Konzervativ emlék.

Az alábbi szövegeket nem a Konzervatórium valamelyik fontos fiatal ideológusa irta, hanem én.  Nagyon nagyon nagyon fiatal koromban, 1994 decemberében. Ékezetet nem tudtam használni (egy amerikai kisvárosból irtam ezeket a leveleket). Érdekelt a dolog, érdekelt ez a világ, volt egy nagyon jó egyetemi könyvtárunk, és esténként irtam ezeket a szövegeket. Nem tudom miért volt ez akkor ennyire fontos, láthatóan sok időt áldoztam rá.  Azt hiszem ekkor még Orbán Viktor sem volt konzervativ. Persze én sem. Konzervativ liberálisnak tartottam magam, ma már annak sem. Semminek sem. Már 1989 őszén kezdtem ilyesmiket olvasni,  kint a kollégiumban, ahol először hallottam ezekről a dolgokról. Allan Bloom-tól a „The closing of the American Mind” volt az első ilyen könyv, és az akkor nagyon megragadott.

Magyarországon effélékről akkor még nem beszéltek, legalábbis abban a közegben nem, ahol én mozoghattam.  Azt hiszem jó, ha az embernek van egy ilyen korszaka, amikor sok mindent elolvas.  És talán az is jó, hogy elmúlik… 🙂  Ez a furcsa ” esszé” itt lent gyakorlatilag olvashatatlan, kétlem, hogy lesz aki átrágja magát rajta, én sem tenném. Ez csak egy személyes emlék.

 

   I. Szemben a valtozassal…

  Mi az, hogy konzervativ ? Eloszoris egy konzervativ temperamentumu, egy
  konzervativ karakteru ember. Nem feltetlenul egy politizalo ember, egy
  igazsagoszto ember, egy a tarsadalom vagy a gazdasag mukodeset vizsgalo
  ember, hanem csak ugy altalaban egy karakter, akit Michael Oakeshott imigyen 
  ir le a "Rationalism in Politics"-ben.

 "..to be conservative,then, is to prefer the familiar to the unknown, to pre-
  fer the tried to the untried, fact to misery, the actual to the possible, 
  the limited to the unbounded, the near to the distant, the sufficient to
  the superabundant, the convenient to the perfect, present laughter to
  utopian bliss..."
 ".. A storm which sweeps away a copse and transforms a favourite view,
  the death of friends, the sleep of friendship, the desuetude of customs or
  behaviour, the retirement of a favourite clown, involuntary exile, reversals
  of fortune, the loss of abilities enjoyed and their replacement by others-
  - these are changes, none perhaps withouit its compensations, which the
  man of conservative temperament unavoidably regrets..."
 "..the disposition to be conservativeis, then, warm and positive in
  respect of enjoyment, and correspondingly cool and critical in respect of
  change and innovation : these two inclinations support and elucidate one
  another... '

 Az Oakeshotti konzervativ polgar ellenpolusa a pragmatikus, "progressziv"
 modern allam, illetve ezek kepviseloi, akiket Oakeshott nem liberalisnak
 hanem "rationalist"-nek nevez. Mindazonaltal a konzervativ vs. liberalis
 dichotomiaban, ez a "rationalist" liberalist jelent. A konzervativ ily modon
 lelki rokonsagba keveredik a modern kor anarchistaival. 
 Az ellenpolus karakteret igy irja le Oakeshott :
 
  "..the general character  and disposition of the Rationalist are, I think
 not difficult to identify at bottom, he stands (he always STANDS) for 
 independence of mind on all occasions, for thought free from obligation
 to any authority save the authority of "reason".."
 ".. His mental attitude is at once sceptical and optimistic :
 sceptical, because there is no opinion, no habit, no belief, nothing so
 firmly rooted or so widely held that he hesitates to question it and judge
 it by what he calls his "reason". Optimistic, because the Rationalist never
 doubts the power of his "reason" (when properly applied) to determine the
 worth of a thing, the truth of an opinion , of the propriety of an action..."
 
