{"id":7327,"date":"2015-03-06T05:27:31","date_gmt":"2015-03-06T05:27:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2015\/03\/06\/the-conservative-speaks\/"},"modified":"2015-03-06T05:27:31","modified_gmt":"2015-03-06T05:27:31","slug":"the-conservative-speaks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2015\/03\/06\/the-conservative-speaks\/","title":{"rendered":"The Conservative Speaks"},"content":{"rendered":"

Innovations are guilty until proven innocent.  There is a defeasible presumption in favor of traditional beliefs, usages, institutions, arrangements, techniques, and whatnot, provided they work.  By all means allow the defeat of the defeasible: in with the new if the novel is better.  But the burden of proof is on the would-be innovator:  if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  Conservatives are not opposed to change.  We are opposed to non-ameliorative change, and change for the sake of change.
<\/span><\/p>\n

And again, how can anyone who loves his country desire its fundamental transformation?  How can anyone love anything<\/em> who desires its fundamental transformation?  <\/span><\/p>\n

You love a girl and want to marry her.  But you propose that she must first undergo a total makeover:  butt lift, tummy tuck, nose job, breast implants, psychological re-wire,  complete doxastic overhaul, sensus divinitatis<\/em> tune-up, Weltanschauung<\/em> change-out, memory upgrade, and so on.  Do you love her<\/em>, or is she merely the raw material for the implementation of your currently uninstantiated idea<\/em> of what a girl should be?
<\/span><\/p>\n

The extension to love of country is straightforward.  If you love your country, then you do not desire its fundamental transformation.  Contrapositively, if you do desire its fundamental transformation, then you do not love it.
<\/span><\/p>\n

\nRelated articles<\/legend>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a>Leftists and Civility<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Denying that There is Political Correctness . . .<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Innovations are guilty until proven innocent.  There is a defeasible presumption in favor of traditional beliefs, usages, institutions, arrangements, techniques, and whatnot, provided they work.  By all means allow the defeat of the defeasible: in with the new if the novel is better.  But the burden of proof is on the would-be innovator:  if it … Continue reading “The Conservative Speaks”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[64],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7327","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-conservatism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7327","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7327"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7327\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7327"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7327"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7327"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}