David Starkey: Disraeli: The Great Conservative
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 май 2022
- Please join the David Starkey Members' Club via Patreon / davidstarkeytalks or Subscribestar www.subscribestar.com/david-s... and submit questions for members Q & A videos. Also visit www.davidstarkey.com to make a donation and visit the channel store shop.davidstarkey.com. Thank you for watching.
Please do not re-upload any David Starkey Talks video without permission.
#Davidstarkey #Davidstarkeytalks #History
![Finesse2Tymes - Pretty Ricky [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xIoP_mhYRT0/mqdefault.jpg)
Please join the David Starkey Members' Club via Patreon www.patreon.com/davidstarkeytalks or Subscribestar www.subscribestar.com/david-starkey-talks and submit questions for members Q & A videos. Also visit www.davidstarkey.com to make a donation and visit the channel store shop.davidstarkey.com. Thank you for watching.
the only reason disraeli was great, was that he shown cromwell was funded by foreign bankers for his revolution and had charles 1st killed. thus rendering every monarchy and government since charles first VOID.
Is this available on DVD ?
The so called humanitarian interventions of the Tony Blair years were disastrous for Britain's international reputation and for the countries concerned. Still we are continuing to pay the price for that in so many unfortunate ways around the world. Interesting perspective. Thank you.
midwit take. oliver cromwell and the dutch, scandi, french and german bankers did this. thank protestantism
Blair/Brown fiasco will keep Labour unelectable for decades.
It was lap service to the US. I think even Blair understod it wa sgoing tio happen no matter what (Teh AMericans hade made their mind up).
You just can't be serious, this " Government " has returned the country back to the Victorian times, with the greatest disparity in wealth of anywhere in Europe. It's wrecked our economy and the amount of corruption is horrendous.
Correct, socialist taxes destroyed the economy and sent the UK backwards
A much better camera set up than previous vids.
Great content, as always Mr Starkey
Friday night, a dram of Glenfarclas 25 and a talk by Mr Starkey. Need I say more.
A man of good taste.
Cigar or Church Warden?
Dear Sir: Thankyou for the courage, time and effort you have taken to upload these talks. While I do not agree with some of your statements, I respect you and your work enough to listen: You have made me think deeply about the issues you address, and have led me to see flaws on both sides. I am grateful.
It remains my hope that humans of all political persuasions can somehow find common ground to show effective compassionate action in addressing the problems of our time.
I understand the world 🌎 better by listening to Dr Starkey and understand why I struggle with so many imported ideas thankyou ❤️
A little rough on olde. Disraeli comparing him to Johnson though. I agree on rating over Gladstone.
Ever since Dr Starkey made this beautiful channel I have been hoping he would one day devote a video to Disraeli, of whom I had heard him speak admiringly in several interviews and who is one of my political heroes. I am very grateful that he has indeed made such a video and a lengthy one at that. Disraeli should never be forgotten and I want to thank Dr Starkey profoundly for keeping his memory alive and for stressing the importance of Disraeli in our day and age.
"New wine into old bottles."
Splendid stuff. Thank you.
Great video. I have always found Disraeli and Gladstone fascinating. You do an excellent job of breaking this down for us. Disraeli saw a much bigger picture just as John Adams did when he agreed to defend the British soldiers in Boston. Oh, he was despised for that certainly did not have the financial resources to withstand being ruined. But due process and justice has to be for all.
A memorable talk, David, with a memorable quote, amongst many, "that jumped up little squirt Lord Faulkner". Thank you.
I would love to see a video on Stanley Baldwin and one nation conservativism.
Thank you for another interesting talk. On the story of liberal intervention, Gladstone and the Balkan crisis is a moment with interesting differences with our current ancestor we have today. The main one I think is that Gladstone’s interventionism is directed towards protecting Christians. It’s no coincidence that Victorian’s had an uncomfortable relationship with the Ottoman Empire - seen before during the Greek war of independence. The Christian revival movements in Victorian Britain did not like the compromises necessary as part of the Eastern Question (propping up an Ottoman state to prevent Russian dominance in the east), that I think Disraeli understood. Disraeli ultimately is flamboyant, but also flexible enough to be comfortable with the trade offs that that movement could not stomach.
