next from a conference on the 50th anniversary of the publication of james burnham's "suicide of the west" a panel discussion of liberalism at home and the challenges to western survival. this is a little over an hour. >> my name is carolyn hanson and i'm the speaker's director program creates a great pleasure that i'm here to introduce a distinguished patron of liberal arts and western civilization. professor noel valis. she is a professor of spanish and portuguese. okay no longer portuguese. [laughter] she was a recipient of the guggenheim fellowship and also a national endowment for the humanities fellowship. she is written on sacred realism, spanish civil war and

19th century spanish novels so without further ado the moderator for the second panel liberalism at home and the challenges to western survival. [applause] >> can can you hear me all right all right? welcome to the second panel on this conference on james burnham "suicide of the west" which the william f. buckley program is organized to put together. i should point out that unfortunately james was unable to attend but wonderfully at the massachusetts -- the last moment we have a replacement. avik roy has stepped up and volunteer to fill in for him so we thank him. [applause] our time of consist of james

taranto and avik roy. we will open up the floor for discussion. when i accepted lawrence kind invitation to moderate this panel i was genuinely to thought -- delighted to have the opportunity to revisit burnham's classic book but as i started to read i realized that i was absolutely dead wrong about it. not about his classic status but i have actually read the book before. because as i read further interested as had i once read this book i would never have forgotten it. my memory of having read it probably arose from recognizing the title title that surely i must to read decades ago. i would never have forgotten it because of the professor of literature.

the first thing i noticed was not so much what he was saying but how he was saying it. in chapter 1 contraction of the west it begins while working on this book one morning i happened to come across lingering on a remote shelf historical -- left over from my school days long long ago. i began idly turning the pages. for no particular reason other than to receive an occasion as a writer will to escape for a moment from the lonely discipline of his craft. a little bit later he writes leafing through an historical atlas of this sort we see history through multiple polarizing glass that reduces the in the net human brady to a single rigorous dimension effective political control.

this dimension is unambiguously represented by a single creative color red green yellow blue impose on a particular segment of the outlying world. the red on italy egypt means groping rule. the blue blues means positive rule. the uncovered amorphous anarchy. burnham has at once promising first by using the classic in recalling his youth and then his all too human yielding to the distractions all writers crave. but of course this atlas is not a distraction as mr. burnham's son has also pointed out for it

represents the very core of his thought in this chapter which introduces the theme of the rapid decline of western civilization. his ability to focus with unsentimental clarity on this image sets the stage iv the rest of the book. above all i was struck by the sober way he went about outlining what can only be described as impending disaster. no four horsemen here. no apocalypse but still disaster. indeed the terms of engagement in this book are harsh and unsparing or he speaks of the necessity of the will to survive of the west's suicidal tendency and provocatively then and now of liberalism as the ideology of western suicide. so we have two extraordinarily drastic terms, suicide and survival.

rector campbell also recognize on this. a passage to something so terrible as to conjure up the image of the last standing man are the last man standing to put it in the right order. i found myself asking is this what burnham is marching toward? is that all that is as the song goes? how shall the west survived and what are the forms this survival will take? but then i would turn to the epigraph from spenser's the queen that burnham carefully chose though he does not identify or comment on the source of the quotation and is not in the edition that i read. after describing the cave of despair spencer has been rebuked by the red cross light for provoking the suicide of -- and it is despair himself who speaks in this epigraph saying what if

some little pain that patents have that makes frail/to fear the better way of? is a pain that brings ease and lays the soul to sleep in quiet grave? sleep after toil port after stormy sea ease after war death after life does greatly pleased. hearing this insidious argument of self defeat he nearly killed himself but is saved by the spirit of faith whereupon despair hangs himself. that is the part that comes after. my question is what is the connection between spenser's figure of despair and the liberalism that burnham identifies as the ideology of western suicide? does he need is to make this connection? it's so there is great irony and

