BOOK REVIEW ‒ In his latest book, Yale law professor Anthony T. Kronman urges conservatives to articulate their principles more effectively in order to stay relevant in today’s competitive political landscape.
Modern political ideologies are strong in receiving theoretical backup, and conservatism can no longer afford the luxury to remain disengaged. In the past, conservative statesmen often expressed disdain for philosophical approaches to politics, wary of introducing abstract theories into practical governance. Today, however, the intellectual contest is so intense that conservatism must articulate its principles better to stay relevant. Other ideologies have already developed detailed intellectual frameworks, leaving conservatism lagging behind. This gap has prompted a surge of interest in conservative political philosophy, as thinkers seek to define and defend its core ideas.
Anthony T. Kronman (b.1945), a Yale legal scholar and philosopher, addresses this need in his magnum opus, Conservatism: Reclaiming Our Humanity in an Arrogant Age (Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 2025). The book’s title, which implies a search for “true conservatism,” is somewhat misleading. Conservatism traditionally avoids claiming to have found a singular, definitive solution, embracing instead a modest approach to politics that focuses on addressing the immediate challenges of the moment. While conservatives often critique alternative conservative theories, this internal debate does not justify a quest for one ultimate version of conservatism. Nevertheless, Kronman’s critique of arrogance in public life strikes a universal chord. In a society deeply divided by cultural, symbolic, and religious issues, where political disagreements frequently lead to inhumane and haughty rhetoric, his call for humility and civility is both timely and compelling. Kronman’s work seeks to reclaim traditional virtues, not to dominate discourse but to foster compromise and temporary solutions that can bridge divides in a polarized political and theoretical world.
The book is rich and complex, less focused on immediate political issues than on exploring the philosophical and cultural roots of the divide between progressives and conservatives. Kronman aims to find a modus vivendi—a way for a turbulent society to coexist despite profound differences. His approach is scholarly and reflective, drawing on his dual expertise in law and philosophy to propose a conservatism that is intellectually robust and possibly also practically grounded. In what follows, I provide a detailed overview of the book’s structure and a thorough analysis of two pivotal chapters that anchor its argument.
Kronman’s book unfolds systematically, weaving together themes of culture, philosophy, law, and politics to construct a comprehensive vision of conservatism. The first chapter, “Our Prejudices,” identifies three progressive biases—a misunderstanding of equality’s universal appeal, a disrespect for the past, and a skeptical approach toward the existence of God—that conservatives must challenge to reclaim intellectual ground. The second chapter explores the concept of culture, distinguishing between high and common culture while drawing on Tocqueville’s description of American democratic political culture to underscore culture’s political significance. The next one defends excellence, concluding with the poetic assertion that “beauty is another name for excellence, sovereign among goods in the realm of human values.”
The fourth chapter delves into the importance of tradition and the past, invoking the Roman concept of pietas—reverence for ancestors—and linking it to an Aristotelian understanding of friendship as a foundation for social cohesion. This theme of personal loyalty extends into the fifth chapter on patriotism, which connects personal and communal bonds to national identity. The sixth chapter, on American constitutionalism, is arguably the book’s intellectual centerpiece, offering a powerful contrast between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to define the essence of constitutional conservatism. The seventh chapter explores the role of religion and metaphysics, arguing for their enduring relevance in public life. This is followed by a chapter, which critiques Kant from a Humean perspective, proposing a synthesis through Spinoza, while the final chapter articulates Kronman’s vision of conservatism, blending the traditionalism of Burke, Aristotle, and Hume with unexpected nods to Spinoza and, in a strictly philosophical sense, Nietzsche. The Afterword emphasizes the shared values uniting progressives and conservatives, casting conservatives as advocates for humility in politics, science, and in the same time the defenders of a few universal human values.
Let us now turn to a more detailed examination of two chapters that are central to Kronman’s argument: the first on the prejudices of our age and the sixth on American constitutionalism.
The first chapter, “Our Prejudices,” sets the stage for Kronman’s critique of modern society. He acknowledges the progressive era’s achievements—advances in justice, equality, and science—but argues that these gains have come with three detrimental prejudices. The first is a misunderstanding of equality’s universal appeal. While equality is valuable in politics, its indiscriminate application, particularly in cultural contexts, can stifle excellence and distinction. The second prejudice is a disrespect for the past, a presentist mindset that dismisses the wisdom embedded in trial-and-error methods of tradition and undermines societal continuity. The third is a skeptical approach toward the existence of God, which Kronman sees as a misunderstanding of human nature and nature in general, and the role of faith in fostering social cohesion.
