Confrontation

Anybody attempting to judge a highly divergent collection of political essays is obviously liable to regard as best and worst respectively those with which he happens most to agree and disagree: but it would be equally unfair to ignore the possibility that these may really be the best and the worst. This, after examining my conscience, I believe to be the case with Left, Right and Center. Of the seven essays contained in this solid little volume the clearest and most rigorously argued—besides being, to me, the most congenial—is Frank S. Meyer’s “Conservatism”: the worst by far, is “A Liberal Perspective on Liberalism and Conservatism” by David Spitz.

The book originated in a meeting at the Public Affairs Conference Center a couple of years ago. As its editor, Robert A. Goldwin, explains in a prefatory note, the object is to present a controversy, indeed, the basic political controversy of our times, through the writing of authoritative spokesmen for opposing points of view; Mr. Goldwin adds, “of such a variety that no one can reasonably agree with all of them.”

AL

About the Author

Anthony Lejeune

Anybody attempting to judge a highly divergent collection of political essays is obviously liable to regard as best and worst respectively those with which he happens most to agree and disagree: but it would be equally unfair to ignore the possibility that these may really be the best and the worst. This, after examining my conscience, I believe to be the case with Left, Right and Center. Of the seven essays contained in this solid little volume the clearest and most rigorously argued—besides being, to me, the most congenial—is Frank S. Meyer’s “Conservatism”: the worst by far, is “A Liberal Perspective on Liberalism and Conservatism” by David Spitz.

The book originated in a meeting at the Public Affairs Conference Center a couple of years ago. As its editor, Robert A. Goldwin, explains in a prefatory note, the object is to present a controversy, indeed, the basic political controversy of our times, through the writing of authoritative spokesmen for opposing points of view; Mr. Goldwin adds, “of such a variety that no one can reasonably agree with all of them.”