  A konzervativizmus lenyege, hogy ellenideologia. Edmund Burke , Joseph
 de Maistre a Francia Forradalom,  Ortega y Gasset, Donoso-Cortes, bizonyos
 ertelemben Tocqueville a tomegdemokracia, Allen Bloom, Leo Strauss a huszadik
 szazadi "counterculture"-re valaszol. A konzervativ nem a priori ellenzi
 a valtozast, a politikai reformokat, adott esetben a forradalmat.
 Ne feledjuk el, az amerikai forradalom egy konzervativ forradalom volt  .
 A forradalom "fekete serege" puritan
 lelkeszekbol allt, filozofiajat a Bibliabol, Arisztotelesztol, Humetol,
 Montesquieutol kolcsonozte, es idealjai azok a New Englandi puritan kozossegek
 voltak, ahol a blaszfemia, a hazassagtores, sot a fiui engedetlenseg
 torvenyi buntetese HALAL volt. (ez nem jelenti azt, hogy tomegevel akasz-
 tottak fel embereket, de a Common Lawban a het (7) eves kor volt az elmeleti
 minimum a halalbuntetes vegrehajtasahoz, es tizennegy eveseken valoban
 vegre is hajtottak halalos iteleteket, bizony a huszadik szazadban is.
 A Supreme Court 1989-as donteset arrol, hogy a fiatalkoruak kivegzese NEM
 "cruel and unusual punishment" erre a szokasjogra alapoztak)
 A konzervativ azonban mindig szkeptikus a valtozassal, politikai reformokkal
 es plane a forradalmakkal szemben. 

  Thomas Molnar kivalo amerikai katolikus es roppant konzervativ
 filozofus, nyiltan ellenforradalmarnak vallotta magat, o aki kishijan
 elpusztult Dachauban, Horthy,Salazar, Franco rendszeret glorifikalta
 The Counter-Revolution cimu munkajaban. Molnar szamara a marxizmus, a libera-
 lizmus sot maga a Reformacio is elviselhetetlen (Ecumenism)
 "..[The Reformation] was a unique impoverishment of the religious domain
 when all over the nothern half of Europe churches, statutes, missals, wood-
 carvings, were whitewashed, broken,crushed, and burned, but the spirit in 
 whose name it was done was more devastating still. Protestantism generally 
 denied the rights of the body and of the senses, and its puritanic variety
 inflicted horrible punishments on the most innocent expressions of earthly 
 joy.."

 II. 

1688-ban az angol Parlament megalkotta
 az English Bill of Rights-t minden nyugati alkotmany alapjat.
 A proklamacio megfosztotta II.Jakabot a tronjatol es helyere
 Oraniai Vilmost es feleseget Mariat ultette.
 "...being now assembled in a full and free representative of this
 nation, taking into their most serious consideration the best means for attai-
 ning the ends aforesaid, do in the first place (as their ancestors in like 
 case usually done), for the vindicating and asserting their ancient
 rights and liberties, declare :
 1. That the pretended power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by
 regal authority, without consent of Parliament, is illegal.
 2. That the pretended power of dispensing with laws, of the execution of laws,
 by regal authority, as it has been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal.
 ....
 9. That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedings in Parliament,
 ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of
 Parliament.
 10.That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, 
 nor CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT inflicted.
 ....
 13. And that for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthe-
 ning, and preserving of the laws, Parliament ought to be held frequently.

  Epp szaz evvel kesobb, 1789 Augusztus 27-iken a Francia Alkotmanyozo
 Nemzetgyules a kovetkezo deklaraciot ( Az Emberi es Polgari Jogok
 Nyilatkozata) tette kozze :

  The representatives of the people of France, formed into a National Assembly
 ,considering the ignorance, neglect, or contempt of human rights,...
 ....set forth in a solemn declaration....in the presence of the
 Supreme Being, and with the hope of His blessing and favor, the
 following SACRED rights of men and citizens :

  1. Men are born, and always continue, free and equal in respect of their
  rights...
  4. Political liberty consists in the power of doing whatever does not
  injure another.
  ...
  7. No man should be accused, arrested, or held in confinement, except
  in cases determined by the law, and according to the forms which it has
  prescribed.
  ...
  11. The unrestrained communication of thoughts and opinions being one of the
  most precious rights of man, every citizen may speak, write and publish 
  freely, provided he is responsible for the abuse of this liberty, in cases
  determined by the law.
  ...
  17. The right to property being inviolable and sacred, no one ought to be
  deprived of it, except in cases of evident public necessity, legally ascer-
  tained, and on condition of a previous just indemnity.

