In "Regime Change: Toward a Postliberal Future," Patrick Deneen extensively addresses the question that evaded him in his first groundbreaking work: What comes after liberalism?
1. It seems to me that Patrick Deneen and many of his fellow travelers in this "Postliberal" movement are proposing:
a. An overthrow (with due process or by force--I can't tell which) of the very heart and core of, and original essence of, the U.S. Constitution.
b. Something very similar to the rule by a permanent class of philosopher kings as per Plato's Republic (as modified by Aristotle's vision of rule over the “natural slaves” and women by the virtuous aristocrats). (By the way, rule by a legally established philosophical elite was also an integral feature of Fascism, National Socialism, and Marxist-Leninist Socialism.)
c. Something very similar to the rule by the philosophical World Controllers in Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World.
2. As such, in this postliberal thought, the very idea of America is extinguished.
3. Thus, I suspect that in the U.S. this postliberal movement has no future, except as a fascinating thought experiment among Catholic ivory tower types, a sort of Tolkien holiday, a form of mental cosplay in which we all can be Gandalf, Aragon, Frodo, Parsifal, Lohengrin, or King Louis IX.
4. But I might be wrong. Maybe a permanent class of Postliberal aristocrats will be our forever leaders in the near future, and Deneen’s “Regime Change” book have a role among those elites that is similar to what “The Communist Manifesto” had among Marxist-Leninist elites, and Donald Trump, the eternal leader of our philosophical aristocrats, will author a popular book titled “My Struggle to Make America First” (Mein Kampf Amerika Zuerst Zu Machen).
5. Still, I think the postliberals are people of goodwill and good cheer, are smart and imaginative, and are good Catholics, good parents, and good neighbors, and I wish them well.
But how does one become a member of the "elite"? We already have an elite class which you mentioned was ineffective. What's to say the elite class you're proposing would be any different? It's a nice idea in theory: to have a Catholic aristocracy that truly wants to look out for their people, but how is that possible? Division is a part of life. It won't simply disappear with a new elite.
1. It seems to me that Patrick Deneen and many of his fellow travelers in this "Postliberal" movement are proposing:
a. An overthrow (with due process or by force--I can't tell which) of the very heart and core of, and original essence of, the U.S. Constitution.
b. Something very similar to the rule by a permanent class of philosopher kings as per Plato's Republic (as modified by Aristotle's vision of rule over the “natural slaves” and women by the virtuous aristocrats). (By the way, rule by a legally established philosophical elite was also an integral feature of Fascism, National Socialism, and Marxist-Leninist Socialism.)
c. Something very similar to the rule by the philosophical World Controllers in Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World.
2. As such, in this postliberal thought, the very idea of America is extinguished.
3. Thus, I suspect that in the U.S. this postliberal movement has no future, except as a fascinating thought experiment among Catholic ivory tower types, a sort of Tolkien holiday, a form of mental cosplay in which we all can be Gandalf, Aragon, Frodo, Parsifal, Lohengrin, or King Louis IX.
4. But I might be wrong. Maybe a permanent class of Postliberal aristocrats will be our forever leaders in the near future, and Deneen’s “Regime Change” book have a role among those elites that is similar to what “The Communist Manifesto” had among Marxist-Leninist elites, and Donald Trump, the eternal leader of our philosophical aristocrats, will author a popular book titled “My Struggle to Make America First” (Mein Kampf Amerika Zuerst Zu Machen).
5. Still, I think the postliberals are people of goodwill and good cheer, are smart and imaginative, and are good Catholics, good parents, and good neighbors, and I wish them well.
Good review. But not as good as Charles Haywood's.
But how does one become a member of the "elite"? We already have an elite class which you mentioned was ineffective. What's to say the elite class you're proposing would be any different? It's a nice idea in theory: to have a Catholic aristocracy that truly wants to look out for their people, but how is that possible? Division is a part of life. It won't simply disappear with a new elite.