Thank you Matt for your comment.
Long-time Starkey fan - LOVING these talks!
Indeed, I am so happy he made a RUclips channel
Great stuff. Before he was cancelled, we only got Starkey once every few months, now we get as much as we want. Would be great to also have some engagement with other academics/ intellectuals so some of the great man's more outrageous statements can be challenged and discussed. Just a thought.
I love shows like this - Disraeli Churchill etc
Fantastic presentation Mr Starkey- like a Bach cantata!
More please!😁🤩
Unbelievable 🙄🙄🙄
This was more then a talk , it was a lesson. And a very good one at that . Thankyou David.
Awesome. Excellent channel. Brilliant content.
Who was the hidden hand Disraeli was speaking of? This is a very interesting quote. “Governments do not govern, but merely control the machinery of government, being themselves controlled by the hidden hand.”
Civilization itself.
If the 'hand' is strong and works toward upholding itself it thrives.
If it is weak then _The Gods of the Copy Book Headings_ step up and explain the price of failure.
Probably Adam Smith's "invisible hand" of the free-market economy.
Matt if ever you have the Opportunity i suggest a visit to the Hughenden Manor Library, near High Wycombe, Bucks .... Disraeli was well versed with the Men who Govern from behind the High Doors and Pillars of initiation.
The hidden hand of power and influence.
Brilliant as always.
I always love your lectures and analysis.
I really enjoyed this, and I don't think I've ever learned as much as this in less than an hour
Dr. Starkey, David, what wonderful answers and analogies. Your depth of knowledge and understanding of historical facts is so impressive and your way of conveying and teaching so easy to take in and understand. Your cancellation by academia was nothing short of scandalous and a major injustice not only to you but to your prospective students. That, however, is the publics major gain. Thank you, Robert.
I think his sudden easy jumper to conclusions and analogies and " answers" in hindsight makes it ok people dont take him as serious anymore. He WAS a good historian, dont know wjy his bitterness about chancelation makes him seem to wanna proof there was a point to it.
@@herzkine I have to let you into a secret... History is all about hindsight, it's the past. If you don't think his cancellation by the WOKE extremists was unfair and destructive, well that's your opinion. If you don't think he's a good historian "anymore" don't listen. How does someone who "was a great historian" and that in their retirement passes on their lifetime's work, suddenly becomes "not a good historian"? I suspect your view is all political and not based on facts.
@@herzkine- i agree
I'd disagree that Gladstone was a leveller in a way comparable to later left wing beliefs. He believed fervently in hierarchy and described himself as an inegalitarian. Gladstonian liberalism was really about Christian individual sovereignty, not social justice. He hated languid, entitled aristocratic leadership which he saw as exploitative, but did believe in leadership by the competent, educated and wealthy. He hated bullies and bullshitters, you might say, and encouraged responsibility. Later welfare state socialism in the name of social equality is a bastardisation of Gladstonian liberalism.
Excellent 👍 thanks keep the good work up 👏👏
Thank you Dr Starkey! Brilliant.
I wish I could give this video 10 thumbs up. This is one of the best of Dr. Starkey's videos. I was well aware of Disraeli, but never paid much attention to him. My loss.
The English/British system is different from that of the US and other countries. This is not a bad thing, and in fact, is quite appropriate. There is no one best system. I am in the US, although I have lived in the UK. Both systems have their good and bad sides. I prefer to live in the US, although I loved my time in the UK. While I was there, I ran, and was elected. to Board of Governors of my children's school. It was the best experience I could have had. I got to see a small part of the government of the country. I actually had to get a letter from the Home Office to be able to run as a foreigner. I still have it, somewhere. I tool all the training available to governors (please excuse the spelling, but spell check won't let me use the proper one). Unlike most ex-pats most of my contacts and friends were locals. This, I believe, enriched my experience.
