It's altogether fitting that a book throwing down the gauntlet for a libertarian-conservative fusion in the 2010s has emerged from an author linked to the same magazine as the progenitor of the original
fusionism of a half-century earlier.
3) SFL is more vocally skeptical of
fusionism than YAL, but prominent members of the Republican Party still adorn its website.
These problems are not amenable to one-sided solutions: traditionalists must be better libertarians, and libertarians must be better traditionalists, even if we do not all settle on Meyer's notion of
fusionism.
Fusionism is the essence of mainstream American conservatism.
Someone seeing the
fusionism with a critical eye will be inclined to question whether it is not a bringing together only of the more superficial aspects of the various worldviews, since the medievalist consensus based on hierarchy, the centrality of religion, and a landed economic base is so very different from the classical liberalism, and its offshoots, that displaced it.
My
fusionism derives primarily from Friedrich Hayek's works.
Among conservatives, Meyer's position came to be known as
fusionism.
This is true of those who point to Hayek as their inspiration or to Buckley or Strauss or even Meyer's later
fusionism.
All modern theorists have applied
fusionism and inclusivity to Greek ethics to some degree.
In its actual manifestations, it has not really been a creed along the lines of the cultural conservatism of the Russell Kirks, the libertarian consistency of a Hayek, or even the
fusionism of a William F.
Fusionism merged core libertarian percepts, such as support for a free economic system and individual reason, with the traditionalists' deference to divine authority and the classical Western philosophical tradition.
However much individual libertarians like to think they transcend the left-right divide, the actual operating strategy of organized libertarianism has been
fusionism.