Kronman argues that these prejudices create opportunities for conservative thought to offer a corrective. He identifies three conservative strands that respond to these biases: libertarians, traditionalists, and religious conservatives. Libertarians, drawing on the intellectual tradition of Adam Smith, criticize state policies that promote egalitarianism at the expense of individual liberty. Traditionalists, inspired by Edmund Burke, defend the value of custom and historical continuity against presentism. Religious conservatives, though lacking a single intellectual founder, argue that human knowledge is too limited to rule out divine presence, advocating for a humbler approach to metaphysical questions. This chapter establishes culture as a cornerstone of Kronman’s conservatism, heavily influenced by Tocqueville’s observations on democracy in America. For instance, Tocqueville noted that equality fosters democratic vitality but can prove counterproductive in cultural, intellectual and artistic matters. He also emphasizes the political role of high culture institutions—those dedicated to knowledge, taste, connoisseurship, and refinement—, which shape societal values. The chapter introduces pietas, the reverence for tradition, as a bridge to broader themes of enchantment, religion, and the spiritual underpinnings of human cohabitation, setting the stage for the book’s subsequent arguments.
The sixth chapter, on American constitutionalism, is where Kronman’s expertise as a Yale legal scholar shines most brightly. This extensive chapter forms the intellectual core of the book, offering a compelling contrast between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to define the principles of constitutional conservatism. Kronman argues that the Declaration, shaped by Jefferson and, behind him, by the continental Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, and Kant, is characterized by an “abstractness of its ideal of equality” and by a “transcendent authority.” This radicalism, with its theological edge, establishes a universal moral standard that prioritizes self-evident truths over contextual realities, fuelling sublime, but potentially destabilizing ideals.
In contrast, the Constitution, influenced by Madison and the English-speaking Enlightenment thinkers like Burke, Gibbon, Ferguson, Smith, and Hume, is a “sober” document, reconciled to the vicissitudes of time and the realities of human nature. Its pragmatic framework tempers the Declaration’s zeal, valuing compromise, prudence, and adaptability over ideological purity. Kronman attributes these differences to the distinct intellectual milieus of Jefferson and Madison: the former shaped by the idealistic currents of the continental Enlightenment, the latter by the empirical traditions of British philosophy.
Constitutional conservatives, Kronman contends, align with the Constitution’s pragmatic ethos. Kronman argues that most legal disputes before the Supreme Court are not so clear-cut as the Brown v. Board of Education case, requiring circumspection and political wisdom informed by tradition rather than universal mandates. He also departs from originalism and embraces the constitutional theory of Alexander Bickel, a Yale scholar and Kronman’s former mentor. Bickel’s approach emphasizes prudence over absolutism in constitutional interpretation. He advocates for “conversation over command” and recognizes “the authority of time” over abstract principles, a stance Kronman describes as embodying a “Lincolnian tension.” This tension balances the Declaration’s idealistic principles with the Constitution’s flexible, pragmatic approach, ensuring that judicial decisions reflect both moral clarity and practical judgment. Kronman mentioned in a private message to me that he is writing a monograph on Bickel, underscoring the depth of his influence. For constitutional conservatives, this means upholding Brown as a universal moral imperative and resisting the overuse of Jeffersonian principles in cases that demand nuanced, tradition-based reasoning.
Kronman’s True Conservatism: Reclaiming Our Humanity in an Arrogant Age is a philosophically rich and culturally expansive exploration of conservative thought, grounded in a profound understanding of law, culture, and history, if a bit far away from political realities. Its core message is summarized in this formulation: “Our inheritance is defined by a commitment to the timeless principles set out in the Declaration and to a constitutional scheme that valorizes time and encourages trade-offs, conciliations, and sensible balance.” This work is not a partisan defense but a thoughtful address to a divided society to rediscover shared values and embrace pragmatic solutions, making a vital contribution to contemporary political thought.
The author of the review made use of the AI program called Grok.
Ferenc Hörcher
research professor, head of the Research Institute
for Politics and Government