This is addressed to people who consider themselves fundamentally conservative, and not<\/i> libertarian<\/b>, and, also reject the supernatural.<\/b> By this, I mean that if you do support libertarian policies (I often do) it is not necessarily because you are at the root someone who is motivated by liberty as the summum bonum<\/i>. By rejecting the supernatural I mean that you don’t accede to the plausibility of gods, spirits, etc.<\/p>\n
Sometimes the answer can be somewhat vague and general. For example, by conservatism, as I implied below, is rooted in the social dependence of human flourishing. This necessarily entails that individual<\/i> freedom is not the ultimate ends, and means that I am opening to diverging from libertarian logic in many specific cases. Or, more precisely, in the case of the United States I think that this nation-state is a good thing, that it has legitimacy, and that it’s coherency as a nation-state should be defended as a long term project. It’s not a mere convenience for the execution of legal prescriptions.<\/p>\n
I throw the question out there because I’m wondering how people will take the ideas I’m going to present at the Moving Secularism Forward<\/a> conference this March.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This is addressed to people who consider themselves fundamentally conservative, and not libertarian, and, also reject the supernatural. By this, I mean that if you do support libertarian policies (I often do) it is not necessarily because you are at … Continue reading