Category Archives: Mencken’s Conservatism

In the following two paragraphs Mises describes the problems for libertarian activism in a manner reminiscent of Mencken: If men will not, from a recognition of social necessity, voluntarily do what must be done if society is to be maintained … Continue reading →

Mises on Inflationary Pride and Deflationary Blame | Hayek on the Success of Socialist Ideas | Block’s “Is There an ‘Anomalous’ Section of the Laffer Curve?” | “Grounding Political Debate” Mises on Inflationary Pride and Deflationary Blame Mencken’s low opinion … Continue reading →

Libertarians often show that governments of the past that are today considered to be tyrannical and unpopular, even by the establishment, share the same characteristics with popular governments today that are considered to be free and popular. With this argument they hope to bring about a widespread enlightenment, which will lead to a more just, free and prosperous society. But their observation also teaches something quite different, which libertarians often fail to acknowledge. As Mencken pointed out: Continue reading →

Mencken’s conservatism is not the opposite of romanticism; it is romanticism par excellence. Mencken did not worry about casting pearls before swine; he was the pearl already there. The world was his oyster.

Far from rejecting the world, Mencken enjoyed it. He was not an accomplice to its crimes, but an expert witness. He did not consent to it; he acquiesced sarcastically.

Mencken thought of the flag, not as some great symbol of high and mighty ideals, but realistically as a handkerchief. Continue reading →

Was Mencken’s conservatism caused by the incidence and severity of the quacks, shysters and demagogues of his time, or was it just a coincidence? If there was no believing and espousing of untruths, would he have advocated and invented them? Did his libertarianism come before his conservatism or vice versa? It is to such questions that Mencken said: Continue reading →

Simultaneously, expectations can be met and hopes disappointed. Expectations are often confused with hopes. Many people believe that positive thinking — that is, having high expectations, not merely high hopes — is necessary to have hopes realised. There is nothing necessary about … Continue reading →

The publication of Mencken’s diary in 1989, 33 years after his death, got a controversial reception. The diary does have dated views, but in a far simpler sense than critics claim. Continue reading →

If you do not expect anything better, then: (1) you appreciate what you already have more; (2) you are not going to waste time and effort developing and implementing reforms that will fail, disadvantage and disappoint; (3) lacking potential for disappointment, and seeing that you cannot do much about your mortality, you will not worry about it so much, making you feel almost immortal; (4) you will be more realistic, and therefore, at least sometimes, more successful; and (5) you will be as happy as a lottery winner when you do witness some improvement. Also, (6) for those without hope, pessimism offers, not hope, but reassurance – those who value truth, accuracy and realism, will be rewarded by being right – that is, those who think being right is its own reward, will be rewarded by being right.

So perhaps we should all look at optimism a little less optimistically. I would then be more optimistic about its proximity to reality. Continue reading →

Mencken’s satisfaction with the current state of affairs makes us ask: would he have preferred a libertarian society? But the question is misleading on four levels. Continue reading →

We have seen that a negative message is not a negative philosophy. Now we shall see that a negative message is not a negative personality.

Much misunderstanding of Mencken is due to the common belief that pessimism and cynicism are personality traits rather than, and instead of, results of reason. Continue reading →