We have established the outlines of our revisionist thesis, that in the grand story of Western Civilization it is in fact the element most oft maligned for its authoritarian influence that actually laid the groundwork for political freedoms of the West, the Church, while Her enemies took advantage of a strategic misstep on the Church's part in not recognizing a certain symmetry between Herself and the emergent bourgeois political movements in the post-'Enlightenment' era.
These enemies coupled the new political move towards self-aware capitalism with their anti-monarchical and hyper-rationalist mindset. While it is clear now that the bourgeois classes were much better off under the monarchies that prevailed before their political movement swept in democracies, a corollary to our thesis is that the leaders of this Revolution considered all along that the bourgeois were their cattle to slaughter. And while the Church in her right political mind had and would continue to have built in many defenses of the lesser owners of private property absent Her strategy in Her war with Her enemies, those who opposed Her set out to ride the catalyst of the social rearrangements that accompanied mass-industrialization to a political supremacy that would allow them to take these new classes of lesser capitalist for all their worth.
The proof is in the pudding. At no time in history have the Western peoples been more taxed, more regulated, less free and more disquieted. The superficiality of Capitalism that pervades the West is more a figment of the remnant of the Cold War imagination than a proper notion of what social system actually prevails in the West. Through a combination of soft and hard social measures, the elites of the West have a populace that owns property in name only. When any second level analysis is done it becomes clear that while property titles might be held in private names, what can be done with the property is almost entirely proscribed by the state. And even to retain nominally private title, the state must be paid off many times over.
How has this been done? How is it that a populace now nearly devoid of any of the prerequisites of private action are more convinced than ever that they suffer, to one degree or another, under the supposed constraints that such a system sustains?
No doubt it has been a piecemeal process. Part and parcel to this process has been the denaturing of any so-called conservative resistance. What we have seen in the United States in particular since at least the end of the Second World War is a choreography of conservative resistance to a sustained liberal onslaught.
What is simultaneously endearing and disarming is that the conservative popinjay is often seen as a very affable guy. While he retains the air of his patrimony, in point of fact, no longer having recourse to the unshakeable cornerstone of Christ the King and the Thomistic underpinnings of natural law, our conservative figures are found most often at a loss when pressed hard to stand for a consistently conservative agenda. This inability to stall the tide of liberalism plays perfectly into the aforesaid piecemeal approach of the Revolution.
Instead, each conservative figure becomes a fulcrum around which social changes progress unabated. Beloved as an inept throwback to those with conservative leanings, these figures embody the very state of conservative resistance, while they are sometimes snickered at and other times more lightheartedly mocked by those most ardent in their wish to destroy Western civilization. My parent's generation had Archie Bunker; the current political firmament, Donald Trump. One perhaps no less fictional than the other.
This planned obsolescence of conservative ideals, each succeeding generation of conservatives further removed from adherence to the foundational teachings of Western civilization, leaves the next generation of conservatives smaller in number and more adrift. The power elite are successful in their choreographed campaign of scorn against this evermore intellectually diminished contingent of society.
Yet, the truth is not easily overcome. There remains two distillations of Western thought that have remained largely immune to this failure of popular conservatism. One is the traditional element of the Church; the other is the natural law formulations of the School of Austrian Economics. The first represents the original and true foundation for our civilization. The other is an important refinement of natural law scholarship that makes crystal clear the ways in which the state is to be limited in order for private society to flourish. We are convinced that it will be a coupling of these two elements that will eventually undo the present hegemony of the liberal state.