In a recent post I mentioned a conference to be held in Wichita. The keynote speaker will be Thomas Woods. Kevin Miller sent me a link to some essays by him. He seems to be pretty libertarian and paleoconservative. I can't say that I find his political views congenial, although i certainly agree with him, and Russell Kirk, whom he quotes, about militarism.
I probably shouldn't say this without taking the time to explain it, but my sense is that these type of political theorists are simply too exclusively masculine in their approach to political life. David Schindler has made the point that the public life of our society needs to be more fully informed by the feminine and the contemplative, nurturing values of active receptivity. The Enlightenment and rationalism, which seems to be the stream from which these thinkers drink, is too informed exclusively by the masculine principle of active activity--the flight from woman. This leads to an attempt to replace the providence of God the Father with human action and results in a pelagianism of culture and a fairly intolerant moralism when it comes to those in poverty.
Or am I wrong?