The Reactionary Mind

Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Donald Trump

De: Corey Robin

Narrado por: Mike Chamberlain

In The Reactionary Mind, Robin traces conservatism back to its roots in the reaction against the French Revolution. He argues that the right was inspired, and is still united, by its hostility to emancipating the lower orders. Some conservatives endorse the free market; others oppose it. Some criticize the state; others celebrate it. Underlying these differences is the impulse to defend power and privilege against movements demanding freedom and equality - while simultaneously making populist appeals to the masses. Despite their opposition to these movements, conservatives favor a dynamic conception of politics and society - one that involves self-transformation, violence, and war. They are also highly adaptive to new challenges and circumstances. This partiality to violence and capacity for reinvention have been critical to their success.

©2011 Oxford University Press, Inc. (P)2018 Tantor

Reseñas de la Crítica

"The Reactionary Mind has emerged as one of the more influential political works of the last decade." (Washington Monthly)

the historical linage of the right

amazing well organized timeline of the right's history. an important thing to understand the world we live in.

Very instructive.

Cory Robin examines a broad range of conservative thought and finds the thread running through each apparently new and shifting ethos. Each time, Robin says, conservatives learn from the left, adapt, and recast their belief in hierarchy in the terms used by the left.

Conservatism is counter-revolutionary, but it is not an attempt to turn back the clock. If anything, conservative counter-revolutionaries have contempt for the old regime that grew soft and allowed itself to be overthrown, But conservatism again and again invents new ways to sell hierarchy to a new age.

If the divine right of kings is abandoned, they portray monarchy as the most rationale system. If freedom is what people want, they complain about the tyranny of the poor and dispossessed, who are taking away the freedoms of the silent majority.

If it’s no longer acceptable to assert white male privilege, they recast racism and sexism as religious beliefs in private (white) schools and the right of women to stay at home and be cared for by men. If violence is no longer fashionable, they talk of business as a kind of war and entrepreneurs and CEOs as generals who must have obedient troops, and countries who have a patriotic duty to support businesses and business leaders.

Samuel Johnson once said Republicans want to level down so they are equal to the King, but they don’t want to level up so they are no better than their servants. So the key to making conservatism popular is to convince people that true enforced equality will hurt them by leveling up more than it helps them by leveling down.

Equality will hurt their freedoms more than it helps. It’s better to be a favored subject of benevolent rulers than to be reduced to the level of the lowest of the low. That’s the sales pitch, anyway. And it’s the reason millions of people who are not highly educated or affluent, the people Democrats think they are helping, are voting Republican.

Insightful and Timely

This book took me on a journey from the origins of right wing conservatism to the Trump era and left me with a new understanding of reactionary politics.

Brilliant author, slowish text

I love political philosophy and this book is full of it, but it dwells for a long time on Burke and his conception of the sublime, which I found too poetic and abstract for my taste. I vastly preferred the more modern analyses in the final chapters, particularly covering the last 50 years, since I know the history better, and the philosophy was more tangible, I would love to see another book from Robins that focuses more on the parallel between modern conservatives and their counterparts from centuries past, rather than deep dives of the earlier thinkers whose history I’m not as familiar with (and would take a much longer book to put into context). I love Robins’ appearances to talk about this book on YouTube and podcasts, where he does an excellent job of distilling down its main points.

Interesting, a bit disorganized

This books responds to a need. What's been needed is a theoretical elaboration of political conservatism. There have been plenty of those but, for the most part, they have been provided by conservatives so they were partisan and they were attempting to redefine the movement.

What Corey Robin provides is a survey of conservative theory and some practice. In chronological order, Robin takes his survey through Hobbes, Burke, Nietzsche, Hayek and Austrian school, mid-century American reaction, Ayn Rand, Bush-era neocon warmongering, Scalia, and Trump. Robin posits a unifying definition of reaction throughout.

The biggest shortcoming is the episodic nature of the survey. As this plays out throughout the book, the chronology is not as clean as it should be and the consistency of the episodes changes throughout the survey. For instance, after moving on from Burke, Robin circles back to him in subsequent chapters for additional excursions. This time and space would have been better spent flushing out one of the main premises of the second half of the book, where Robin posits two strains of reactionary types, following in the lineage of Nietzsche and the militaristic type on the one hand and on the other hand the Austrian school and the captain of industry entrepreneur type.

Despite these shortcomings, it is still an enjoyable book. Robin was responding to a need and he contributed to the literature on conservatism and reaction by do so. While he didn't write the definitive guide to conservatism and reaction, he did provide an edifying and at times stimulating tome.

great analysis but needs to better distinguish quotes

it might have helped if there was a separate reader for quotes. I've seen that in other books.

An Important Book, but a Sub-Optimal Reader...

Corey Robin makes a first-class contribution to political literature in this explanation of how and why "conservatives" think the way they do...Too bad the narrator wasn't up for this particular job...Listen to the sample and make your own decision...Thanks!

Rich, accurate, predictive

This is an authoritative book that you will want to reread. Very concise, densely packed, yet easily readable and smartly designed.

It will expand your view of the reactionary/conservative ideology. Tough and serious conservatives should read this as well. If you are academic, I do not think you will disagree with many of his points, and may learn a great deal about where you’re coming from and going.

I think it is fair and realistic, though preferring a Liberal-Left orientation.

This is a brilliant book.

In short if you want to understand Conservatism not in the terms it prefers but from the level of it's DNA I don't know if there is better than this. This book is insightful, direct, and deeply thought out. It isn't about looking for some mystical, morally lazy middle ground it's about defining what Conservatism wants and how it acts. Pair it with Bob Altemeyer's "The Authoritarians" and you'll have the essence of Conservatism in it's starkest relief. This is a research document not an editorial, I can't recommend it enough.

All that’s missing is a Marxian class critique in this context

Simply excellent, a great shortcut to much knowledge on all this violent Right-wing nonsense. This world is a world built by the conservativism & reactionaries. They want hierarchy, not justice. Rich overlords, not less people above them. Someone to call the n-word, not for the dispossessed to do better. Remember that conservativism will always adopt popular language to serve power. US Democratic Party liberalism is partner here, not opposed. Winning with violence maintains status quo, not arguments, virtue or “how things should be.” If you are of the True Left, a socialist, a communist or whatnot you should read this book especially if you are married to any notions of nonviolence, “ideological diversity is best” & technology as progress. Also, f*** the police.