paradox in it for his burnham himself declares liberalism is the optimistic is espousal of the perfectibility of human nature one of rationalism and secularism but it is the consequences of such utopian thinking it's underlying nonrational basis that may lead us to the cave of despair. all of this tells us something about the moral compass of james burnham's vision in this book. now i'm privileged and pleased to introduce our distinguished speakers. russell reno is editor one of the best journals published today as public square pages i especially love reading. i was amused to discover on line and to read that after graduating high school he spent a year living in a tent in yosemite valley and i would like to know the story behind that one. [laughter]

rusty received his ph.d. in religious studies from yale university and taught theology and ethics at creighton university in omaha for 20 years and notable among his publications are the collection of essays fighting the noonday devil and the rooms of the church the change in the atonement and cure of the soul and the co-author of sanctified vision and introduction to early interpretation of the bible. james taranto is editor of opinion journal.com and responsible for his popular best of the web today column and very memorable for his sense of humor and pointed commentary. he is a member of "the wall street journal"'s editorial board. he has been with the journal since 1996 after spending five years as an editor of city journal the manhattan institute's quarterly public policy. he has also worked at the heritage foundation united press international and elsewhere and

he co-edited the book presidential leadership braving the best and the worst in the white house in 2004. that would be a different story with it? [laughter] and finally avik roy is a senior fellow at the manhattan institute and a forbes opinion editor and the author of the forbes blog apothecary and many readers are familiar with his trenchant criticisms of the patient protection affordable care act otherwise known as obamacare. he is also served as an outside adviser to the romney campaign on health care issues. he is a contributor to the national review on line and the author of the encounter broadsides how medicaid fails and he too is a yalie having studied at the yale university school of medicine as well as m.i.t.. please join me now in welcoming our panelists. [applause]

>> i guess i will start out. thank you very much for that wonderful meditation on spenser and the cave of despair. i never thought about liberalism hanging itself. [laughter] but i rather like that outcome. when i read "suicide of the west" it's certainly a book that i'm very sympathetic with. after 9/11 i tutu asking many of my friends who are very concerned about islamic terrorism and islamic extremism he said what is the greatest threat to the west? kohl.

.. >> >> political dream is a

dream of justice without virtue. more of a dream of virtue without discipline or censure. and spiritually is of realization and salvation. to my mind that is the metaphysical or anti-metaphysical dream of liberalism. so maybe that was a provocation in light of his own account. so the second issue is the implausible way understandable given the book was written in the '60s but the impossible way that it treats communism as anti-western. is transparently the case that communism was a contending forces in the west of form of westernism that was extremely effective

at conquering a great deal of the world. i would submit try that today has been westernized by communism and it is an indispensable stage in its development with the capitalist society russia was capitalized by communism so it was not the western ideology but one of the perversions of the west that was contending for the future of the world to use his terminology. it did a great deal to westernize the political imagination of the part of the world that had dominance. and to also with the capacity of liberals to

defeat communism because he sometimes did not see how the revolution would help b.c. the liberal technocrat our rivals completing for dominance in the post traditional west it is the liberal technocrat have the cop is are we are at war with each other in the postwar era. and liberalism has techniques to establish and maintain power that are in fact quite effective. of good example from decolonization it served the interests of liberal technocrats and with that suez canal crisis clear of the demonstrated they were subservient and it was the

instrumental move to establish but do demonstrate the non soviets could do nothing without american backing. >> can to serve the interests specifically america than technocratic elites so it did not represent our defeat but part of our victory to a good imperium globally. and ways to maintain power with the liberal strategy to maintain power in society to parcel out of committees in a way to maintain power. they appear to be anti-western and suicidal

but we know from experience that in fact, they have not been weakened but are able to redouble their strength. sold to my final point to underestimate liberalism the is not in touch with reality and the example that is the most powerful is the clause in view of the soviet union during the '50s and '60s. it defeated itself for all kinds of reasons that tends toward industrial. and its lack of contact and has adjusted itself ongoing

viability and understanding of the capacity is something we need to do and that capacity for adjustments dems for the fact that american end of liberalism is not rationalism of politics. is that pragmatic mentality. but the principals are highly plastic. it is a quality except when it is not it is freedom except when it is not. it is tolerant exception it is not. it is tolerance except when it is not. it is welcoming and it is very difficult to see the principles but is instead is

a pragmatic step -- step underwritten of a pragmatic mentality. but to put it more differently liberalism is the establishment of ruling mentality of political philosophy and failing to recognize liberalism is connected culturally with certain strands from the '70s and '80s but nevertheless say cultural base that gives it a try end of stability and content to perpetuate itself with those principles.