To conclude, I must thank Dr. Starkey for his incredible content. I don't always agree with him (although I do more often than not), but I always appreciate his point of view and his knowledge. That he is willing to share it with all of us is a wonderful thing.
Dear Mr. Starkey, I could not agree more with your descritption on conservativism and it's ever evolving course of self renewance! Thank you so much for amplifying and strengthen my views on the matter. best regards! X.H.
"Intoxicated with his own verbosity" - wow - such a phrase has fullest effect when it is reserved for those politicians who are unequivocally intoxicated - to the eyeballs - with their own verbosity. In the modern day, such a person can be no other than John Bercow.
Another extremely enlightening lecture.
Just connected with this and found it fascinating. As a student I always thought of the old Roundhead/Cavalier saying in relation to Gladstone vs. Disraeli: 'Right but repulsive, wrong but romantic'. Not that Disraeli was 'wrong' - far from it in most instances - but Gladstone was surely 'right' in many of his domestic reforms? Introducing meritocratic entrance exams for the civil service, ending the practice of purchasing of army commissions, widening the provision of free and secular state education, taxing heavy spirits to tackle endemic alcoholism, - weren't all of these Gladstonian reforms with vital long term benefits? High minded, preachy people such as Gladstone are neither colourful nor attractive, but sometimes they are the required antidote to the sleaze that naturally engulfs politics when unchallenged. Cue the present day - don't we desperately need a new Gladstone to roll back the capture of our society by a corrupt, plutocratic 'chumocracy' with enormous power? He / She / They could start by passing a law to prevent senior state regulators moving straight across into hugely overpaid jobs at the head of the industries they purported to regulate (OFWAT and the FCA come straight to mind). So I'd welcome Gladstone-2!
If in doubt about a quiz question about an historical prime minister, chances are the answer is Disraeli.
Thank you Dr Starkey.
Great video thanks
Marvellous talk
Thank you.
Loved this
Hello david.
Just watched disraeli,a true romantic so this video was just perfect to watch after watching the dvd.
What a great man disraeli was..
Wish we had more mps like him around today.
I love your channel, great information. Would you ever do a video on the battle of Towton.
Brilliant!
One of your best yet Dr Starkey! Ask me I think it the UK needs someone with the brass to stand up an say Make Britain Great Again.😉
I think Dr Starkey would be better as an advisor to a younger political leader. Cromwell or Wolsey to a new Henry VIII? Does Dr Starkey know Lord Frost? Lord Frost took a first in History and French at Oxford University as well as negotiating the Brexit deal...I am sure they share common ground and Lord Frost looks like a man who understands the modern world as well as the nation that we grew up knowing...
@@golfbulldogFrost has wrecked our Economy by pushing through that ludicrous brexit, and making us a laughing stock.
👎👎👎🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺
Thank you
Excellent!
As a Scottish nationalist David, I can say without contradiction, I know no fellow Scottish nationalists that refer to the English as colonisers. Will there be some? Well of course but it really is overplayed as is just about every critique of Scottish nationalists. We want to build a better nation, though in the global political economic world we now live under that will be extremely difficult. Breaking Scotland away from the British state is a noble goal, I hope to live to see it & acknowledge the difficult times that will have to be endured in that process. Work as though you live in the early days of a better nation.
Always enjoyable & interesting listening to your vast knowledge. Best wishes.
Every word that comes out of this man’s mouth is nectar.
🙄🙄👎
amazin as always
Please Sir: Who did the painting of you, the one sitting down and dressed in a sporting look.. It it well done and I appreciate it. thank you for your time
More like this please.
“Semi fascist states of continental Europe” - could not have been described with any better precision.
