It will be generally agreed, I think, that there is a good deal of uncertainty in such thinking about political fundamentals as takes place today. Traditional forms of society—the forms within which most men have lived hitherto—have been criticised by two main schools of thought, by liberals on the one hand and by the various sorts of collectivist on the other, but the views taken of all three types of order tend to become blurred as the defenders of one combine with those of another against the third. The supporters of tradition have believed in a "natural" order of society to which men should piously conform. Liberals advocated a form of society in which the spontaneous efforts of individuals would lead to constant improvement. Collectivists believe in organising and controlling by state power the social changes which, in a liberal society, take place haphazardly and painfully. Liberals and collectivists join together against tradition when there is some "superstition" to be attacked. It was in this way that the late Professor Laski's rationalism constantly revived the liberalism in him which no less constantly wilted again in the heat of his collectivist ardour. Collectivists and traditionalists make common cause against liberalism, which they both see as a source of social anarchy and moral nihilism. Thus socialists and Catholics unite in defence of a "just price," a notion which many liberals find difficult to make sense of. Liberals and traditionalists, however, sometimes combine in opposition to what they both consider the "tyranny" of collectivists. A traditionalist like Mr. T. S. Eliot, for example, moves towards liberalism when he considers how collectivist planning ignores the rights of family and region. From the liberal side, Professor Hayek expresses admiration for Burke because, like that defender of the traditional European order, he thinks it preferable for society as a whole to grow rather than to be planned.
(H. B. Acton, "Tradition and Some Other Forms of Order," Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, n.s., 53 [1952-53]: 1-28, at 1-2 [boldface added])
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 