>> if it trichomes globally and it may but it could be the dominant global mentality. it may represent the suicide of humanity but not the suicide of the west but the triumph of a certain faction they queue. [applause] >> i have the better grade than our moderator does because i distinctly recall i never read suicide of the west. i was comparing the description of the liberal of 1964 holding up better

than i would have expected but there were two very glaring differences and one of them is in the past 50 years liberalism has completely rejected the freedom of speech if that is an exaggeration i suggest you read the constitutional amending introduced by tom udall of a new mexico. he has 48 co-sponsors the 49th democrat and all currently in the senate have voted on procedural motions. those numbers will decline but not because they changed their minds. this amendment is a response to this a this is united case that independent expenditures could not be regulated which is the case

of campsite -- campaign finance lot coming up on free-speech and corporations have this will go far beyond by reversing citizens united is says congress or state legislatures will pass any you reasonable regulation to influence the election. the crucial saying in his the supreme court on campaign finance is corruption it is not about corruption by persuasion ct to change the minds of the voters and i think that the democrats are for this not because it would be to their vintage as democrats but ideological grounds so this makes the rejection of free speech total.

political correctness is a better way to examine this ecology of rejection of free-speech. because what you see is robert frost to said zero liberal man to take his own side of a quarrel. with that understanding a free-speech but not just a legalistic understanding bettis social and cultural understanding that everyone is entitled to his opinion and they have the right to speak their piece. but they don't believe that anymore. look what happened into the guy he was driven because he

supported the initiative of same-sex marriage in california. who get the incident from earlier that was mentioned although they did not specify the provocation. and there are two reasons. one was a show of dominance if you shut your opponents up if you don't you will of appeal but they may not have the political or legal power but they have a cultural power. but it is a sign of older ability because they feel threatened of dissenting views and we have seen that quite a bit where all critics are denounced as racist and so on and so forth.

and they did report tell that liberals might abandon free-speech but then talk the second way that they are different is that burnham said almost nothing about sex. i mean that in both cents the roles of men and women also sexual relationships. there obviously has been fast social change and i would pinpoint to new policy decisions that was from this our social change was a driven by liberalism or the omission is the indication of that but it has adapted to that and made it essential to the ideology one is the fda approval of

the pill as a form of contraception in 1960 to enable the sexual revolution freedom in a way that was not possible before. the other was a civil-rights act that extended its protections to women originally as discrimination and the other was introduced mysteriously by a virginias segregationist. some people argue he was sincere in his devotion to feminist principles but is agreed but he thought he would embarrass people voting against it or for it then they would be embarrassed to vote down the bill then they voted for it so perhaps he was too clever by half but with that change

from what the liberals adopted and it is the central core of liberalism. and these touche changes in tandem have more of any fact on the culture and politics than anything else because it affects the structure of the family and the welfare state with legitimacy rates the which in turn i play snorer demands of expanding the welfare state. it has just been overwhelming and he if it did not see that that talking about the case that i was talking about before that panel began to say i understand how often this cannot support somebody who speaks up for women's

equality and freedom in muslim countries. and i said bernam explained that that he has a chapter that he talks about the for political ideas the differences come down how they rank some value some more than others and his ranking for the liberal the uppermost priority was peace followed by justice, followed by freedom followed by liberty it was personal freedom so liberty is beside the point but think about this. to embrace free speech now with his sexual freedom. we have competing claims of

justice speaking on behalf of justice for women of our muslims who are a repressed minority and the claim on behalf of muslims end up trumping because of that topmost value of peace because the claim of justice on behalf of the potential or actual adversary of america or the west out ways the claman peace and justice on behalf of humanity some are westerners and some are not there is the answer to your question. [laughter] and then i will pass over so we have time for questions. >> did is great to be here also thanks to the buckley program for that beautiful

