ing frightened by postmodernity, or savoringrnone’s provincial “rootedness,” orrnwearing thick horn-rimmed glasses, orrnattending Sunday school lessons. Somerngreat conservatives were agnostics, or pagans,rnor modernists, or revolutionaryrnthinkers. By contrast, today’s conservativesrnhave failed to address the socialrnquestion of workers in the West, andrntherefore, their turf has been stolen byrnthe former 68ers, who are more versed inrnpromising a glorious future.rnWhat is to be done? Young conservatives,rnespecially those with a solid backgroundrnin the humanities, must start demystifyingrnthe leftist-liberal mythology.rnThey must not gullibly imitate theirrnteachers in the corrupt Western academy.rnAfter all, many self-proclaimedrnscholars are often half-wits with litdernknowledge of the drama of life, and theyrncan easily be beaten on their ownrnground. In order to unseat the leftist-liberalrnpolitical class and its pseudo-intellectualrnacolytes, young conservativesrnmust resort to the same strategy that thernleft has pursued: Take to the cultural barricades,rnbut to defend Western civilization,rnrather than to tear it down.rnAnd conservatives should not forgetrnthe ancient wisdom: Beat your leftistrnneighbor with his own weapon. Wherernit hurts the most.rnTomislav Sunk is the cultural counselorrnat the Croatian Embassy in Brussels.rnPHILOSOPHYrnMere Childrenrnby Peter KwasniewskirnThere is a profound difference betweenrnthe ancient and medievalrnview of children and the modern cult ofrnthe child. The Rousseauean idolatry ofrnnature and worship of savages, popularizedrnthrough a certain brand of sentimentalrnpoetry, helped to establish a picturesquernideal of the innocent, angelicrnchild. St. Augustine was not inclined tornhold the same view. For him, the anger,rnmischievousness, and impatience of littiernchildren were so many signs that humanrnnature is not inherited free of therneffects of Adam’s sin. The modern emphasisrnon letting children “be themselves”rn(even though it often turns out tornbe lip service), as well as rhetoric aboutrn”recovering one’s childhood,” belie a peculiarlyrnrosy estimation of the innaterngoodness of man.rnOnce the doctrine of original sin hadrnbeen largely eradicated from the dailyrnmindset of Catholics as well as Protestants,rnit was inevitable that shrines wouldrnbe erected to The Child, nature’s favorite,rna piece of charming fantasy confirmedrnin the popular mind by Victorianrnpaintings of an effeminate Jesus caressingrnthe golden locks of cherubic tenyear-rnolds. The gradual shift from thernChrist Child, who deserves our reverence,rnto The Child can be seen in somernof Wordsworth’s verses and those of otherrnRomantics who profess the innocencernof the “man of nature” and the perfectibilityrnof the human species. In ourrnage of educational Prometheanism,rnwhich still embraces these fanciftil theoriesrnand pushes them even further, itrnmay be worthwhile to consider the morernrealistic views of our ancestors.rnThe ancients and medievals saw thernchild as an imperfect starting point andrnthe adult as matiire, meaning capable ofrnmoral and intellectual perfection. Onlyrnan adult can appreciate the good, therntrue, and the beautiful as such; a childrnfeels their vibrations in his imaginationrnwithout apprehending what they are, orrnwhy they should be as they are. Thernchild’s psyche exhibits a paradox: In itself,rnit is superficial because undeveloped;rnbut it is also supremely absorbent,rnpossessing an almost magical power ofrnassimilation. When Christ tells us to imitaternthe child, he is clearly pointing tornthe latter quality. Christians shouldrnstrive to be receptive to God’s word,rnready to do His will, even as a child receivesrntrustingly and eagerly whatever isrngiven him, and acts upon what he acquires.rnThis duality in the child’s psychernexplains why both Aristotle and Nietzschernemphasize the role of training inrneducation: The child forms habits longrnbefore he understands the meaning andrnimportance of habit.rnTo take an important example, a smallrnchild, simply of himself, is not capable ofrndiscriminating between good and badrnmusic. He will grow accustomed to anyrnsounds to which he is subjected becausernthey are all novel to him and he is greedyrnto exercise the powers of sensation.rnHence, a child can learn to love Mozartrnlong before he is capable of appreciatingrnhim. His sensitive soul becomesrnMozartian while his consciousness remainsrnignorant of the nature of the musicrnabsorbed. Absorption is the rightrnmetaphor in this context. A towel is capablernof picking up any kind of liquid, regardlessrnof its nobility: Soda pop saturatesrna towel as thoroughly as vintage wine. Arnchild, because of his very openness andrnlack of differentiation, trusts the wholernworld as though everything were equallyrnchoiceworthy. As Aristotle said.rnThe child has [a deliberative faculty],rnbut it is immature…. Thernchild is imperfect, and thereforernobviously his excellence is not relativernto him alone, but to the perfectrnman and to his teacher, and in likernmanner the excellence of the servantrnis relative to a master.rnChildhood furnishes the materials outrnof which parents and educators mayrnbuild a responsible public citizen and arnvirtuous private man worthy of his freedom.rnThe chief purpose of childhood isrnto culminate in adulthood. The child,rnespecially in his most “tender” years, exercisesrnlittle independent power over thisrnprocess of maturation, for he is at thernmercy of his elders and his society. Invokingrna central Aristotelian distinction,rnwe may say that the power to “form” childrenrnresides not in the child, who is asrnmatter, but in his elders, who have alreadyrnacquired the forms of virtue andrnvice, and therefore stand to him as form.rn(This relationship explains why we customarilyrnspeak of the “formation” of children,rnstudents, soldiers, or priests.) Apartrnfrom their example, instruction, and discipline,rnthe child can only mature biologically,rnnot psychologically and spiritually.rnChildhood is a rudimentary stagernthat must be shed like a first skin when itrnbecomes too tight for inner growth. AsrnDorothy Sayers remarks:rn”Except,” said Christ, “ye becomernas little children”—and the wordsrnare sometimes quoted to justify thernflight into infantilism. Now, childrenrndiffer in many ways, but theyrnhave one thing in common. PeterrnPan—if indeed he exists otherwisernthan in the nostalgic imaginationrnof an adult—is a case for thernpathologist. All normal childrenrn(however much we discouragernthem) look forward to growing up.rnJust as the liberal arts (e.g., geometry.rn46/CHRONICLESrnrnrn