Disclaimer: al final es más una página de mi diario que una reseña, perdón.

No soy nadie ni he estudiado nada que me otorgue la capacidad de opinar con fundamento sobre este libro. Dicho esto (permitidme ser algo desordenado, al menos para que parezca que no me he leído el libro en realidad):

Ensayo denso, reaccionario y un poco abuelo cebolleta, <> Pero ni siquiera en sus tiempos porque el momento que echa de menos es la antigua Grecia con Platón y su concepto deseable de Doctor en Filosofía como meta a alcanzar por el ser humano.
Que está muy bien, si no digo que no, pero hay referencias que pillo a ratos, y una urgencia por cambiar el sistema de valores y enseñanza que imagino va acompañada por el mal cuerpo de la Segunda Guerra Mundial.
Supongo que el resumen es que sí, hay ideas que tienen sentido para mí, como el desarrollo pleno de la persona enfrentado a la especialización y la deformación del espíritu. También comulgo con el desprecio a "La Gran Linterna Mágica" y sus desaciertos y manipulaciones, igual que veo cómo esa "campaña de desinformación" no hace si no polarizar con un discurso enfermizo.
Supongo que en ese momento, el señor Weaver se permite ser optimista hacia el final de su ensayo, haciendo un pequeño delineamiento de lo que cree que son los puntos clave que pueden significar el cambio de rumbo necesario. Veo dos fallos desde mi inexperto punto de vista:
El primero es que su solución a mis ojos es volver a un tiempo pasado en el que las cosas eran mejores, quizá demasiado pasado, probablemente porque llevamos demasiado tiempo volando a ciegas con el morro hacia abajo. Quizá, antes que volver a la Edad Media, aunque pueda ser una solución resultona, no merece tanto la pena, siendo que volver cumpliría con su concepto de saber qué se pierde y qué se gana al saltar al vacío y forzar un cambio, puesto que sabemos a qué vamos en la Edad Media. En este caso, incluso con mi pesimismo y poca confianza en la sociedad occidental, sigo considerando que no todo tiempo pasado fue mejor.
El segundo es que, según yo, el juego estaba trucado desde el principio, y lo mejor que puede pasar es que todo esto se cierre como cualquier otro fin de capítulo aciago en la historia de la humanidad y las futuras generaciones sean más listos que nosotros.

Con suerte, y como me suele pasar, no tengo razón y las cosas mejoran. Yo intento aportar mi granito de arena, desarrollándome lo mejor que puedo y enriqueciendo tanto como se me permite la vida de los demás mientras cada uno me devuelve vivencias y valores que merecen la pena ser conservados. La vida sigue y se abre paso, e incluso siendo una naturaleza cruel a los ojos de Don Weaver, considero que la palabra "justicia" se ajusta más a lo que la naturaleza proyecta, que no deja de ser la imagen que debería ser y que, sabia, se esfuerza por imponer.
Aún así, seguiré siendo el hombre que comprendió y dominó sus instintos, porque solo siendo capaz de comprenderlos es que los siento propios, manía personal.

I opened this book expecting so much, and I really got so little. 10 Books Every Conservative Must Read: Plus Four Not to Miss and One Impostor gave it a very high ranking, and it got me hyped. Almost all conservatives love this book to death. I google Richard Weaver and see that he is a Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Chicago, and the hype shoots to the roof. I check this guy's Wikipedia page, and it turns out he was taught by Cleanth Brooks, John Crowe Ransom, Robert Penn Warren, Eric Voegelin, and Arlin Turner, all towering figures in the world of literary analysis.

The book is really nothing but rhetoric and a string of cliches. It's beautiful to the ears, but there is very little content that's in the book. It's hollow. Empty. Who cares if it was well written. It doesn't say anything. I had hoped that that is not what rhetoric is all about since I consider Aristotle's The Art of Rhetoric to be a masterful book on human psychology. I don't know what's so precious about this volume. There is certainly very little in the department of ideas that can be found here. Okay, radicals are misguided. How are they misguided. Why are they misguided. What are they misguided about.

