The Reactionary Mind

1. Conservatism is Counterrevolution: A Reaction to Subordinate Agency

To understand these ideas, we have to understand that story. For that is what conservatism is: a meditation on—and theoretical rendition of—the felt experience of having power, seeing it threatened, and trying to win it back.

Defense of Hierarchy. Conservatism, at its core, is a response to challenges to established power structures. It's not merely a defense of tradition, but a reaction against the agency of subordinate classes seeking greater freedom and equality. This reaction stems from a conviction that elites are best suited to rule, and any challenge to their authority threatens the natural order.

Extension of Freedom. The conservative's opposition to equality isn't about limiting freedom in general, but about preventing its extension to the lower orders. Historically, conservatives have favored liberty for the higher classes while advocating constraint for those below. The true threat, in their eyes, is the potential for the subordinate to exercise independent will and disrupt the established hierarchy.

Private Life of Power. The conservative imagination is particularly agitated by democratic movements that challenge power dynamics in intimate settings. The real subject of political deliberations, according to this view, is the private life of power, the contest for rights and standing in the family, the factory, and the field. This focus on the personal relations of power explains the intensity and ferocity of conservative arguments.

2. The Conservative Critique: The Old Regime's Fatal Flaws

What these two opening statements of the conservative persuasion suggest is that the greatest enemy of the old regime is neither the revolutionary nor the reformer; it is the old regime itself or, to be more precise, the defenders of the old regime.

Internal Weakness. Conservatives often criticize the very regimes they seek to defend, arguing that their defenders are morally timid, obtuse, or simply incapable of mounting an effective defense. The old guard is seen as having grown complacent, losing the ideological wherewithal to confront the challenges posed by revolutionary forces.

Moral Timidity. Conservatives often accuse defenders of the old order of being cowed by the moral indictments leveled by their opponents. They see a lack of conviction and a willingness to compromise, which undermines the legitimacy of the established power structure.

Obtuse Defenders. Another common critique is that the defenders of the old regime are simply too clueless to recognize the coming catastrophe. They are portrayed as being so absorbed in their privileges and comforts that they fail to grasp the magnitude of the threat or the need for decisive action.

3. Revolutionary Envy: Conservatives Admire and Mimic Their Opponents

To destroy that enemy, Burke wrote of the Jacobins, “by some means or other, the force opposed to it should be made to bear some analogy and resemblance to the force and spirit which that system exerts.”

Learning from the Enemy. Despite their opposition to the goals of the left, conservatives often study and adopt the tactics and strategies of their opponents. This can involve consciously borrowing techniques or unconsciously absorbing the categories and idioms of the movements they resist.

Strategic Adaptation. Conservatives may strategically adopt the language and methods of the left to advance their own aims. This can involve using progressive vernaculars to appeal to a broader audience or appropriating revolutionary tactics to defend traditional hierarchies.

Unconscious Absorption. Even when they consciously reject progressive arguments, conservatives may find themselves influenced by the very movements they oppose. By engaging with and resisting these movements, they may inadvertently internalize their categories and idioms, leading to subtle shifts in their own thinking.

4. Hobbes: The Counterrevolutionary as Modernist

Hobbes, for one, thought otherwise. In Behemoth, his most considered treatment of the issue, he firmly declared the English Civil War a revolution.

Rejection of Divine Right. Hobbes broke with traditional justifications for monarchy, such as the divine right of kings, and instead grounded his defense of absolute sovereignty in a materialist account of human nature and a theory of consent. This move allowed him to appeal to modern sensibilities while still advocating for a highly authoritarian political order.

Redefinition of Liberty. Hobbes challenged the republican conception of liberty, which linked individual freedom to political participation. He argued that freedom is simply the absence of external constraints on motion, and that individuals can be free even under an absolute monarch. This redefinition of liberty severed the connection between personal freedom and popular government.

Influence on Conservatism. Despite being viewed with suspicion by some conservatives, Hobbes's ideas have had a lasting influence on the right. His emphasis on order, security, and the need for a strong sovereign resonates with conservative instincts, while his account of private liberty has found expression in libertarian thought.

5. Rand's Reactionary Utopianism: The Agon of Superiority

If civilization is to survive, it is the altruist morality that men have to reject.

Rejection of Altruism. Rand's philosophy of Objectivism centers on the virtue of selfishness, arguing that individuals should prioritize their own rational self-interest above all else. She rejects altruism as a destructive force that undermines individual achievement and societal progress.

