The conservative French perspective is so distant from most American conservative views that I can only be grateful.

A culture is unified when all live by the same rules and expectations.

A culture is divided every time one group lives by one set of rules and/or expectations, while another lives by some other, different set.

This is true for both conservatives and liberals, probably in all cultures – ever.

And it is a natural response for humans to exclude and shun that which is alien. That is why it matters so much how we define what is to be viewed as belonging vs. what is to be viewed as alien. We cannot get rid of the fact that we are “made” (whether via creation or evolution or both or neither) to reject Other. But what we can control is (a) how we define Other and (b) whether the form of our rejection is just or whether it is inhumane.

@Graham Combs:
Progressives also want to end conflict. And as usual it is to be ended the old fashioned way. First by namecalling then by law.

This cracked me up. I don’t know how I was expecting the sentence to end, but …

“Nationality is the self-consciousness of a people and can only be secured by separation and exclusion of all that is alien”

The conservative French perspective is so distant from most American conservative views that I can only be grateful. The American pluralist experiment is indeed exceptional and is closer to Christ’s vision. Jesus and his followers rejected for good reason the Jewish nationalism that resulted in the destruction of the Temple.

Nationality is the self-consciousness of a people and can only be secured by separation and exclusion of all that is alien.

Pluralism means competing visions of Good. It is essentially a City full of Strangers, a non-City in fact.

That is the problem with the conservatives. They are floundering between two denials of the political nature of man that seeks to erase distinction between citizen and stranger.

This can be done either by making everyone a citizen (Progressivism) or by making everyone a stranger (libertarianism). These two tendencies are simultaneously acting and mutually reinforcing.

The commandment Love Thy Neighbor itself indicates the political nature of man whereby man lives in nations with their particular Laws and vision of Good.

The difficulty is that in the midst of struggles over the survival of things we value and believe are essential, it’s very difficult to keep these foundations in mind.

It’s good to be reminded that the deepest threat is not this or that political threat in a particular controversy, but even more essentially the danger of losing one’s soul. So yes, let’s keep arguing for religious liberty and the good of marriage and all important social goods. But not in a way that undermines the whole reason for defending these good things.

The truth is that our salvation does not turn on any political or social arrangement, but rather on our fidelity to the Gospel, come what may.