VIEWSnJack and Jill, or Why I Am Not a ConservativenHe who has seen the present has seen everything, saidnMarcus Aurelius, and this is why the floor of my studynis made concave by the aggregate weight of all the newspapersnand magazines I have acquired since moving tonCambridge: I simply cannot bring myself to throw away ansingle page of newsprint. In this sense I am a conservative.nLet me reach into the moldering pile. “Our ideas havencrossed the front lines and conquered our enemies’ consciousness.”nIs this Enoch Powell, in the Spectator of Junen25, 1988, hailing the national revival of the RussiannEmpire? I read on:nLet us suppose that the Reds only think they arenfighting for the glory of the International . . .nand in fact are shedding their blood, howevernunconsciously, for nothing other than thenrestoration of the Divinely Protected SovereignnAndrei Navrozov, formerly editor of The Yale LiterarynMagazine, lives in Cambridge, England.n16/CHRONICLESnby Andrei NavrozovnnnState of Russia. … If this is the case, it means thatnthe “White idea,” having crossed the battlelines,nhas conquered their subconscious minds. . . . Wenhave triumphed. . . . The White idea has beennvictorious.nNo, this is not Enoch Powell but an intellectual forerunnernof his, a Russian monarchist named Vasily Shulgin, writingnin 1922. Shulgin was one of the founders of smenovekhovstvo,nor the “changing landmarks” movement, of whichnthe modern historians Michel Heller and Aleksandr Nekrichnsay in their Utopia in Power:nThe changing landmarks movement arose amongnthe right-wing, conservative sectors of the Russiannintelligentsia. Efimovsky was a monarchist, Ustryalovnand Klyuchnikov supporters of Kolchak, Shulgin anmonarchist, and Gredeskul a right-wing Cadet.nThey all “changed their landmarks” when theyncame to the conclusion that the White cause wasn