Like certain people in the Tory Party 😖
(6:15) 'Intoxicated with the EXUBERANCE of his own verbosity.' My mother would often quote it and then laugh.
Thank you so much! As a German, I am highly fascinated by the rhetorical mastery, in which British historians, philosophers and political theorists can bring History to life - espacially History of Ideas. Does anyone have an idea what to read in order to further engage with Disraeli's world of thought?
Read his trilogy Coningsby; Sybil, and Tancred 8:50
If you have never listened to them, Isaiah Berlin's series of talks about Romanticism are perhaps one of the finest recorded examples of that British mastery of the extemporaneous exposition of the history of ideas.. 🙂
RIP Professor John Vincent. His book on Disraeli was regarded as the Magnum Opus for some time.
Love the lamp
Dizzy was of a character and intellect that’s virtually impossible to imagine in British politics today. A truly great Briton.
My English father-in-law was a working class Tory and my mother-in-law, Labour. My wife... took her father's path and was Conservative. Canada has a similar problem: the Conservatives of today have no ideology of conservatism. That ended in the 1960s.
Today's Canadian conservatives (and a lot of conservatives) in general are only about making sure the upper and higher end of the middle class get their tax breaks and spend through tax cuts
America has the exact same problem. America lost its true sense of Conservatism when it the East Coast Establishment won pushing forth its abstract goals of liberal internationalism. The "new American Right" that rose with the Cold War was not "Conservative" and this idea that they are "conservative" allows the false notion of the 'party switch' that is heavily pushed within the American school system. The historiography is absurd & ahistorical unless combined with the ability as a victor within a culture struggle to rewrite the history within the lens of a Nouvelle Gauche dominated academia in addition to the hostile takeover over the Republican Party (Conservative Party) by international liberals in the 1940s and solidified in 1952. Only thing is that we tend to assume the people who took over the Establishment in 1964 with Goldwater and further solidfied in 1980 by Reagan were "conservative" - - but they most certainly were not. Reagan was a neoliberal and Goldwater was a self-declared libertarian, more interest in the abstract ideal of the economy and less so the reality of it.
@@themainmanborah Though I do note there is an attempt is some quarters to link modern so-called conservatism to Edmund Burke and Adam Smith. The last conservative intellectual known widely here in Canada was George Grant.
Most of what I knew of Disreali was from Trollope's caricature in the Palliser novels ("probably not temporary insanity"), so this was enlightening.
I'm a Palmerston and Gladstone man myself
This was a truly great and fascinating talk, but we've now gone way beyond being "a bit imperfect". The system is clearly fracturing, breaking and will need another tearing before it is repaired.
I am so glad you are not surgeon. You have a broken leg? Lets break one of your arms as well, that's the best way to get that leg repaired!! Lol. Common sense man, repairing and tearing are the opposite you cannot tear to repair. That is called demolition and mimicry!
The very thing we need avoid.
I made exactly the same point in an essay at Sunderland Polytechnic in 1986, Although Dr. Starkey does it with more flourish and unfortunately has the ability to use the actions of Blair and Johnson to illustrate his point.
The 'petty MP' was Daniel O'Connell, hardly petty.
dear david love your dizzy upload dizzy would put the modern day tories to shame him and gladstone both did much good i hope you are well stay safe yours avon leicestershire 2022
love Starkey
Goat intro ✴️😁
These talks are amazing 👍
Mrs Thatcher's economic ideas were very much in the tradition of Gladtone, as was widely acknowledged at the time. In the 20th century there was much overlap between liberalism and conservatism in response to the rise of Labour. You can see this in the career of Winston Churchill, as I'm sure Dr Starkey knows. I believe that if Gladstone's struggle to achieve Home Rule for Ireland had succeded both countries would have been spared much pain and misery.
