In Defense of Freedom by {author}: summary and why it matters

What it argues

Meyer, a former Communist turned National Review editor, argued that the two main currents of the postwar right, the libertarian emphasis on freedom and the traditionalist emphasis on virtue, are not rivals but partners. Virtue, he held, has meaning only when freely chosen, so a state that imposes it destroys it. Freedom, on the other hand, is meant to be used toward the good, and a society with no moral anchor will not remain free.

He therefore defended limited government as the political order that makes moral life possible, while leaving the cultivation of virtue to family, church and conscience. He rejected both the collectivism of the left and the traditionalist inclination to use state power to enforce morals.

Why it matters

The idea became known as fusionism, and it governed the coalition that backed Goldwater and Reagan. Debates about whether it still holds are at the center of present-day arguments between libertarians and national conservatives.

About the author

Frank S. Meyer (1909-1972) was an American writer and a Communist Party official who left the party in the 1940s and became a conservative thinker. He joined National Review in its early years as a book editor and columnist. He argued with the traditionalists on the magazine's staff, and the debate was one of the ways that conservatism defined itself.

Who should read it

Readers of movement history and anyone trying to understand why conservatives are both for liberty and for tradition.