‘Before the term “liberal” became ideological, it referred to much more general, non-political characteristics: open-mindedness, generosity, and the like…Liberalism, however, marked the triumphant beginnings of modernity, which aimed to create a political morality called “the conception of rational choice as the generator of political order”.’

‘According to the main line of progressivists, the struggles of history lead to a just or more just society, just as science eventually overcomes “superstition”. Ironically, today’s supporters of the ideology of progress are often those post-Christian materialists who believe that religion…is also nothing more than a kind of “superstition”, even if this superstition is somewhat more complex, has moral lessons and has contributed constructively to “the democratic roots of Europe”. On the other hand, we can find many explanatory arguments as to why the idea of ​​progress in a general sense applied to the human world or human nature can actually be considered a superstition—that is, a contra-factual idea that is completely opposed to the self-image of modern natural scientific thought.’

‘The lessons from Molnar’s book about Bernanos remain fresh today. The “fascist temptation” has not disappeared, but only appears in new forms…Bernanos’s prophecy is interesting because there are still today, and probably always will be, movements that call for a radical break with the past, and announce a return to the “pure source”, with the creation of an imagined future order or return to a past order and hierarchy that has not yet been corrupted.’

‘The question I am left with about Hazony’s rediscovered conservatism is whether it is a conservatism that is, or could be, rediscovered, or is it a conservatism that has never existed. And, even if it did exist at one time, could it ever exist in current circumstances, in which we live in a far more open type of society than Hazony envisages? If this latter is not the case, then as one who values aspects of our openness and indeed our rationality more than Hazony appears to, I have to conclude that, for all its merits and passion, Hazony’s book offers us no more than a dream.’