moment earlier this semester when she got to come to the campus. [applause] and to settle that invitation i think all of us were very appreciative and i also want to thank john to bring up that moment from 16 years ago. i was there. [laughter] his hair was flopping in the wind and i was tasked that evening with preventing of lot of koreans to break down that door with two by fours to get into the hall. >> north koreans? >> south korea's. [laughter] a data would not forget it does not happen in every day but of course, we're not expecting mobs to break down the door but that is

relevant to our subject for today. i actually want to echo something that the earlier panelist mentioned the managerial revolution in my mind has the most profound implications for today. if you think how the state has grown across the west what is the driver? of course, government spending but our movement has done a reasonably good job to hold the line looking at tax revenue as a percentage of economic output, 50 or 60 and has gone up with the scale and scope of activity has been regulation but to have those

books like bernam and we express skepticism that there has and though coherent approach or attack or action against the growth of the of regulatory state. in there is a reason. think of the conservative movement since world war tarot there was an argument as to which term there has been a lot of great stylist that we have not necessarily done a great job to produce people who are able to fight on the of battlefield to steer their regulatory state in every direction. it is really, really boring.

1926 the federal register the of books that the government puts out with notices is 2600 pages. in 2012 it was 78,000 pages 20,000 pages of regulations alone for obamacare that is the bulk of how the obamacare changed america we talk about the spending that the government is so heavily involved in the health care system already formed the great society program through medicare and medicaid is relatively modest italy increases spending by 15 percent but where it is a change from the old system introduces a layer of regulation, a federal regulation into the health insurance market that

determines the choice is how we pay for a and consumer health care. the regulatory state is a huge problem and a huge deficiency in our movement. i am not sure how we reorient our movement to do something where we build a cadres of regulatory ninjas to go out and fight the battles. maybe that isn't the right metaphor because in a sense we have done is we tend to say if we produce our own regulatory experts to fight that battle they are technocrats the government has no legitimate role we should just keepv!%h%j"f┘ñ"t[ó -

advancing. we have not found a way to navigate that defied between saying in principle against regulation reno that it tends to be economically inefficient and yet we have to have a plan or an approach to rolling back or reforming the regulatory state to make it smaller. it is fine to say the government should have no role in health care. that is great to read the constitution also but it is spending $1 trillion per year on health care driven by 50,000 pages of regulation and unless we figure out a way to address that problem we're never going to enjoy of freer health care system that we want and espoused in this leads me to the second half

should there be a suicide watch for the west? i thought rusty brought up a beautiful point how communism is a western idea. what is the west? stick it sold the entire world is sequestered one form or another maybe you can say isis' really is a western is politics but with use of technology they are quite is capitalism originated in though west the gsa capitalism around the world looking at the heritage foundation the two countries are hongkong and singapore so we have a lot to learn from the geographic peace when we think about how to apply and advance the

valleys in the interest of though west the free talk about a set of countries where historically white europeans have inhabited then we can express concern about that but we're not here to talk about ethnic groups and if they are prosperous but a set of ideas but are triumphant because this is what bernam reminds us of like john lot riding out the future of the of west in the late 18th century at the time of the enlightenment with the rebellion of the conservative is some of roman catholicism or other

forms of government we did not know at that time with the industrial revolution would do to the west we had a similar point the revolution -- and formation a transforms a whole world in the way to is think about the way in the industrialized sense have not fully grasped. that debate was of battle about industrial societies with the informational and economy is more important than it would finance not in a straight line but he faulted ways that we cannot predict.