I don't care for what's presented here, and I really tried to understand it. At some point, I left the book for two months and returned to it afterward, and I did not regain (or gain) any appreciation of it. It's bland. It really tastes like oats soaked with milk, and not much more. I am not sold.

Man's increasing egocentricity may prove to be his undoing.

I listened to this. The narrator had an upper class English accent and sounded pompous. And I fell asleep a lot. I think I read or started this before. Interesting. But not my cup of tea.

An everlasting work. One could say work of "social commentary," but to do so, I think, would be to limit its importance and scope.

I'm not a fan of using a highlighter to mark memorable passages in books, but if I were at least half of my copy of Ideas Have Consequences would be yellow. Richard Weaver is that rare writer who both has interesting things to say, and says them in an interesting way. This book is not only considered Weaver's masterpiece, but, sadly, Weaver is often considered something of literary one hit wonder, with comparatively few people aware of his other writings (or even familiar with this one beyond the title). While this perspective is unfair to the impressive body of Weaver's work, Ideas stands out due to several factors, not least being arguably the first book of the post-World War II conservative renaissance, having been published in 1948.

The worst part of Ideas Have Consequences, in my opinion, is Roger Kimball's foreword. Generally, forewords discuss the importance of the work or the thinker at hand. These can at times come across as a bit hagiographic, but then again the entire point of a foreword to a book written decades ago is to put it in context and show the influence it and the author have had in the intervening years. Kimball, however, doesn't seem to have much regard for either this book or its author, who comes across in Kimball's telling as half hermit, half Luddite. Kimball drags out the familiar canards about Weaver's life - how he had no or very few friends, how he insisted from his office at the University of Chicago that his septuagenarian mother plow the family farm back in Weaverville, North Carolina with horses, not tractors - despite these stories being, as Ted Smith III shows in his introduction to In Defense of Tradition: Collected Shorter Writings of Richard M. Weaver, 1929–1963, exaggerations, when they're not flat wrong. To be sure, Weaver was a more reserved figure than, say, Russell Kirk, but it was not true, as even his friend Kirk claimed, that Weaver spent every free moment in solitude. Nor was it true that Weaver demanded that his family farm - a generous description for the 2 acre back yard in which Weaver planted a garden - be plowed with animal labor instead of machinery.

These are the kinds of stories that make for great tales, and might even make an author more interesting after he's gone (Weaver died prematurely in 1964, at the age of 53), but Kimball's reciting them in order to paint his subject as "eccentric" and to thus cast his work as such is counterproductive if he's actually interested in having people read the book he's introducing. Kimball claims that Weaver was not so much "anti-liberal as anti-modern," a claim he then uses in support of his statement that the solution that Weaver sought was "a categorical 'no' to modernity," which Kimball thinks would be the height of "hubris." Well, it might be if that's what Weaver sought, but no one could study Weaver's body of thought and conclude either that he was not "anti-liberal" or that he sought to shout "no!" at modernity and its accomplishments. Weaver was indeed a critic of modernity, a traditionalist in his outlook, but as the Hoover Institution's Mark C. Henrie has written, "traditionalists do not wish to 'turn back the clock.'" Rather, people like Weaver recognize that in the great rush of modernity, older values, like "loyalty and friendship, leisure, honor and nobility, and religious 'enchantment'...are unavailable or frustrated in the present." As Weaver himself wrote in a later essay, "once we admit, as we have to admit, that some periods of achievement in the past have something to teach us, we are on our way toward acquiring the humility necessary for wisdom, for not all wisdom is new wisdom."

