Crunchy

I've been reading Crunchy Con for 2 weeks now and finally speed-read through the ending. Dreher creates a Crunchy Con manifesto, and then goes on to talk about how the crunchy conservatives "fundamental stance toward reality is sacramental." Each chapter is devoted to explaining what living sacramentally in a specific area would look like: Consumerism, Food, Home, Education, Environment and Religion.

While this isn't an earth shattering book, Dreher does a good job defining the difference between the Casual and Committed Christian (see Barna's book, The 7 Faith Tribes). In his chapter on the Environment, for instance, the author talks about living ones values because of those who follow. "For a true conservative, that community includes men and women yet to be born, and for whose sake we are morally obliged to be good stewards of the world we have been given." Considering one's legacy, both personal and communal, is something I'd love to hear more about in the church.
As might be expected, the chapter on Religion, while at the end of the book, is the foundation of Dreher's argument. Without religion, or faith, what is the point of sacramental living? "Crunchy Conservatism takes a more holistic stance toward the world, one that seeks to be true to the basic teachings not only of classic Christianity, but of Judaism and other great wisdom traditions...the (crunchy conservative) believes his religion doesn't state an opinion about how the world is; he believes it is an accurate guide to factual reality."
Dreher states that the true radicals these days, in a time of greed, individualism and secularism, is large families, embracing time tested truths, investing in small and particular instead of large and lavish. His concern is for the cultural battle that we are engaged in and believes "how vital it is to embrace and live by traditions that stand outside this time and this culture, and to fight the dictatorship of relativism, the tyranny of the everlasting now."
I appreciate the quote Dreher includes from Lukas, in his book called, "Democracy and Populism,"
" It may be that in the future the true divisions will be not between Right and Left but between two kinds of Right; between people on the Right whose binding belief is their contempt for Leftists, who hate liberals more than they love liberty, and others who love liberty more than they fear liberals; between nationalists and patriots; between those who believe that America's destiny is to rule the world and others who do not believe that; between those who trust technology and machines and others who trust tradition and old human decencies; between those who support "development" and others who wish to protect the conservation of land-in sum, between those who do not question Progress and others who do."

In effect, the above statement is why we teach logic at our our little homeschool on the Prairie.

For those looking for a road-map, this is a good guide. For those already crunching along, this is good validation.