  Edmund Burke (1727-1797) az English Bill of Rights feltetlen hive volt,
  es a Francia Forradalom ( a Nagy Terror elott!) kerlelhetetlen ellen-
  fele. Reflections on the Revolution in France cimu munkajaban fejti
  ki azokat a nezeteket, amelyekrol a konzervativizmust a Bourbon-restauracio
  utan Burke francia hivei elneveztek. Burke per definitionem az elso konzer-
  vativ volt. Burke ugy atyja a konzervativizmusnak mint
  Marx a szocializmusnak, vagy Mill a liberalizmusnak, ezt Russell Kirk
  Edmund Burke eletrajziroja (es ujrafelfedezoje !!!) irta. Macaulay szerint
  Burke Milton utan a legnagyobb volt. Lord Acton egyenesen azt mondta,
  Edmund Burke-kel kezdodott a tortenelem. A Reflections az 
  a konzervativizmusnak mint a Kommunista Kialtvany a marxizmusnak.Alapmu.
  Multkor  azt irtam Burke-rol ellenideolog volt.
  Formalisan Rousseau ellenideologja,de konnyu latni, valojaban Locke-je is.

  Locke ket muvebol idezek. 
  Az elso (Of Civil Government), az angolszasz liberalizmus ideologiai
  alapja, az English Bill of Rights politikafilozofiai hattere.(1690)
 " Man being as has been said, by nature all free, equal and independent,
  no one can be put out of this estate and subjected to the political power
  without his own consent.."
 " For, when any number of men have, by the consent of every individual
  made a community, they have thereby made the community one body
 
 with a power to act as one body, which is only by the will and determination
 of the majority. 
 "..Wherever law ends, tyranny begins..." 

  Ezzel szemben a Reflections... leghiresebb passzusa igy kezdodik :

  "Society is indeed a contract ..."
  "In a partnership in all science, a partnership in all art, a partnership
  in every virtue and in all perfection. As the ends of such partnership
  cannot be obtained in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
  only between those who are living, BUT, between those who are living,
  those who are dead, and those who are to be born. Each contract of each
  particular state is but a clause in the great primeval contract of eternal
  society, linking the lower with the higher natures, connecting the visible
  and invisible world according to the fixed compact sanctioned by the
  invisible oath which holds all physical and all moral natures each in
  their appointed place.
  This law is NOT subject to the will of those who by obligation above them
  and infinitely superior, are bound to submit their will to that law.
  The municipal corporations of that universal kingdom are NOT morally
  at liberty, at their pleasure, and on their speculations of a contingent
  improvement, wholly to separate and tear asunder the bonds of their
  subordinate community and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
  unconnected chaos of elementary principles "
  
  Burke frontalisan tamadja az English Bill of Rights minden "liberalis"
  ertelmezeset. 
  Eloszoris Pascal-i ketelyei vannak a Descartes-i "Reason"-nal kapcsolatban.
  Egy eredendo bunnel terhes , esendo, gyarlo embert lat aki piszkalja a
  Tortenelem Isten altal elinditott Ingaorajat. Burke hisz a prejudikaciokban
  es preskripciokban.Ez affele szocialokologia, Burke fel a Tiszta es Absztrakt
 
  es foleg roppant Emberi Eszmetol, ami jon, es beleavatkozik a tortenelem
  evoluciojaba. Burke a JO, az IGAZSAGOS (kereszteny) tarsadalomban es
  annak torvenyeiben hitt. Termeszetesen, a jo es igazsagos tarsadalmakban
  vannak torvenyek amelyek vedik az embereket (foleg azok tulajdonat, Burke
  szerint a tulajdon teszi az embert emberre, es a legfobb jog, a tulajdon
  korlatozas nelkuli atszarmaztatasa generaciorol generaciora) . LENYEG :
  Burke szamara az ABSZTRAKT emberi jog, az onallo eletet elo emberi jog,
  a jo,igazsagos,keresztenyi tarsadalom immanens erdekeitol fuggetlen jog
  ertelmezhetetlen. Ezert utalta annyira a franciakat...

