Lincoln, the purest visionary (though not necessarily in Sowell's "Vison of the Anointed" sense) in major American politics ever, proved to be a pragmatist once in office.

Not that Obama deserves any comparison to Lincoln.

I agree with Sowell's Analysis of what the court will be like after Obama gets his fifth justice. The four liberals we presently have not only ignored all the facts in the heller case, they then turned around and embraced the new gun control philosophy that there are no individual rights in the Constitution or the Bill or rights. While Obama talks of restoring peoples individual rights he says were trampled by Bush, his justices, in the name of their feelings, will trample them for anyone they personnally dislike. Heaven help the man or woman who the justice just takes a personal dislike to and bends the law to full-fill some need of to punish.

You want to tell me the neocon foreign policy in the Middle East is a constrained vision?! How about Ronald Reagan's "City on a Hill" metaphor?!

This isn't philosophy. This is hypocritical political campaigning dressed up in big words.

Sorry, I quit reading after "superb book by Thomas Sowell."

Sorry, I quit reading after "superb book by Thomas Sowell."

Sad.

Great....

Anybody else detect the irony in this:

The French Revolution, by contrast [to the American Revolution], embodied the unconstrained vision. "In France," Sowell says, "the idea was that if you put the right people in charge--if you had a political Messiah--then problems would just go away." The result? The Terror, Napoleon and so many decades of instability that France finally sorted itself out only when Charles de Gaulle declared the Fifth Republic.

For those of us who haven't read A Conflict of Visions, would someone kindly point to a good summary explaining what Sowell means by “The Constrained Vision” and “The Unconstrained Vision”?

The Wikipedia article on Thomas Sowell includes this paragraph:

Many modern ideological struggles can be traced to two visions: the vision of the anointed and the vision of the constrained realist: Sowell lays out these concepts in his A Conflict of Visions, and The Vision of the Anointed. These two visions encompass a range of ideas and theories. The vision of the anointed relies heavily on sweepingly optimistic assumptions about human nature, distrust of decentralized processes like the free market, impatience with systemic processes that constrain human action, and absent or distorted empirical evidence. The constrained or tragic vision relies heavily on a reduced view of the goodness of human nature, and prefers the systematic processes of the free market, and the systematic processes of the rule of law and constitutional government. It distrusts sweeping theories and grand assumptions in favor of heavy reliance on solid empirical evidence and on time-tested structures and processes. [Boldfacing, hyperlinks and footnote removed]

That paragraph has survived unchanged at least since August 2008 despite numerous other revisions, so I assume it accurately reflects Sowell’s views, yes?

Is the Vision of the Anointed the same thing as the Unconstrained Vision?

I may have further comment on this topic after I am enlightened by responses to my questions so far.

SSFC,

"Not that Obama deserves any comparison to Lincoln."

Not yet. Though I wouldn't foreclose the possibility.

Please show how Barack Obama is a more talented demagogue than George W. Bush under the training and advice of Karl Rove.

Have you ever heard Bush give a speech? My 8-month old daughter is more coherent.

Anon21:
James Gibson: It's pretty unlikely that Obama will have a chance to shift the balance of the Court. Unless one of the five conservative Justices develops a serious health condition, all of them will probably serve into 2017.

literally everyone expects Stevens and Ginsburg to retire on the belief they have stayed in office simply to prevent Bush from putting a conservative in their seats. But Scalia is 72 which makes him older then "guilty until proven innocent" Breyer and Souter (who some expect to be the third up for replacement). And in the case of Scalia some people have been noting his weight and the possibility of high blood pressure. So your argument is invalid.

In the name of preventing the loss of liberal seats on the court you protect the ability to gain a majority. Thus having a swing voter such as Kennedy or now retired Day O'Connor becomes a mute point. Would Obama put on a conservative to maintain the four/four balance with a swing voter. Or would he go for party loyalty and his beliefs and make a solid majority for one side which would only be open for adjustment in ten years. As they say, its through the courts presidents have their longest legacy: for good or for bad.

Sowell's judgment?

I don't see any judgment at all, sir.

Lurker999: "We survived Grant and FDR and Nixon and Carter and GWB."

What is your evidence that we've survived GWB?

Just because GWB is a talented demogogue is not a reason to sell Obama short :)

Sowell certainly demonstrates a mastery of the McCain talking points. Beyond that, there's not much there.

More than three hours ago, I asked for, among other things, explanation of what Sowell means by “The Constrained Vision” and “The Unconstrained Vision”. Here I am, a liberal offering the opportunity for conservatives to spread their gospel and inform the unenlightened about the good news offered by one of their great prophets, and nobody wants to evangelize.

It's Friday.

eyesay,

In the (very) off chance that you are sincere in your plaint.