They all thought he was a snake, and I call snake. As Hotspur puts it, 'Tell truth and shame the devil'
Disraielly was modern conservative,he had brought about electoral reform, bringing in lower class people to vote,His speeches were like blowing winds reforming the parliament to catch up with the time,He was a real constitutional who knew old flexible English constitution,
Quite right the English judicial system is also very old,but the liberal Blair set up supreme court,in fact house lord's judicial committee is the last court of appeal.Never before we have seen an irrational prime minister like Blair,He was a davastating,
Gladstone was also liberal ,very brave and rhetorical.S otland had its own parliament,but here we don't have federal government rather unitary form of government
I'm a hard line Unionist.
I've heard Simon Heffer describe himself as a Gladstonian Liberal. Starkey in discussion with the fellow Cambridge Historian would make a fascinating conversation.
In the thumbnail there seems to be a passing resemblance between D & S...Good video, thanks!
Sir, you are a national treasure to Americans and Britons. I channel you when I explain to my children that the people ordained their constitution; no pope no pretentate, the people
A national treasure to the Americans ??, that explains a lot. 😅
May I ask your thoughts on the books by AN Wilson and Douglas Murray ? Thank you.
Dr. Starkey, could you recommend any biographies of Disraeli, the Great Conservative? Thank you, sir.
Recently watched the 1930's film Disraeli starring George Arliss. Would love to see it remade today.
See the Mudlark and the Invincible Mr Disraeli
And Disraeli created a great album with the rock group Cream.
he said, giving us the Gears
@@WakingUpToday213 Haha!
Can you do a video of William Gladstone please?
Gladstone was not the 1st political statesman to get a state funeral - Palmerston had one in 1865 much to the annoyance of the queen.
Three things I think are important are as follows;
1 - You former Conservative (usually) MP’s at the constituency home gate with the wife and children after an affair is publicised putting in the whole spectacle and being basically publicly humiliated and losing their ministerial position etc. This seems fine given they have been directly elected from the whole 2.4 children angle and virtues of the (usually) Christian position on family life etc.
You then fast forward to the present and have a wildly different society with no such dominant religious angle and yet men (usually) are still humiliated and lose their career (whether supreme in their brief or not) because of basically sex.....this just seems insane and so wrong.
In other words - another intolerance has replaced the previous doctrine of intolerance.
2 - I think it has become clear to many people (not me as I predicted this long ago) that the grave harm of Blair was not solely Iraq but in fact, what took place domestically. The list is sizeable and you mentioned another area that is on that list - the road of good intentions and all that. In time more people will become far more aware of just how harmful his ‘things will only get better’ actually was.
3 - I think the moment you mentioned the referendum pertinent to the 1867 act of Disraeli it was rather important.
If you imagine that nobody (of significant number) in large working class areas was even registered (or intending to vote as they don’t vote in elections ordinarily) to cast their vote in that referendum then you begin to realise just how apathetic the very people Disraeli included in democracy actually were - I was one of them.
You may conclude that including a broader segment of society into democracy (as Disraeli does) is step 1 (a vital prerequisite for genuinely being democrat as a state) but surely they (the now included electorate) need to be inspired for something/someone to actually get off their backsides and go and vote for.
I will now continue watching the rest of your great work.
david speaking of dizzy i have some victoian albums of photo cabinet cards some of royalty and some of polictians namely of dizzy and of gladstone as well as both albert and victoria and their nine children and their familys i would love to show you them but keep your youtube going see you soon yours avon leicestershire 2022
More epicness
24:00 "Dishing the Whigs" = "Owning the Libs"?
Disraeli was indeed a genius and what a character and it indicates that the British weren't racist or prejudiced , nor was Queen Victoria , no wonder Queen Victoria loved and respected Disraeli , he was amusing, brilliant and showed the Queen abject respect and loyalty, whereas Gladstone, although brilliant would have been a sanctimonious bore , she couldn't stand him initially .
To whomever is looking after the audio, it’s super low quality - maybe over compressed?
