Episode 31 - We The People
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
Release Date: 05/21/2019
143 – The Conservative Mind at 70 with Michael Lucchese
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
In 1953 a little-known political theorist Russell Kirk repurposed his doctoral dissertation as a book for publication. His book, The Conservative Mind, would quickly become a bestseller, give the nascent conservative movement its name and intellectual moorings, be reviewed and debated in respectable publications across the country, and launch its author to international fame. Seventy years later, the book is still going strong. Now on its seventh edition and reprinted in multiple languages, The Conservative Mind is among the indispensable tomes for understanding the...
info_outline
142 – Jiving with Jaffa with Seth Root
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
While Leo Strauss was famous for influencing men and women who became intellectual heavyweights in the conservative movement—names like Allan Bloom, Irving Kristol, Harvey Mansfield, Thomas Pangle barely scratch the surface—few stand as tall as Harry Jaffa. A cantankerous and quarrelsome debater to some and a beloved architect of restoring conservatism to a more American-focused and principled-based approach to others, Jaffa lived a remarkably long and productive life. His writings persuaded William F. Buckley, Jr. away from a more sympathetically Southern conservatism and,...
info_outline
141 – The Soul of Civility with Alexandra Hudson
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
Everyone supports civility, in theory, when the “other side” is behaving themselves. But what is the role of civility in an era of growing political division? Is civility a weakness that can be exploited by our political opponents? Is it simply being well-mannered and exceedingly nice, or is there more to it? Those are the very questions Alexandra Hudson set out to answer in her new book, . Alexandra joins Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis to unpackage how civility holds the timeless answers for humanity’s timeless struggle with living alongside the “other...
info_outline
140 – Back to Burke
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
The name Edmund Burke is used quite liberally on the Saving Elephants podcast as host Josh Lewis makes no bones about being a “Burkean” conservative. But who was this Irish statesman, economist, and philosopher? What were his contributions to conservative thought? Why does Josh hold him in such high regard? And why do some conservatives argue there’s no place for Burke in conservatism? Rather than inviting one guest to tackle these pressing questions, Josh explores the various conversations had on the podcast with past guests about Burke to help us navigate...
info_outline
139 – Perspectives from Across the Pond with Sarah Stook
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
The United States and United Kingdom have enjoyed and, at times, endured a symbiotic history, culture, politics, and global relationship. Often understanding the quirks of one nation helps us better understand our own. Sarah Stook, journalist of American politics and history, joins Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis to discuss what Americans and Brits can learn from one another, what unique challenges face young, British conservatives, the importance of the British monarch, and whether American politics looks as off-the-rails from an outsider’s perspective as it does from those...
info_outline
138 – The Conservative Historian with Belisarius Aves
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
“History offers not simply a chronicle of events but, more importantly, opportunities to gain insights about the human condition from the experience of other times and places,” writes Thomas Sowell in his provocatively titled book . “That is, it offers not merely facts but explanations.” Yet history’s capacity to benefit us is naturally limited by our natural biases. “History cannot be a reality check for visions when history is itself shaped by visions.” To learn how to extract beneficial explanations from history, therefore, we must first learn how to...
info_outline
137 – Political Theology with Jonathan Cole – Part 2
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
Christian or not, it’s undeniable that Western civilization, and the United States in particular, has deep historical roots in Judeo-Christian teachings. Scripture has shaped much of our culture, thought, values, and politics. But while plenty of Biblical passages appear to have political implications, there’s little consensus among the general population—to say nothing of the religiously devoted—what a political worldview based on the Bible should look like. Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis continues his conversation with Jonathan Cole on the topic of political...
info_outline
136 – Political Theology with Jonathan Cole – Part 1
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
“I never discuss anything else except politics and religion,” English writer, philosopher, and Christian apologist G. K. Chesterton once quipped. “There is nothing else to discuss.” For some sensible, genteel Americans, politics and religion are precisely what you don’t discuss in public and—perhaps even—in private company. Others discuss both with ease yet may have trouble thinking through what their politics might say about their religion, or how their religion ought to inform their politics. The discipline of political theology specializes in studying...
info_outline
135 – Cool Ellul with Jason Thacker
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
Modern views on how future technology is likely to change our lives range from bloviatingly aspirational visions of utopia to musings on whether the latest advancement in AI will destroy humankind in our lifetime or merely enslave us all in Matrix-style battery capillaries. Yet debates on whether technology is a neutral tool for our benefit or a near-unstoppable force leading us to a particular destiny are nothing new. In 1964, French philosopher and sociologist Jacques Ellul wrote , in which he argued technology had a totalizing effect that could potentially dehumanize our world...
info_outline
134 – Gilding a Mess with Avi Woolf
Saving Elephants | Millennials defending & expressing conservative values
In the aftermath of the Civil War and prior to the first World War lies an often overlooked era in American history known as the Gilded Age. This was an extraordinarily “messy” period where it’s often difficult to identify the heroes to extol or villains to condemn. But it is also a period that has unusually similar parallels to our own times from rapid technological advancements, growing partisanship, and the unraveling of communities and traditions. We might benefit from a closer understanding of the lessons learned in this messy period. Saving Elephants host...
info_outlinePoliticians are fond of talking about “the people.” But who are “the people”? That might sound like a nonsensical question but—it turns out—there are a lot of presuppositions baked into the concept of “the people” and much of the divide between the Right and the Left begins here. Identifying “the people” leads us to other important questions, such as: Who speaks on behalf of “the people”? And what system of government or society can best represent their interests and protect their rights?
In much of our political rhetoric today we are told that the most democratic expressions best represent “the people”. But what lurks behind the belief a direct, popular vote is somehow in the best interest of “the people” is the assumption is that “the people” can best be defined as a simple headcount.
They can’t.
“The people” is not a simple headcount. It is a recognition of sub-groups loosely bound to a larger group, of various interest groups within a nation-state, of factions that voluntarily choose to live in civil harmony with those with whom they don’t always agree and sometimes despise. Simply blending these sub-groups into one mass doesn’t provide clarity, it only makes our understanding of these collective interests harder to untangle.
One ought to be suspect of any political system which defines who speaks on behalf of “the people” either too narrowly or too broadly. Circumstance coupled with prudence dictates whether the polling of the majority, or the voice of the perceived “leaders” within each faction, or some truck driver who happened to call into a local radio talk show to weigh in on the matter, or some other means of discerning what “the people” have to say best represents what “the people” have to say. In practice, this means we should be suspect of the politician who seems wholly disinterested in “the people” just as we should be suspect of the politician who seems absolutely and consistently convinced they speak on behalf of “the people.”