I think it's fair to say that as I age I've become more skeptical of certain kinds of anti-modernism and pastoralism, and more interested in the relationship between social-cultural-scientific dynamism and the successful transmission of tradition.
I touch on this a little in my discussion with @roddreher, but there's probably more to say: 
One way to think about it is that insofar as preservation of a true tradition requires a certain degree of reinvention/innovation in each generation, that can be easier to do in a society that's more dynamic and youthful and creative generally.
Also it might the case that pastoralist society has virtues that dynamic societies lose, BUT you can't go back to pastoralism; there's no road back to Eden. And to the extent that pastoralist enclaves persist within modern society, you need a certain dynamism to maintain them.
In other words perhaps it's actually easier to be Wendell Berry when you're fighting the developer, one creative impulse against another, than when the developer is gone and all that's left are opioids and old age.
In which there is a case for a fusionism that isn't exactly the old alliance of libertarians and social cons, but an alliance of "conservative"-coded cultural impulses and "progressive"-coded political-technical impulses that are actually both interested in furthering creativity.
Of course I'm probably influenced in all this thinking by the fact that I tried to move to the country and nature tried to kill me, but that's for the next book. For now please buy this one:
amazon.com/Decadent-Socie…
amazon.com/Decadent-Socie…