once they that is interesting some of the greatest capitalist of our era i'd like steve jobs and sector bird our political liberals. leer for capitalism but why is this of the greatest space star political liberals? there also the global listed nationally oriented such as looking down on nationalism most of the super successful capitalists are the same way actually. a of a global perspective the way they're looking at each country and try to do business everywhere including red china and it is moving and a capitalist direction with less

political freedom but it is sent all clear the west is failing but if we were at a similar conference we would be culminating about the triumph and how that idea has taken over the world and how ideas of the quality are demolished so yes is the state trying to do more? yes. but under this process and economic equality increase but it is the information economy were successful entrepreneurs can now make billions of dollars those you can navigate those college educated elites are

doing extremely well this the so-called the blue-collar worker, his role in the new economy is not clear. so as we think about us at bernam thought process i would argue he would be very concerned about the regulatory state and also tried to think hard how the information economy is transforming political orders around the world in ways that may work against us but principally i would say the political problems we have today are different because liberalism has some limitations is in a world where if you worked hard to get ahead anybody could have

done a good job in the still believe that concept but in a world where certain people have of fundamental advantage? we have to think how we address those disparities are average people going to believe in 2013 if you work hard to have an equal chance to get ahead as somebody who has a degree from yale? it is not exactly clear. we have reason to be optimistic. sexual mores are different but economic prosperity is a paean to because of western values just 1 billion people have them listed -- have been lifted out of poverty because of western values hundreds of millions of people have been the bird -- liberated we are celebrating

the 50th anniversary of the suicide of the west also of the fall of the berlin wall. to efforts by government to regulate have proven not to be that successful. is a source at to be optimistic not only growing around the world to be triumphant now just as there were before. thank you. [applause] >> they give it to a the panel. we do have time for questions.

maybe we could pick chin but the one i wanted to ask is it is never a democracy that did not commit suicide if they're all forms of government are subject to the same vulnerabilities because of human frailties it is just oppose touche bernam understanding of liberalism i don't think he is quoted in the book but to what degree do they speak of the same thing? >>. >> american democracy has not committed suicide 200 years later it is that testimony to the fact we

have social capital and a democratic system that is paralyzed because with my analysis it reflects the ambivalence of the country with respect to deep questions about what type of society we want to be. we have a system and it is dysfunctional because our society is between two different visions. it feels that they run everything but the friend of mine in the york that said you have to go to texas. [laughter] >> i would agree.

i could tell you it was eye opening. the capitalist energy in a share right now is incredible. their sense of the possibility to make them more prosperous than it made me feel of our argument relative of what is going on with their political orders are not democratic. we don't have to get on a side discussion of political economic freedom are correlated. but the problem is not so democratic but madison and the and. we have a system designed to make it hard to change laws but in those few brief moments where progresses had overwhelming power such as

2010 and 1965 it has been very hard and that regulatory states have taken over. and the framers believed in the system they were devising plummeted government had a disadvantage because in those few moments the progressives do their system and conservatives have not been able to reverse that because of the addisonian checks and balances on the temporary moments of power. that the midterm election to publish the shot dead tuesday canceled the midterm elections. [laughter] >> this was the day before the election their argument

was we have midterm elections and make some hard for the president to govern so relieved democracy is the corrective rather than the problem. >> and the bush years and the reagin years. >> in terms of the question of the regulatory state we are stuck with it in the real question is to get to run it? to make it somewhat less burdensome to organize people's lives with a powerful influence behalf to impose say bureaucratic therapeutic mechanism to organize people's lives.

stick we see this on university campuses. where bad things are happening so now we have a of legalized system in order to impose some order and as the family declines in the united states we will get a growth of government in the press today set to be administered so we wind up regulating in order to you compensate for the deregulation of into the life and sexual revolution. >> i see one of the major problems as education people did not have an understanding of the free

market. that is that people get from the media. with the predominant thinking. >> i have to do say that it is extremely capitalistic everyone was to go to stanford it now has the lowest admission is rate in terms of colleges because everyone has become an entrepreneur so that is the exciting development. but that is where metal in the tradition but the western canon in the

intellectual tradition where we are suffering but at least on the issue of entrepreneurs there is a lot of reason to have optimism. >> university is a progressive church because progresses' don't go to church. [laughter] if they want to transmit their values to the children how do they do that? they have to transmit the values to their children so the profound structural reasons why the culture is left of left and not center-left because i am a conservative catholic dialogue to transmit my values to the next