Kimball's caricatures are at best oversimplifications of what can be found in the totality of Weaver's writing, and can to a substantial degree be undermined by simply reading a single one of his essays, the readily available “Up from Liberalism,” an essay which Kimball himself references (though I am still left to question, given his comments above, the degree to which he really understood it). None of this is intended to excoriate Kimball, whose writing I generally enjoy. Rather it is to say that if Kimball either misunderstands Weaver or dislikes his thought, he was an odd choice to write the foreword, which certainly doesn't give the reader a reason to read further into the book, which would be to the reader's loss.

Transitioning to the book itself, Ideas Have Consequences is Weaver's analysis of what he calls in the introduction "the dissolution of the West." While it may seem odd to the modern reader to see an intellectual, and a conservative one at that, expressing such pessimism in what should still have been the glorious afterglow of America's victory during World War II, it was actually the war that substantially contributed to the pessimism he felt about the state of and prospects for the West. It wouldn't be until the posthumously published Visions of Order: The Cultural Crisis of Our Time that Weaver would explain why World War II had this effect on him, but it's interesting that Weaver (and his fellow traditionalists Kirk and Robert Nisbet) were perplexed by the consequences of the war.

The source, Weaver believes, of the West's decline is the ascendance of William of Ockham's doctrine of nominalism, the philosophical rejection of universals. Oddly, Weaver's analysis is almost all effect and very little cause - that is, he doesn't exactly explain how nominalism triumphed, or what the process was. Rather, he focuses on what the cultural effects have been. Even so, Weaver's basic thesis has found many supporters, including prominent Thomist philosopher Edward Feser.

While there are very clear philosophical themes, Weaver’s work is at bottom a scathing criticism of modern mass society, as he argues that modern man has rejected transcendent truth and higher goals for subjectivism and personal aggrandizement. Since Ideas is something of a catalog of the consequences of this trade, the book can sometimes read as a list of Weaver's least favorite things. Even so, he lands body blows to many features of modern society that were taken for granted then, and still are, as inherently positive developments. What's more, Weaver's list of complaints is broad enough to step on nearly everyone's toes.

While he criticizes liberal egalitarianism as destructive of the hierarchical bonds that tie society together, he also condemns what he sees as the materialism of what he calls "finance capitalism," what today might be termed "crony capitalism." Later in the book, Weaver expresses his support for property rights and he would in later works express his admiration for free-market economists like F. A. Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Wilhelm Ropke. As a result, Weaver cannot (contra Kimball) be considered a distributist pamphleteer, at least not if the full body of his work is considered.

Weaver's criticism of mass media - which in Weaver's day primarily meant radio and movies, with a smattering of television thrown in - which he called "The Great Steropticon,” is so withering and complete that it even applies to today's media technologies that Weaver could not have foreseen. Weaver takes further aim at what he calls the "spoiled child psychology," saying that modern man, like a spoiled child, has corrupted the Declaration of Independence in that "the right to pursue happiness he has not unnaturally translated into a right to have happiness.”

Not surprisingly, Weaver's estimation of art forms - whether paintings, literature, or music - in modern society is low, as Weaver considers modern artistic expression to be filled with excess "egotism," or self-indulgence. Historically, Weaver's views on jazz (he was not a fan) have received the most attention, although it should be noted that even admirers of Weaver, including Feser, have disagreed with his analysis on these points. For his part, Feser thinks that Weaver holds too strongly a Platonist line in respect to art (in which the ideal nature of the art form is completely above and apart from unworthy "popular" expressions), whereas Feser prefers a more Aristotelian perspective (where even popular art forms, if not ideal expressions of high culture, still have essential elements of it that give them value). On this point, I tend to side with Feser, although plenty of conservatives besides Weaver have held his opinion on artistry. But, as an example of just how radical his standards were, Weaver even criticized opera as a substandard expression of art.