The Heroic Individual. Rand's novels celebrate the creative genius who stands alone against the masses, defying convention and pursuing his own vision. These heroic figures are portrayed as superior beings who are entitled to their success and should not be held back by the needs of others.

Social Darwinism. Rand's philosophy reflects a Social Darwinist worldview, where success is seen as a measure of fitness and the strong are entitled to dominate the weak. This perspective justifies inequality and rejects any attempt to redistribute resources or opportunities.

6. The Conservative's Populist Play: Making Privilege Popular

Monarchy, he writes, “is without contradiction, the form of government that gives the most distinction to the greatest number of persons.”

Democratic Feudalism. To gain popular support, conservatives often create a sense of shared privilege among the masses. This can involve turning the white majority into a lordly class, sharing in the privileges and prerogatives of governing a subordinate group.

Racial Domination. In the American South, racial domination served as a way of harnessing the energy of the white masses in support of the privileges and powers of established elites. By making every white man a member of the ruling class, slavery created a sense of shared identity and purpose that transcended economic divisions.

Right-Wing Populism. The goal of right-wing populism is to appeal to the masses without disrupting the power of elites. This involves mobilizing the street for spectacular displays of power while ensuring that power is never truly shared or redistributed.

7. Violence as a Virtue: The Conservative's Embrace of the Extreme

To obey a real superior … is one of the most important of all virtues—a virtue absolutely essential to the attainment of anything great and lasting.

Agonistic Vision. Conservatism often embraces an agonistic vision of the good life, where power is demonstrated and privilege earned through arduous struggle. This perspective values strength, intelligence, and the ability to dominate others.

The Battlefield of Power. War is seen as the natural proving ground of superiority, where individuals can demonstrate their fitness to rule through violence and conquest. The battlefield becomes a space for the exercise of power and the establishment of hierarchy.

Capitalism as Warfare. Some conservatives extend this agonistic vision to the marketplace, viewing capitalism as a form of warfare where individuals compete for resources and dominance. The great men of money are seen as warriors who seize their privileges without permission.

8. The Dialectic of Domination: How the Left Shapes the Right

If he is to preserve what he values, the conservative must declare war against the culture as it is.

Opposition to the Left. Conservatism is fundamentally defined by its opposition to the left. It is a reaction against movements for emancipation and equality, and its ideas are shaped by the challenges posed by these movements.

Borrowing from the Left. In the course of opposing the left, conservatives often borrow its ideas and tactics. This can involve adopting the language of rights, appropriating revolutionary strategies, or incorporating elements of progressive thought into their own worldview.

Counterrevolutionary Imperative. The conservative believes that the left has been in the driver's seat for centuries. To preserve what he values, he must declare war against the culture as it is, adopting a radical stance in defense of traditional hierarchies.

9. The Allure of Empire: A Conservative Longing for Order and Purpose

What’s the point of being the greatest, most powerful nation in the world and not having an imperial role?

Longing for Grandeur. Some conservatives yearn for a return to a more hierarchical and ordered world, where the United States plays a dominant role in shaping international affairs. This vision is driven by a desire for purpose, meaning, and a sense of national greatness.

Rejection of Materialism. These conservatives are often critical of the free market and the pursuit of wealth, viewing them as distractions from more noble goals. They seek to elevate politics and government, directing public discussion toward ends more glorious than material well-being.

The Burden of Leadership. The conservative vision of empire entails a willingness to use force and to bear the burdens of global leadership. It rejects isolationism and embraces the responsibility of shaping the world in accordance with American values.

10. The Paradox of Security: How the Quest for Safety Undermines Freedom

The central question that emerges from the civil rights movement is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically?

Erosion of Liberty. The pursuit of national security can lead to the erosion of civil liberties and the concentration of power in the hands of the state. This can result in the suppression of dissent, the violation of individual rights, and the creation of a climate of fear and suspicion.

Unequal Distribution of Costs. The costs of security measures are often borne disproportionately by marginalized groups, such as immigrants, people of color, and political dissidents. These groups may be subjected to increased surveillance, discrimination, and restrictions on their rights.

The Illusion of Balance. The metaphor of balance between freedom and security conceals the underlying power dynamics at play. It suggests that there is a neutral point where the two values are in equilibrium, when in reality the quest for security often serves to reinforce existing inequalities and hierarchies.

Last updated: August 24, 2025