A reconstruction of the Théorie du Pouvoir, the first and major work of the French philosopher Louis de Bonald, shows that this work is best being read along the lines of political classicism: its... Show moreA reconstruction of the Théorie du Pouvoir, the first and major work of the French philosopher Louis de Bonald, shows that this work is best being read along the lines of political classicism: its syllogistic structure consists of a philosophical (deductive) maior, a historical (empirical) minor, and the political conclusion that the aristocratic authority and corporative forms characteristic of the preabsolutist era rather than ancien régime monarchy should be restored. As much as a frontal attack on the French Revolution and its Enlightenment ideas it can be regarded as a subtle defense of the nobility’s cause against absolutist policies. The common view that Bonald was a champion of absolutism should be replaced by the view that he continued Montesquieu and prefigured Tocqueville. As an archetypical conservative Bonald cannot be said to be a mere precursor of fascism. This is demonstrated in the epilogue, which discusses the ways that Bonald’s ideas have been transmitted, adopted and transformed not just by the modern extreme-right but also by French royalism, German romanticism, panslavism, carlism, conservatism in Latin and Northern America, Dutch neocalvinism, French liberalism, the Catholic Church, corporatism, christian-democracy, the social sciences, socialism, anarchism, men of letters, esoteric traditionalism and islamic fundamentalism. Show less
This research has analyzed the topic of “conservatism” (baoshou zhuyi) in early 1990s China from a twofold perspective. Firstly, in the tradition of conceptual history (Begriffsgeschichte), the... Show moreThis research has analyzed the topic of “conservatism” (baoshou zhuyi) in early 1990s China from a twofold perspective. Firstly, in the tradition of conceptual history (Begriffsgeschichte), the concrete use of the concept of “conservatism” in Chinese intellectual discourse has been studied in relation to the “counterconcept” of “radicalism” (jijin zhuyi). This approach has enabled the study of a variety of references to “conservatism,” such as the “neo-conservatism” of Xiao Gongqin and the “princelings,” the 1992 debate on the nature of modern Chinese history that was triggered by the overseas Chinese historian Yü Ying-shih, the New Confucianism of Chen Lai, and Zheng Min’s criticism of the Literary Revolution. On a second level, it has been investigated whether these criticisms of “radicalism” were expressions of a conservative “style of thought” that went beyond the critique of historical events such as the May Fourth Movement, the Cultural Revolution, or the quest for science and democracy of the 1980s. Show less