Having laid out his case for the degeneration of society, Weaver closes by offering three solutions to the predicament of the West: protecting private property, restoring the discipline of language and recovering piety towards man and nature. The first of these, as mentioned above, was not a blanket endorsement of capitalism, but a call for limits beyond which the state could not interfere in the affairs of men. To Weaver (and to Frank Meyer, who borrowed heavily from Weaver's analysis) property rights were not just important to the individual's ability to provide for himself apart from state predation, but gave him a sense of independence and security from which he could point out society's errors. The person dependent upon the state, or even to large bureaucratic business organizations, could not, Weaver thought, feel secure enough to criticize the political and social trends of his age. It's difficult to look at modern American society, particularly in the social media age, and not acknowledge Weaver's prescience on this point.

In his call to restore the discipline of language, Weaver (an English professor and an expert in rhetoric) believes that preserving the definitions of words, and increasing the felicity of their use, is critical to carrying on the best aspects of culture. He pleas for a return to piety because it "is a discipline of the will through respect. It admits the right to exist of things larger than the ego, of things different from the ego. And, before we can bring harmony back into a world where now everything seems to meet 'in mere oppugnancy,' we shall have to regard with the spirit of piety three things: nature, our neighbors - by which I mean all other people - and the past.” Both of these are concepts that Weaver, in one way or another, would reiterate over and over throughout his subsequent work.

Weaver later expressed regret that he didn't make some of his arguments in Ideas Have Consequences more clearly. The Weaver of Visions of Order is more measured (not to mention less of a Platonist) than the Weaver of Ideas. And while that is for the better, there's an urgency and a passion in Ideas Have Consequences that Weaver never replicated - the kind which would be nice to see in modern defenders of culture, whoever and wherever they are.

É impressionante como esse livro escrito no pós-guerra, há 70 anos, continua atual, claro e profético em relação à crise da sociedade moderna e ao que contribuiu para a decadência da civilização ocidental.

O livro provoca uma verdadeira torrente de ideias e questionamentos, trazendo à tona concepções pré-modernas que desafiam aquilo a que estamos acostumados e frequentemente aceitamos como certos. O autor oferece uma perspectiva anti-mainstream, representando uma contracultura em meio ao moderno liberalismo progressista, e defende uma postura conservadora.

A obra critica fortemente a “lanterna mágica”, referindo-se à máquina de propaganda da mídia, do jornalismo, do cinema e da cultura contemporânea. Argumenta que nossa educação e formação seguem o caminho de uma criança mimada e individualista, que prioriza sensações e prazeres imediatos, em detrimento de valores mais profundos.

O livro valoriza a figura do homem do campo, apresentando-o como um ser integral, metafísico, aristocrático, e enfatiza a importância da propriedade privada. Abraça o universalismo e as verdades universais, posicionando-se contra diversas correntes de pensamento como:

Especialização
Libertarismo
Capitalismo exacerbado
Pragmatismo
Empirismo
Nominalismo
O homem prático
Imediatismo
Materialismo

As Ideias têm Consequências não apenas diagnostica a crise cultural, mas também explora como podemos superar essa crise. É uma leitura essencial para quem busca entender as raízes da nossa cultura atual e as possíveis rotas alternativas para o futuro.

Read this awhile ago, but still recall what a breathless rant it was. He's even apoplectic over jazz music. I suppose some fellow conservatives at the time (e.g. William F. Buckley) would enjoy the confirmation bias, but I don't see the author convincing anyone new. I grew up in a conservative household and was myself when I was young, but as the term suggests it means being opposed to change. All change is not good, but flat out opposition to it is reactionary and regressive.

A great read. Foundational reading for anyone leaning towards conservatism.

Tightly-written short book on the philosophical origins of the postwar traditionalist conservative movement in the United States. Weaver opens by stating in a matter-of-fact tone that "this is another book about the dissolution of the West." Weaver attacks moral relativism insistently, suggesting that the "denial of everything transcending experience means inevitably…the denial of truth. With the denial of objective truth there is no escape from the relativism of ‘man is the measure of all things.'"

