluent community in Dallas, I know of only one couple—one husband and wife with children —who have exerted themselves to oppose the infiltration of leftist ideological insanity into our independent school district.

Sir Roger was an admirer of Lord Salisbury (Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury) who served as Prime Minister on three separate terms: June 1885–January 1886, July 1886–August 1892, and June 1895–July 1902.

Lord Salisbury

Lord Salisbury was opposed to getting involved in pointless wars on the Continent, and he sought to avoid European alliances. He instead pursued the policy of "splendid isolation.” He considered war a failure of diplomacy, and he despised "promiscuous jingoism.”

In this respect he followed in the footsteps of Queen Elizabeth I, who sought to avoid war and instead focused English resources on a defensive foreign policy. This served her well when King Philip II of Spain sent his mighty Armada to invade England and overthrow her. The English Navy’s superior tactics (as well as unfavorable weather) proved to be the Armada’s undoing.

I find it notable that the administrations of Queen Elizabeth and Lord Salisbury were both great periods of English prosperity and culture.

Lord Salisbury’s objective was to enrich Britain through peaceful trade and to conserve British culture and society. He expressed his brand of conservatism (and fine sense of irony and humor) with the famous remarks,

Whatever happens will be for the worse, and therefore it is in our interest that as little should happen as possible.

Change? Why change? Things are bad enough as they are.

His point is that politicians should be very cautious about embarking on adventures that will likely have unforeseen and deleterious consequences.