The citizens of anywhere are depicted, in my view, by the character of Gabriel Conroy in Joyce's story, The Dead. I'm sure that wasn't Joyce's intention but it's my analysis of that revolting, rootless, condescending cosmopolitan.
David, you talk about how bad the Balkans are now. They were no better under the Turks. What does that tell you?
As they say, the French Constitution is filed under "Periodicals" at the literary archives.
Of course Labour would never have got into power without the 1918 Reform Act, which gave non property owners the right to vote.
Paradoxically speaking, if the UK had a more robust system of checks and balances like the United States, separation of powers included, Blair would have never been able to abolish a position like Lord Chancellor. Because we in the US separate the executive and legislative branches more, and because we have an upper house that is still on equal footing to the lower house, and because we have a written constitution with a very high bar to amend, the ability of a Blair like figure to do much real long term damage constitutionally is next to zero.
Frankly, long term the British constitution is doomed precisely because its historical nature as a nebulous/abstract concept, means you always one election away from a radical rewriting of your system and the minute the Lords or the King were to intervene as a "check", those institutions will have signed their death warrants.
Also it should be noted that even in the United States, our Vice President is also President of the Senate. If the electoral college is a tie, the House elects the President by state delegation and the Senate elects the Vice President by majority vote. The Chief Justice presides over impeachment trials in the Senate. Just because an institutions crosses over the boundary, does not by itself mean that it violates the separation of powers, in fact such boundary crossing is essential for the separation of powers to function as part of a system of checks and balances.
Gladstone was right in his reaction to the Bulgarian massacres. It was the UK's following policy of propping up the sick man at the Bosporus that was shameful.
(Blair's intervention in Iraq - which wasn't his decision anyway - a stable and cukturally different was a whole different matter.)
He also was right on home rule. That it never came through caused all the Irish troubles from 1916 onwards.
Had John Smith lived the country would never have been cursed with Blair.
Yes I remember listening to him and thought he spoke more common sense than the Tories did at that time. When he died & then the Slug called Bliar took over, any thoughts of ever voting Labour evaporated!
That was a very insightful presentation and as an American I will look for books detailing Disraeli's life and career because it seems to me that Donald Trump is something of an American version of Disraeli. Many will disagree but Trump's clarion call of "America First" speaks to the forgotten middle class here in America.
To compare the subtle, imaginative brilliance of Disraeli to the lumpen, ignorant blathering of Trump is a true stretch of the imagination.
Simply brilliant.
Disraeli and Gladstone were the last two Prime Ministers to have statues dedicated in Westminster Abbey. Not trying to be political but it seems to me that a statue of the greatest Prime Minister who ever lived and the first woman Prime Minister is more than enough reason to add two more.
Note how the representative of Liberalism switches from Gladstone to John Stuart Mill at the point that Starkey tries to heap all credit for the 1867 extension of the franchise on Disraeli. That's because Disraeli's decision was partly motivated by fear of the radical wing of Gladstone's party and of Radical MPs like John Bright. Starkey is right that the Tories have shown an ability to risk yielding positional power throughout their history, but it has never been without some struggle from below, including Peterloo (the Tory response to which was the closing down of the main publication (now the Guardian) sympathetic to the murdered protesters), the inspiration of Garibaldi, the Hyde Park demonstrations etc
David you are the first of a few who are intellectual giants.
Interesting that there is no mention of Gladstone's influence upon the lodestar of the modern Conservative Party - Margaret Thatcher. She bragged in the 1980s that if Gladstone had still been alive, he would have joined her Conservative Party.
Wouldn't England and Whales be better off without Scotland? I was living and working in England in the early 2000s. When I asked one of my English management colleagues about the Scotland situation his response was quite interesting. He said, build a trench across the border and hopefully it will float out to sea.
