Book Review: “Conserving Truth” by Joelle Webb
A Brief History of Western Conservatism, by Equal Protection Project’s Researcher
In the wake of the assassination of Turning Point’s Charlie Kirk, the youth-oriented campus conservative advocacy group has received more than 120,000 inquiries from people interested in starting new campus chapters.
Therefore, the timing of the book by Equal Protection Project researcher Joelle Webb could not be better. “Conserving Truth: A Brief History of Western Conservatism” is a work focused on defining the essential principles of modern conservative philosophy and was written to inform and inspire young Americans who are beginning to engage politically and civically and battle against woke policy and socialist activism.
“Conserving Truth” is an impressively insightful and exceptionally well-argued work that stands out for its intellectual depth, clarity of analysis, and commitment to fostering nuanced political and legal understanding. Joelle delivers a masterful synthesis of history, philosophy, law, and social commentary. She crafts a compelling narrative powered by deep scholarship and a genuine passion for the subject matter.
From the outset, “Conserving Truth” weaves together a fascinating review of the evolution of democracy and legal thought, drawing from philosophical superstars such as Tocqueville, Jefferson, Adam Smith, and Foucault. Joelle’s analysis transcends mere summary and offers an intriguing interpretation that traces the origins of foundational concepts such as property rights, social contract theory, and the tension between law as order and law as control. Each chapter is meticulously sourced and engagingly written, offering both accessible explanations and advanced insights suitable for experts and newcomers alike.
One of the most impressive aspects of Joelle’s work is its balanced perspective. She openly acknowledges ideological orientations, yet resists offering trite insults and hyperbole. “Conserving Truth” invites readers to grapple with complexity and to question assumptions. The discussions on originalism, judicial restraint, and the shifting interpretations of the Constitution are particularly sophisticated, exploring not only the technical legal arguments but also the moral and philosophical stakes in contemporary politics.
Perhaps my favorite portion of the books was Joelle’s explanation of why “Conserving Truth” was written:
But it was one class in particular at Drake that fueled a deeper passion for conservative philosophy, specifically. The class was centered around reading and analyzing Karl Marx’s Das Kapital, where we would learn about the politics and economics of this greatly misguided philosopher. I read his screed of capitalism page by page, attempting to extract even a semblance of useful information from the depressing novel of the exploited laborer and the capitalist, and walked away even more convinced that the only credible alternative to this despotic regime was capitalism and free-market enterprise.
…It was within the crucible of this class that the book you are now reading began to take shape. Instead of spending endless, pointless hours debating with my professors, knowing that they frequently passed by, misinterpreted, or misunderstood conservative philosophy, I elected to devote my time to writing this book. My hope is that other young conservatives shall better
understand the roots and history of conservative thought within contemporary society.
It is interesting to note that in addition to being an Equal Protection Project researcher, Joelle is an undergraduate at Drake University in Iowa. She is currently participating in the 3+3 accelerated law program focused on Law, Politics, and Society and is set to complete her bachelor’s degree in 2026. If admitted to Drake Law School, Joelle will earn her Juris Doctor degree in 2028.
“Conserving Truth” offers so much to the young men and women opening up “Turning Point” Chapters or otherwise becoming more engaged in politics or government. Even when addressing dense theoretical material or summarizing major court cases like Marbury v. Madison, Joelle succeeds in explaining difficult material without sacrificing subtlety or detail.
Additionally, Joelle’s commentary is passionate yet professional, blending academic rigor with a personal touch that makes the arguments memorable and persuasive. In summary, “Conserving Truth” is an inspiring, beautifully reasoned book that would make a great gift to high school and college students seeking a better understanding of what conservatism is…as they are not apt to get this information at most college campuses.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Foucault? Not a fan but more Derrida influence would have been nice.
Marx had some nice lines (18th Brumaire Preface to the 2nd edition) that have recently been quoted to put down both Reagan and Trump:
Of the writings dealing with the same subject at approximately the same time as mine, only two deserve notice: Victor Hugo’s Napoleon le Petit and Proudhon’s Coup d’Etat. Victor Hugo confines himself to bitter and witty invective against the responsible producer of the coup d’etat. The event itself appears in his work like a bolt from the blue. He sees in it only the violent act of a single individual. He does not notice that he makes this individual great instead of little by ascribing to him a personal power of initiative unparalleled in world history. Proudhon, for his part, seeks to represent the coup dbetat as the result of an antecedent historical development. Inadvertently, however, his historical construction of the coup d’etat becomes a historical apologia for its hero. Thus he falls into the error of our so-called objective historians. I, on the contrary, demonstrate how the class struggle in France created circumstances and relationships that made it possible for a grotesque mediocrity to play a hero’s part.
Derrida would have been helpful for showing that depth runs into contradiction, but with a sense of amazement. Explaining eternal vulnerability to Marx or the opposition generally. (Who in turn are vulnerable for the same reason.)
I’d suggest Richard Epstein’s classic econtalk podcast on Rule of Law for an undeluded background on conservatism. I guarantee it’s the best podcast you’ll ever hear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK6u6r-7y74
“tension between law as order and law as control.”
Law and order is famously taken as a pleonasm, but they’re two different things. Order regards hierarchy. Law is the rule book, written at best to increase opportunities for gains through trade.
“Order regards hierarchy.’
Only if you select the non-optimal definition.
Order opposes chaos.
There’s _It Usually Begins with Ayn Rand_ by Jerome Tuccille, and his encounters with conservative enthusiasts.
” Around this time I met the Galambosian.
“I am a Galambosian,” he said.
A what? I was beginning to feel like a right-wing Yossarian. All these mothers were out to destroy every principle I believed in! If it wasn’t square-jawed South Westerners with mixed premises, or Ivy League intellectuals who mouthed off in public like truck drivers, or shifty-eyed carny barkers from the Middle West, it was an S. J. Perelman character with a pipe and an ascot, telling me he was a Galambosian.
“What the hell is a Galambosian?” ….
“There are five legitimate functions of government,” said the Galambosian.
“No kidding. What are they?”
“I am not at liberty to say. The theory was originated by Andy Galambos and it is his primary property.”
The Galambosian also informed me that Andy had been introduced to Ayn Rand several years before, and that after five minutes of conversation they had pronounced each other insane.
“Of course, it is Miss Rand who is really insane,” said the Galambosian.