  Burke nem volt teologus. (Locke az IS volt).  Mivel a Vallas es az Ember
  viszonyanak targyalasa elkerulhetetlen, a mai napra rendel szent evangeli-
  umot a Locke-i es Burke-i felfogas kulonbozosegenek felmutatasaval zarom.:-)
  Angliaban, II.Jakab nyilt katolikus restauracioja bekitette ossze az angli-
  kan egyhaz kulonbozo frakcioit (Laud Canterbury ersek hivei elvetettek
  a predesztinaciot, az Independensek maguk valasztottak volna a papjaikat,
  az 1649-1660 interregnumban a leheto legdrakoibb bibliai torvenyeket
  iktatta torvenybe a Puritan frakcio, szigoruan ellenoriztek a kereszteny
  Sabbath betartasat (aprosag, Massachussetsben joval
  a Wall of Separation "felhuzasa" utan Tocqueville meg olyan varosokat talalt
  ahol kulon tisztsegviselo zaklatta a vasarnapi utazokat) az iszakossagot
  is torvenyben tiltottak. Szoval a zsido-kereszteny tradicio helyes osvenyenek
  kijelolesenel,mondjuk ugy, problemak mutatkoztak. A dogmakat allandoan
  valtoztattak, es konyortelenul szamonkertek a helyes ideologiai iranyultsa-
  got. Vilmos megkoronazasa utan, az angol Allami Egyhazugyi Hivatalt :-((
  (Court of Commissioners for Ecclesistical Causes) megszuntettek, persze
  az anglikan vallas allamvallas maradt ( egeszen a mai napig, egyhazi ugyekben
  az angol Parlament az illetekes, es koszonik szepen jol megvannak vele)
  es  kibocsatottak az Act of Tolerationt. Well, almost toleration-t....
  Marmint olyan "lehetetlen" vallasokat mint peldaul a katolicizmus, termesze-
  tesen tovabbiakban is uldoztek. :-(((
  A liberalis Locke errol igy ir ( Letter Concerning Toleration 1689)
  "Let us now consider what a church is. A church then I take to be a voluntary
   society of men.."
  "I say it is a free and voluntary society..."
  "Speculative opinions, therefore, and articles of faith, as they are called,
  which are required only to be believed, cannot be imposed on any Church by 
  the law of the land "
  "Further, the magistrate ought not to forbid the preaching or professing
   of any speculative opinions in any Church..."
  
 " Again : That church can have no right to be tolerated by the magistrate,
  which is constituted upon such a bottom, that all those who enter it, do
 thereby
 ipso facto, deliver themselves up to the protection and service of another 
 prince.  "
  
 "Lastly, Those are not at all to be tolerated who deny the being of God.
  Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society
  can have no hold upon an atheist"

  Burke (anyja katolikus volt, es csaladjat az IRA elodjevel a Whiteboys
  nevu terrorszervezettel valo kapcsolattartassal vadoltak) :
  "We are resolved to keep an established church, an established monarchy
   and an established democracy  each in degree it exists and in no 
   greater "
  Burke mar Bolingbroke (rendkivul tekintelyes filozofus-politikus) latens
  deizmusaba is belekotott, a Filozofusok manifeszt deizmusatol kifejezetten 
  rosszul volt. Hitt a termeszetes hierarchiaban, es az Istentol
  eredo autoritasban, egy tarsadalomban, ahol az  emberek Isten es az
  Torveny elott 
  egyenlok, de tehetseguk , szarmazasuk es vagyoni helyzetuk szerint
  kulonbozo helyet foglalnak el, es ezt a helyzetuket bekeben tudomasul
  veszik.  Az Established Church az Irgalmassag es
  az Alazat, es termeszetesen a tarsadalmat megtarto autoritas
  kepviseloje es terjesztoje. Ezert vedte az Anglikan Egyhaz
  kulonos helyzetet Edmund Burke, az elso es maig legnagyobb konzervativ
  aki nem hitt az Irgalmassag es Alazat nelkuli "Reason"-ben.

 III.

 
A kortars amerikai konzervativ Russel Kirk irja
 a konzervativokrol :

 "I think that there are six canons of conservative thought.
 
 1.Belief in a transcendent order, or body of natural law,
 which rules society as well as conscience. Political problems
 at bottom are religious and moral problems...
 ..True politics is the art of apprehending and applying
 Justice which ought to prevail in a community of souls.

 2. Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of human
 existence, as opposed to the naroowing uniformity,
 egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems...

 3. Conviction that civilized society requires orders and 
 classes, as against the notion of a "classless society'.
 With reason, conservatives often have been called
 the party of order...

 4. Persuasion that freedom and property are closely 
 linked :separate property from private posession, and 
 Leviathan becomes master of all. Economic levelling,
 they maintain, is not economic progress.

 5. Faith in prescription and distrust of "sophisters,
 calculators and economists' who would reconstruct society upon 
 abstract designs. Custom, convention, and old pres-
 cription are checks both upon man's anarchic
 impulse and upon the innovator's lust for power.

 6... Society must alter, for prudent change is the
 means of social preservation, but a statesman must
 take Providence into his calculations, and a
 statesman's chief virtue, according to Plato and
 Burke, is prudence."

 Ezzel szemben a liberalis attitudrol igy velekedik :

 " All the same, in a hastily generalizing fashion one
 may say that radicalism since 1790 has tended to
 attack the prescriptive arrangement of society on
 the following grounds -

 1. The perfectibility of man and the illimitable
 progress of society : meliorism. Radicals believes that
 education, positive legislation, and alteration of environment 
 can produce men like gods, they deny that humanity has a natural
 proclivity toward violence and sin.