Richard Weaver's "Ideas Have Consequences" serves as a compelling exploration into the roots of the decline of Western civilization, offering a timeless perspective since its publication in 1948. As a former Professor at the University of Chicago, Weaver delves into profound insights, although some are challenging to absorb. Weaver's critique of the modern world and systemic relativism is thought-provoking, with a particular focus on the concept of spoiled-child psychology. While I resonated with some of his ideas, such as the importance of societal structure, I found certain judgments excessive, especially his criticisms of jazz, airplanes, and technology.

The author astutely observes the growing incapacity for logic in modern man, emphasizing the significance of education in perfecting the spiritual being. Memorable quotes, such as "the only source of authority whose title is unimpeachable is knowledge," highlight the depth of Weaver's philosophical exploration. Moreover, Weaver's criticism of newspapers and modern media is scathing, using vivid examples from World War II to convey the dissonance between trivial advertisements and profound destruction. Quoting John Adams and Nietzsche, he underscores the toxicity of media and advocates for a more intellectually nourishing alternative.

In conclusion, "Ideas Have Consequences" remains a relevant and thought-provoking exploration of the human condition. The book challenges readers to contemplate the consequences of societal shifts and encourages a deeper understanding of the complexities inherent in the human experience. Noteworthy Quotes:

Effort and Reward - Self-Discipline:

-"The greatest disservice done to our age was this denial of the necessary connection between effort and reward."
-"The only guaranty against external control is self-discipline, taught and practiced."
-"Life means discipline and sacrifice."
-"The spoiled child has not been made to see the relationship between effort and reward."
-"Man is the product of discipline and of forging; he really owes thanks for the pulling and tugging that enable him to grow."
-"Exertion, self-denial, endurance, these make the hero."

Power of Speech and Language:

-"It is, as even primitives know, a wonderful thing to have the gift of speech. For it is true historically that those who have shown the greatest subtlety with language have shown the greatest power to understand."
-"American universities have found that with few exceptions students who display the greatest mastery of words, as evidenced by vocabulary tests and exercises in writing, make the best scholastic records regardless of the department of study they enter."
-"Command of language will prognosticate aptitude. Facility with words bespeaks a capacity to learn relations and grasp concepts; it is a means of access to the complex reality."

Media Critique:

-"During the recent war (World War II) what person of feeling was not struck by the insanity of hearing advertisements for laxatives between announcements of the destruction of famous cities by aerial bombardment?"
-"What person taking the affirmative view of life can deny that the world served up daily by press, movie, and radio is a world of evil and negation?"
-John Adams: "I have given up newspapers in exchange for Tacitus and Thucydides, for Newton and Euclid, and I find myself much the happier."
-Nietzsche: "Sick are they always; they vomit their bile and call it a newspaper."

Historical Awareness:

-"Santayana has reminded us that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
-"The man of culture finds the whole past relevant; the bourgeois and the barbarian find relevant only what has some pressing connection with their appetites."
-"Awareness of the past is an antidote to both egotism and shallow optimism."

Education and Spiritual Growth:

-"If the primary need of man is to perfect his spiritual being and prepare for immortality, then education of the mind and the passions will take precedence over all else."
-"The only source of authority whose title is unimpeachable is knowledge."

Goodness and Truth:

"There is some ultimate identification of goodness and truth, so that he who ignores or loses faith in the former can by no possible means save the latter."

Observations on Urban Life:

"And one sees everywhere in urban populations a volatility of temperament that contrasts with the steadiness of the man living close to nature."

Shockingly prescient. By turns obtuse and profound. Just when the reader is bogged down in arcane philosophic writing, along comes spectacular and applicable brilliance. This book details the decline of modern man. It is a tragedy and yet the end is still unknown, for God in His providence may be waking His people and even those not his to what is actually happening and a remedy may yet be applied. A foundational book written just after WW2 and yet written about today. A mind stretcher. Read it and learn!