So much of the argumentation in here is premised on the idea that to disagree with Rod is to disagree with, say, Russell Kirk or even traditional conservatism qua traditional conservatism. Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
Jonah, that’s a good and fair point. I don’t think I have premised any arguments on this idea. In fact I have disagreed substantially with Rod myself in this blog. Perhaps you want to limit discussion to Rod’s book and Rod’s book only. I would prefer to use the opportunity of Rod’s book to engage a more far ranging debate. I think that’s pretty much what you summarized as my dilemma, and you’re right.
