We are only minutes into the State of the Union. Already, Cindy Sheehan has been arrested and removed from the audience. Bush talks about how America will not tolerate evil. And yet the evil of totalitarianism grows stronger by the hour. This fig-leaf conservative administration expands surveillance power over us and circumscribes our ability exercise our right of free speech all the while talking about defending freedom.

My uncle recommended that I read Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom so I would properly understand the conservative position. Hayek’s primary concern is with stopping the spread of totalitarianism and preserving the freedom of the individual. I’m down with that. (Did I mention that Cindy Sheehan has already been removed from the Capitol?) Reading Hayek, what struck me was a passage from his preface to the 1956 edition:

But true liberalism is still distinct from conservativism, and there is a danger in the two being confused. Conservativism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic, and power-adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place. A conservative movement, by its very nature, is bound to be a defender of established privilege and to lean on the power of government for the protection of privilege.

So just to clarify, Hayek defines conservativism as: paternalistic, nationalistic, power-adoring, anti-intellectual, and prone to mysticism. Moreover, it is a defender of established privilege and tends to lean on the power of government for the protection of that privilege. I don’t agree with a lot that Hayek has to say but if this guy is the intellectual fount of the conservative revolution, some people need to go back to their studies.