This was also the era of the Quebec independence referenda. They had two and neither was successful. I had a meeting in London with a Canadian business partner just before the second. He predicted rightly, that the second would fail. What was happening then was demographics. You should have seen the speculation in the US on what would happen if Quebec had separated from Canada. I recall one PBS report that speculated that the rest of Canada would become part of the United States.
"You don't even know who I am."
Is this available on DVD ? This is bloody brilliant.
Surely the main problem with an Empire's collapsing is not that the liberals helped it on its way, but that it leaves people unable to rule themselves, divided, without an independent history etc, because of the nature of imperial domination. Look at southern America and the West Indies. Look at Europe and N Africa and the Middle East after the Romans. They were a potential mess after achieving independence with or without liberalism. Liberalism was in many ways a response to the autocratic and oppressive nature of imperialism and the political and economic exploitation that went with it - an attempt to heal its wounds. Manchester liberalism developed as a challenge to the pre-industrial orthodoxies of London commercialism and Whitehall policies and networks of power and influence.
The century upon century of warfare within Europe after the fall of Rome was the legacy of Empire. The Balkans would have been a mess had the local populations thrown out the Turks without liberal help or liberal ideology. Liberalism, of course, did affect the forms the messes took and the relationships between former colonies and other states, whether 'allies' or former imperial powers.
Nationalism was, arguably and in part at least, a Romantic, backward-looking notion that developed in tandem with conservatism. And this caused huge problems in the C20th that cannot gbe blamed on liberalism. Look at Scott, one of the founding figures of historical romanticism and a conservative crafter of a semi-mythological, romanticised history of the UK. In a different context, similar principles were used to break up imperial entities such as the A-H and Ottoman Empires.
At the core of all nearly all political problems is the question: Who owns what? That's to say, a major issue is almost always the way property is distributed, and this is entangled with the non-ending struggle between plutocratic elites and the people, autocracy and democracy noted by Plato in the Republic (Bk 6?). What is particularly destabilising following the collapse of Empire is the struggle to settle who owns what, something made extra difficult after the fall of the C19th/20th empires by the rise of global capitalism and the continued economic and political as well as socio-cultural influence the imperial powers. The UK, of course, suffered less post empire than its colonies because the fundamentals of the post 1660 to 1689 settlement pertained, whereas its empire had destabilised any existing settlements or political, socio-economic and cultural settlements in a quarter of the globe. Its only successful large-scale legacy polities were those that were just a replication of the old settlement in countries where the original polities had been wiped out or shovelled to one side. Places like Hong Kong were exceptions that proved the rule.
That is a very myopic view of the Romantic movement in Western cultural history. Many are the historians and thinkers, contemporary to the late 18th/early 19th Centuries (and since) who have written of its association with the psychology of emancipation - both political and psychological. You aren't seriously going to suggest that Romantics didn't admire the French revolutionary consciousness or it's putative liberal-radical? Just mentioning Scott is disingenuous (I note here that Coleridge spoke in critical vein of Scott's work as examining the dialectic between both tradition and progress). There are some theories (Isiah Berlin for example) that posit the emergence of Romanticism as a provincial German reaction to the imperialist Catholic oppression of Louis XIV, even whilst some critics accused Romantics were accused at the time of being antediluvian Catholics. There are more still that posit the notion of an emergence 19thC nationalism as a clarion call for emancipation from the hegemonic political and economic forces of imperialist dynastic dominion in wider Europe. Furthermore, you aren't seriously going to suggest that Romanticism didn't inspire the emancipatory revolutionaries of the 20thC or the anti-heroes of 20thC liberal social-justice? Even Hitler, ever the Romantic, was a socialist.
What liberal today does not jealously guard his creed of emancipation and progress wishing to conserve it from all tincture, even though it is now sinking into the morass of relativism and ethical abdication? As to the point about property, property rights are one of the fundamental tents of a conservative philosophy of society. Liberalism as it stands to day is all for abolishing any communitarian sense of property or belonging by the relentless instrumentalist push for a sterilising globalism.