518
PARTISAN REVIEW
whi ch leads
to
a certain amount of sentimenta lity.
If
one is going to
defend neoconser va tism , then either one speaks
to
the merit o f the
argument itself, or one sho uld be more candid abo ut calcul a ting
which groups or constituencies benefit from which principles or
programs, and then perhaps advance the argument tha t the benefit of
a specifi c group enhances the welfare of the larger community or
group.
James
Q.
Wi lson:
I certainl y agree with wha t you 've just said, and I
don 't think my views were meant
to
persuade you tha t I didn 't agree.
I sugges ted tha t men and women are by n ature social and po litical
commun al creatures who do no t have wholl y idiosyn cra tic, random ,
ephemeral values; that some of these core values tend
to
be perma–
nent and unch ang ing, or ch ange ver y slow ly. And to identify those
and to understand them more full y is, I think , where classical
po liti cal philosoph y began , and where much contemporary po litical
thought could pro babl y return . I think there is a long way between
tha t vi ew and whatever people want a t a p ar ticular moment. Then I
went on to say tha t given the instincts tha t come from wha t I regard
as na tural sentiments evinced by men and women li ving in commu–
niti es, one tri es to make an intell ectual defense of core va lues, and to
see how they influence po li cy. But first you must examine ev idence
and describe consequences because now you h ave responsibility for
affecting man y peopl e. Secondl y, you quickl y become aware o f the
tensions and incon sistencies in those views, and reconciling tenden–
cies and inconsistencies intell ectuals have been train ed for. We are
simplifi ers; we tend
to
be doctrin aire. It is a sobering experience
when you realize tha t you can 't do tha t and be truthful to the core
values. Now all o f this strikes me as common sense. My coll eagues on
the panel describe it as an " ism ," as a movement, so tha t they can
po int out th at it is either tri vial or irrelevant or wrong . I don 't think
o f it as a movement or a an ideology. T hey di sagree as
to
whether it
is important. The one who thinks it is important thinks it is wrong.
T he one who thinks there may be something to say fo r it thinks it is
unimportant. I don 't think it reall y makes a lo t o f difference,
because, as you rightl y sa id , each ar gument has to be judged on its
merits, and wh at I find allractive about the magazines I write for is
th a t one a llempts to make an argument tha t is capable o f being
judged on its merits, and one expects it
to
be criti cized on its merits.
And one is no t expected to subordinate tha t argument to some larger
theoreti cal interes t.
Norman Birnbaum:
I think , too, that the failure o f libera lism might
