Comments on: Questions MI candidates should answer http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/questions-mi-candidates-should-answer/ A Forum for Our State's Future Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:40:29 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: J. A. Ault http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/questions-mi-candidates-should-answer/comment-page-1/#comment-1003 J. A. Ault Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:59:35 +0000 http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/?p=1063#comment-1003 There is a condensed version of Russell Kirk's views calle Ten Conservative Principles avalable on the website www.kirkcenter.org track Russell Kirk then "Thougt" for a link to it. Reading The Conservative Mind is a major commitment but this essay gives the executive summary. There is a condensed version of Russell Kirk's views calle Ten Conservative Principles avalable on the website http://www.kirkcenter.org track Russell Kirk then "Thougt" for a link to it. Reading The Conservative Mind is a major commitment but this essay gives the executive summary.

]]> By: Mike Anthony http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/questions-mi-candidates-should-answer/comment-page-1/#comment-1004 Mike Anthony Mon, 03 Nov 2008 09:36:47 +0000 http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/blog/?p=1063#comment-1004 I like this sentence, Phil: "3) Why do you think it has been so difficult for Michigan to adopt far-reaching strategies to reform and improve our state? Can you point to an occasion when you have bucked your party's orthodoxy or stood up to the leaders of your caucus?" ...especially the phrase 'party's orthodoxy'. It helps me think through the issues if I start with the body of liberal and the body of conservative thought -- as imperfect as my understanding is of each. Democrats seem to 'brand' the body of liberal thought; Republicans seem to 'brand' the body of conservative thought; albeit in either case, the branding template appears to be a sloppy approximation for either party. As a result, you cannot help but make ad hominum connections between personalities and the underlying liberal or conservative philosophies. (Frankly, I do not even know if liberalism or conservatism should even be regarded as polar opposite philosophies - you'd think so based on the 'plebeian-versus- patrician' monologues each party throws at each other.) So when you say, 'party orthodoxy' I know exactly what you mean from a political branding point of view. I struggle with how a compromise position could be formulated in terms of liberalism and conservatism that would get Michigan out of its political deadlock. There is too much "noise" in the branding of each party. I bought a copy of "The Conservative Mind" by Russell Kirk, last summar at Border's and read it "for fun" on a very liberal beach in northern Europe. Kirk, by the way, is a Michigander, now deceased, who, early in his career took a swing at trying to compile conservative thinking over the centuries. If you are looking for a book that gets mainly to the ideas of conservatism -- without all that branding and ad hominum noise -- you may be disappointed. I was; but I recognize the book as the best in class. (Michiganders should also be proud that we had such a mind working at MSU about 50 years ago.) If someone out there knows of a book that tries to do something similar with the body of liberal thought starting from, say Gibbon -- possibly by a Michigander -- please let us know. (There I did it myself -- I had to take an ad hominum shortcut) Together, the two books might be required reading for those in Michigan seeking political office. It might help future leaders to see Michigan possibilities in terms of ideas instead of personalities. Hope this helps. I like this sentence, Phil:

"3) Why do you think it has been so difficult for Michigan to adopt far-reaching strategies to reform and improve our state? Can you point to an occasion when you have bucked your party's orthodoxy or stood up to the leaders of your caucus?"

…especially the phrase 'party's orthodoxy'.

It helps me think through the issues if I start with the body of liberal and the body of conservative thought — as imperfect as my understanding is of each. Democrats seem to 'brand' the body of liberal thought; Republicans seem to 'brand' the body of conservative thought; albeit in either case, the branding template appears to be a sloppy approximation for either party.

As a result, you cannot help but make ad hominum connections between personalities and the underlying liberal or conservative philosophies. (Frankly, I do not even know if liberalism or conservatism should even be regarded as polar opposite philosophies – you'd think so based on the 'plebeian-versus- patrician' monologues each party throws at each other.)

So when you say, 'party orthodoxy' I know exactly what you mean from a political branding point of view. I struggle with how a compromise position could be formulated in terms of liberalism and conservatism that would get Michigan out of its political deadlock. There is too much "noise" in the branding of each party.

I bought a copy of "The Conservative Mind" by Russell Kirk, last summar at Border's and read it "for fun" on a very liberal beach in northern Europe. Kirk, by the way, is a Michigander, now deceased, who, early in his career took a swing at trying to compile conservative thinking over the centuries.

If you are looking for a book that gets mainly to the ideas of conservatism — without all that branding and ad hominum noise — you may be disappointed. I was; but I recognize the book as the best in class. (Michiganders should also be proud that we had such a mind working at MSU about 50 years ago.)

If someone out there knows of a book that tries to do something similar with the body of liberal thought starting from, say Gibbon — possibly by a Michigander — please let us know. (There I did it myself — I had to take an ad hominum shortcut)

Together, the two books might be required reading for those in Michigan seeking political office. It might help future leaders to see Michigan possibilities in terms of ideas instead of personalities.

Hope this helps.

]]>