generation i can give money to the church or identify traditional organizations or the rights of columbus or the masonic lodge there almost all on the conservative side so progressives don't have institutions to mediate their values. >> people who appreciate capitalism by and large become capitalists can go into business so there is a self selection in issue but i know other people die of the al leiter -- out lawyer. >> there are three parts. but regulatory in does but

but the broader difficulty that comes from bernam there is an interest of the regulatory state there hasn't been any serious thinking of pride political thought bernam said this is the future so shouldn't there be a conservative philosophy except for the utopian libertarians? many things there should be no regulation but it seems to me that is the challenge for the thinkers today. >> we can have all whole conference on that topic i will do my best to correlate but it actually goes back to

the selfie selection with the regulators with a gay is an attractive mechanism but i will say that here is where our movement could learn a lot more as to purely be about economic liberalism because how would. inform our thinking? we have to be gradual not disruptive barrasso empirical so how does that frame that? we have to think about with regulation a bunch of people in a room say let's regulate this but they don't think of the cost-benefit they're not required to by law but there is no evidence but it is one

of the few ways we can govern to have the empirical framework for they going to destroy the economy are made businesses dropped out or encourage more competition in a more prosperous economy? we have to think of that's there is another lesson in this regard conservative is a man says alcee a lot of that means elitism that has resulted brought so much aristocrat's but the corporate is families that he and down the big gigantic businesses and avoid the rules this is where that regulatory state to help us

think through because part of what we are now fighting against is a conservatism that it will be disruptive if we just don't know we can i have a free health care. who has one of those? like jonathan gruber the other day but that's easy to is the betrays that impulse that is something because populism alone will never succeed there called you the its because they have more influence and more power in the populous cannot always easily fight back so we have to figure out some sort of language to appeal to the

the class that freedom is better than regulation but these are hard problems and why we have not solved them. >> with is to apply the cost-benefit analysis to put us caboshed deregulation but he said the office was created during the carter administration and the reagan administration put it too bad use. >> i am afraid we don't have any more time i assume you want to stick to your schedule. >> let's do one more.

>> to touch on the contraction or the collapse of the two-parent family are those trends as robust as they seem and if so what about western culture? >> the pursuit of the people who go to church every sunday has not changed in the last 50 years one of my sociologists friend says that has been true about 100 years but what has is those who have no religious affiliation richest 20 percent they drive the cultural for the religious left of the to do first century they are tired of putting up the christian nation there will not put up

with it anymore that creates the impression of the decline of religious faith there really is a transformation those who are not religious but acquiesce to the dominance of christian values of america that is a big change it is not a decline in religious faith but the influence of religious faith. >> it is the decline over the elites because then it evangelical side has been a growing so maybe we are becoming more polarized. i don't think the trend is going away anytime soon that is technological changes but

that coming apart of charles murray with the more educated that is where religious of going to church that i don't know if they are more religious of greater concentration of protestants but they are more liberal. >> marriages to ring just on a talk the talk of the '60s bell walked the walk of the '50's. [laughter] one of the great problems in our society is not income inequality but i think gay

marriage is going to be paid for by the board because it cannot help to undermine because it was a sexual revolution on a point but anybody is committed to a limited government should be very worried about the future of marriage so then people will demand to take care of them single women vote democrat so strongly because they feel vulnerable and they don't feel they have a network or a reliable basis for the future of their lives. they don't feel secure.

with every your moral views you should be very concerned if you are concerned about limited government. >> it is always good to look at western europe actually the divorce rate for college educated couples is than% so the bride and groom are more than 10% but among field beats the family has not broken down but is in europe it definitely has so let's get scandinavia where there is economic freedom there has been a complete breakdown. >> in france you are more likely to grow up with your natural parents in in the united states. the french still very but

they stay together. >> there is a breakdown of formal bearish but there is cohabitating couples for with children the state together long periods of time. five free that up to say that while the formal characteristic the community that people go to church on the sunday or that entity it might erode where christianity where they pay taxes to use the church there is a family breakdown but not in social order we all assumed that family breakdown of these jews social order there may be a way out of that conundrum. because think about this what is the one difference