# Anybody read the old Paleocons?



## RamistThomist (Dec 27, 2007)

Does anyone here identify themselves in this tradition? Have you read any of these authors?

Richard Weaver
The Agrarians
Russell Kirk


----------



## smhbbag (Dec 27, 2007)

I've read a lot of Richard Weaver and some Russel Kirk, but "identify" with them only in that I'm sympathetic to a lot of their conclusions. The worldview that supports those conclusions, though, is obviously quite different from my own.

It's been enjoyable reading, but I confess I skimmed a good bit of both, after finding them quite content to make a one paragraph point in 10 pages.


----------



## VictorBravo (Dec 27, 2007)

Spear Dane said:


> Does anyone here identify themselves in this tradition? Have you read any of these authors?
> 
> Richard Weaver
> The Agrarians
> Russell Kirk



I've read bits from all of them, though I tend to think of Weaver and Kirk as venerable contemporaries because they died in my lifetime. I like them a lot, along with others like Wendell Berry.

But I remain a Westerner rather than a Southerner. There is a lot of overlap, but some subtle differences. I think it boils down to Southerners have a culture with a stronger emphasis on history, family, and place, whereas Westerners (intermountain west) think more in terms of continual migration, pragmatism, and, to some extent, running from their past. (A great number of settlers did just that). So it leads to a different kind of neighborliness: you help each other out, sometimes at great sacrifice, but you rarely ask questions about a person's past or private affairs. So there's a certain resptectful aloofness that is different from the Southern heritage.


----------



## SouthernHero (Dec 27, 2007)

Man, that's good stuff...


----------



## fredtgreco (Dec 27, 2007)

Spear Dane said:


> Does anyone here identify themselves in this tradition? Have you read any of these authors?
> 
> Richard Weaver
> The Agrarians
> Russell Kirk



I had the pleasure of spending time with Russell Kirk before he died, when he and his wife visited our debating society in Chicago.


----------



## Pilgrim (Dec 27, 2007)

I've read some Kirk, hardly any of Weaver and the Agrarians at all.


----------



## Devin (Dec 27, 2007)

I have heard of Pat Buchanan being called a Paleocon. Would that be an accurate description given that the previously mentioned authors help define Paleoconservatism?


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 27, 2007)

Devin said:


> I have heard of Pat Buchanan being called a Paleocon. Would that be an accurate description given that the previously mentioned authors help define Paleoconservatism?



Yes, sort of. He has always said good things except for the recent endorsement of Romney.


----------



## Pilgrim (Dec 27, 2007)

Buchanan's foreign policy could be considered paleocon. Not so sure about his domestic policy though, although I don't think paleocons necessarily were libertarians when it came to economics.


----------



## Kevin (Dec 27, 2007)

Weaver, most everything.

Kirk, Yes.

Argrarians, 
Alan Tate, 
John Crowe Ransom, 
Andrew Nelson Lytle, 
other than those three only the esays in "I'll Take my Stand"


----------



## Vytautas (Dec 27, 2007)

Does Howard King count as an Agrarian?


----------



## Pilgrim (Dec 27, 2007)

I think that Weaver was influenced by the Agrarians If I recall correctly.


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 27, 2007)

Pilgrim said:


> I think that Weaver was influenced by the Agrarians If I recall correctly.



Most definitely. See _The Collected Essays of Richard M. Weaver_. Saying Weaver was influenced by the Agrarians is like saying I am influenced by Bahnsen.


----------



## Kevin (Dec 27, 2007)

Spear Dane said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> > I think that Weaver was influenced by the Agrarians If I recall correctly.
> ...


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 28, 2007)

Pilgrim said:


> I've read some Kirk, hardly any of Weaver and the Agrarians at all.



Weaver is good to read, but some of the Agrarians can be wordy and annoying after a while. There are about 3 essays in _I'll Take My Stand_ that are really on target. The rest are too verbose for me.


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 28, 2007)

Let me see if I get it right:
The intellectual heavyweights for the Paleocons are Weaver, Kirk, Edmund Burke, and Lord Acton.

The intellectual heavyweights for the Neo-cons are Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly. Both sides seem evenly matched.


----------



## Kevin (Dec 28, 2007)

Spear Dane said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> > I've read some Kirk, hardly any of Weaver and the Agrarians at all.
> ...



Remember that Agrarianism is primarily a movement of writers. Read some of Tate & Ransom (for example) as poets or critics to get a true sense of the movement.

Too often people reduce them to political philosophers or social critics only. If you only read "the Hind Tit" you do not really "know" Lyttle in any signifigant way. Read some of his biographys & history to get a better sense of what values he places on 'place' and tradition.

For me my real first insight into the movement came from reading a ghost story!


----------



## KMK (Dec 30, 2007)

Vytautas said:


> Does Howard King count as an Agrarian?



From what I understand about Christian Agrarianism, yes he most definitely is.


----------



## AV1611 (Dec 30, 2007)

Spear Dane said:


> Does anyone here identify themselves in this tradition?



I have read them and would fit in with their general views although I would more accurately be described as a High Tory. I like Burke but prefer Joseph de Maistre and Sir Robert Filmer.


----------

