Editor, The New York Times Book Review
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
Dear Editor:
Sheri Berman relates that Corey Robin defines conservatism as "an inherently
elitist and hierarchical ideology, whose essence is the defense of elite
privileges against challenges from below" ("The Conservative as Elitist," Oct.
9). Ms. Berman rightly ridicules this straw-man definition of conservatism,
pointing out that it describes the ideology neither of Edmund Burke nor of Sarah
Palin.
True. But that Mr. Robin's description is a sham is best revealed by the fact
that much of what today is called "conservatism" (and much of what Mr. Robin
loathes) was originally in Britain and America, and is still in many
non-English-speaking countries, called liberalism. It's a philosophy that
champions the right of individuals - regardless of rank or creed or color - to
be free of the stupidity of enforced traditionalism, free of the choking grip of
superstition (including the hyper-lethal superstition that is nationalism), and,
above all, free of the arbitrary will of their 'betters.'
Classical liberals (and many "conservatives") champion free markets and private
property rights, therefore, not to defend "elite privileges against challenges
from below" but out of a sincere conviction that markets and property are
necessary for maximum possible freedom and for astonishing material abundance -
both of which, were Mr. Robin to get his way, would be crushed by the unbearable
weight of what he elsewhere Orwellianly describes as the "more robust freedom of
choice" served up as diktats, decrees, favors, extractions, and sanctions issued
by the ever-oh-so-well-intentioned state.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
George Mason University