 2. Contempt for tradition. Reason, impulse, and materialistic 
 determinism are severally preferred as guides to social welfare, 
 trustier than the wisdom of our ancestors...

 3. Political levelling. Order and privilege are condemned;
 total democracy, as direct as practicable, is the professed
 radical ideal...

 4. Economical levelling. The ancient rights of property, especi-
 ally property in land, are suspect to almost all radicals;
 and collectivistic reformers hack at the institution
 of private property root and branch. "


  Ennek a szovegnek pedig semmi koze sincs Newt Gingrich-hez.
  Altalaban, Newt Gingrichnek semmi koze sincs a konzer-
  vativizmushoz, egy konzervativ nem hirdeti meg a forradalmat
  a TV-ujsagban. Kirk a Real McCoy, Gingrich egy West-Georgiai
  macher.
  A konzervativ szamara eleve vereseg a liberalis demokracia lete.

   A "political levelling" (bar az amerikai alkotmany elso cikkelyenek
   masodik szakasza ugyan leirja, hogy a Nep valasztja a kepviseloit
  de arrol egy szot nem szol, hogy ki a nep, a nep meglehetosen 
  hosszu ideig jomodu, feher ferfiakbol allt.) kiteljesedett.
  (Voting Rights Act,illetve 15., 19.,24. es 26-ik kiegeszites)

  Kirk elso es masodik pontja eppen arrol szo, hogy absztrakt jogelvek 
  nem vezenyelhetik a konzervativ szamara kedves tarsadalmat, es
  hat egy orszagot absztrakt jogelvek vezerelnek az az USA.
  A konzervativ tarsadalomban leteznek autoritiv intermediate retegek. 
  Na, hat ez nem
  jellemzo Amerikara. A Barron vs. Baltimore 1840-ben meg adott egy leheto-
  seget a tradicionalistaknak azzal, hogy az allamokat kivonta a Bill
  of Rights hatalya alol,
  azonban a huszadik szazadban a "Barron" eltunt,  szovetse-
  gi birok ugy vagnak haza absztrakt alkotmanyos indokkal,
  nepszavazassal megerositett torvenyeket 
  hogy orom nezni.
  Amerikaban a Supreme Court filozofus-kiralyai voltak arra hivatva, hogy
  a tradiciokat orizzek. A huszadik szazad liberalis fobiroi pedig
  "atalltak" a forradalmarok taboraba. 

   Kirk szamara a kulonbozo vilagkepek, a kulonbozo velemenyek igenis
  nem egyenranguak, es pont. (and he is damn proud of it)
  Az USA-ban pedig kifejezettel eroszakosan egyenjogusitjak
  a velemenyeket, neha egyaltalan nem vilagos, hogy a velemenyek
  elnyomoi vagy a velemenyek elnyomoinak elnyomoi aggresszivebbek.

  Amerika nem igazan osztalytarsadalom, kulturalisan nagyon nem az,
  ahol feher gimnazistak jiveban beszelgetnek es gangsta
  rapet hallgatnak a hiphop sapkajukban , Yo-mama-yo, mondjam vagy
  mutassam :-)) (nem tudom mutatni,valahogy nagyon kombinative kellene
  a csuklot es az ujjakat behajlitgatni :-)).

   A New Deal  "economic levelling"-jet sem igazan lehet "visszacsinalni".
  (Gingrich FDR-t a legnagyobb huszadik szazadi elnoknek tartja, az
  ellenseg megtevesztese vegett, bar a C-SPAN-en rola aradozo Toeffler
  hazaspar akkora libertarianus hogy orom nezni, a neni olyan vehemens
  pro-choice, hogy az mar kifejezetten mulatsagos).
 
  A konzervativ tehat tovabbra is morog.  (morogni egyebkent jo)

<div class='sharedaddy sd-block sd-like jetpack-likes-widget-wrapper jetpack-likes-widget-unloaded' id='like-post-wrapper-192691293-16516606-68785fcd627d2' data-src='https://widgets.wp.com/likes/?ver=14.1#blog_id=192691293&post_id=16516606&origin=www.orulunkvincent.hu&obj_id=192691293-16516606-68785fcd627d2&n=1' data-name='like-post-frame-192691293-16516606-68785fcd627d2' data-title='Like or Reblog'><h3 class="sd-title">Like this:</h3><div class='likes-widget-placeholder post-likes-widget-placeholder' style='height: 55px;'><span class='button'><span>Like</span></span> <span class="loading">Loading...</span></div><span class='sd-text-color'></span><a class='sd-link-color'></a></div>