Patrick Daneen has this book where he argues that a bunch of enlightenment philosophers created this thing called liberalism and then unleashed it cruelly on an unsuspecting world. He hopes for a post-liberal future. https://amzn.to/2STm69K 

I think this is all wrongheaded.

Liberalism was not a set of ideas conceived by philosophers and then foisted on unsuspecting masses; rather, Hobbes, Locke, et. al. were simply the philosophical expression of deep habits, legal regimes, and cultural priorities that were all ready centuries old

in Britain & Netherlands--and later would be planted more or less whole sale in America, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia by the colonists from those nations--by the time these philosophers articulated them. "Self making," distrust of authority, bourgeoisie striving,

legal regimes that favored the creation of markets and prized private enterprise, an individualist ethos and family system preceded the enlightenment. These things, I believe, are permanent features of Anglosphere politics, and barring true cultural revolution style attacks on

the common law, deep seated cultural norms, et. al. they are here to stay. For America, post-liberalism is an illusion. We will either be liberal and strong or subject to Tocqueville's atomized despotism.

There are no other options this century (it takes more than that to change these things).

I thought about writing a long blog post of series of essays to argue this all out. Decided not to.

Other people have actually done all the arguing for me. o instead I'll just post excerpts from their writings as I find them. I trust readers are smart enough to connect the dots.

I'll update this thread as I post 'em

AGAINST PATRICK DENEEN (I): Lexington and Concord

https://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2020/05/against-patrick-daneen-i.html