what is conservatism?
a political tradition which contains both constant and variable principles. Conservatism doesn’t see itself was a doctrine rather, it seeks to preserve the status quo and tradition, how it does so depends upon the context.
therefore by nature it is a reactionary movement
what are the origins of conservatism?
- reactionary movement
- roughly same time as the enlightenment-what it was first reacting against
- philosophy: reacting against the idea that man is a rational creature-not driven by appetites/desires
- religion: RC had dominated European thinking-ideas can be seen in conservationism: hierarchy, obedience, authority, original sin(how cons view human nature) rationalism rejected this (opting for a much more protestant theology)
class and conservatism
- begin with assassinated with class interests
- industrial revolution: middle class growing they have capital and want a say- trad land owning class feels threatened threatening the status quo had to justify position beyond mere tradition (during into a doctrine in order to preserve?) Disraeli deveoped the best theory-neo-feudalism preserve sense of order.
what was Disraeli’s theory about class
society divided into 3 classes
- working class:producers couldn’t exercise power directly (no time or knowledge) although they should be represented
- capitalist/commercial/middle class: main wealth creators but self interested couldn’t be relied on
- landed/aristocratic class: had enjoyed great privilege but had to act responsibility (noblesse oblige) they had no need to work-could govern disinterested way and having governed for so long and built up knowledge and experience (no gen should ever be so rash as to consider itself superior to the last)
- all this allowed them to govern in a paternalist way
ways conservatism has had to adapt-depending on what it is opposing
- liberalism: disraeli one nation conservatism (two nations: the rich and the poor)stressing social unity and the need for some form of welfare to combat the neg side effects of free market individualism.
- socialism: objecting to egalitarianism and the dismantling of the state become champions of private enterprise and individualism and excessive state intervention is opposed and suspicious
- Fascism: at first didn’t know how to react in the end stressed individual liberty, democracy and limitations to the state (the beginning of the liberal con fusion 1st to prog then to classical)
- today: cons are splintering about which way to go-gay marriage etc reaction to liberal homelife etc in favour of tradition
Conservatism on human nature
pessimistic
- RC-born with original sin flawed character
- not driven by reason but by desire eg desire for physical wealth and prosperity/capital would suggest individuals cannot be trusted in government
- Karl Popper- human nature is always changing should follow this changing nature rather than sticking to a doctrine
- people are self-seeking feckless etc so need a firm government - burkian paternalism
implications of the conservative view of human nature
- cause of crime and disorder lies with the individual and therefore support strong law and order and punishments rather than rehabilitation
- thatcher-free from the shackles of government free market desires stemmed from individualism but had to be countered by strong law and order
conservative view on order
human kind’s most basic need is order and security
Hobbes:on the one had humans desired to be free and experience their right but on the other hand humans are self seeking and competitive thus if we were left to our own devices life would be “nasty brutish and short” thus we should sacrifice some of our freedom in favour of a secure existence
Burke: growing hysteria about revolution in France, Burke believed change in order to preserve and that our liberties are derived from the past
conservatives on tradition and preservation
conservative preferences to tradition (change in order to preserve) (no generation should ever be so rash as to consider itself superior to the past) closely relates to their desire for order.
what is meant by traditional is both values and institutions
-worst part of the French revolution was that “no generation should ever be so rash as to consider itself superior to its predecessors” BURKE, why? because “our liberties derive from the past” -they come from our traditional values and institutions, if they have survived they have done so because they’re worth it and they have accumulated the wisdoms of the past.
Also these traditions create a sense of order and continuity
Conservatives on inequality
until the enlightenment/18th century the idea that humankind was naturally divided into a hierarchy-that we are all born into unequal circumstances was natural and inevitable.
however this has developed
became meritocracy with individuals being unequal in terms of their ability-although today’s cabinet would suggest otherwise
conservatives on pragmatism
Oakshott advocated pragmatism and gov reacting to the needs of the people
politics should be a convocation not an argument
but just look at the new right…
conservatives on individualism
-the individual is tectonically a principle of liberalism concerned mainly with the absence of restraint or freedom to
-individuals and households should be presented with the widest range of choice and opportunities and the state should restrict that choice as little as possible. It is recognised that the state can enhance and facilitate choice (one nation conservatism)
-individualism-privacy areas where the state can infer eg law and order but they shouldn’t interfere with the private life (gay marriage objections)
-individualism best flourishes in a stable moral economic environment
-Oakshott society should be nomocratic (single moral, belief value system)
-But Thatcher- classical neo lib idea of the individual
explain the tensions between conservatives at the moment?
conservatives on property
much of the 19th cent feared the rise of the property owning/capitalist class as they believed they would sweep away the staus quo. HOWEVER, becomes clear that they will not they are just as invested in the staus quo and the state as they are-both need to hold back the working classes and so both interests were joined Thatcher- right to buy etc
conservatives on opposition to ideology
- oakshott: boat
- ideology is usually radical when it should be gradual change and change in order to preserve
- can result in tranny
- fixed view of human nature opposition popper
conservatives on scepticism and empiricism
- sceptical of dogma, humans, government
- empiricism-learning from experience BURKE
explain early conservatism
- reaction to the french revolution
- big fan of traditional authority the monarch and the church
- divine right of the king
- burke
what’s the deal with peel?
into pragmatic conservatism rather than reactionary - he urged them to embrace free trade
basically he began the connection
took up the middle class
one-nation conservatism
disraeli
extended the franchise-took up the cause of the working class to protect against the threat of socialism
two nations the rich and the poor wanted them to become one nation
had to deal with the problems of the working class
PROTECT THE STATE
unite the people avoid social conflict
nationalist-authoritarian right
enoch powell-rivers of blood kicked out of the party not such a uk thing
place national interest above other things
national front in france
The Ew Right
blend of neo-liberal and neo-conservative
friedman and hayek
classical liberal economic policy free market marketization (theory about that and removal of democracy) rolling back the frontiers of the state self responsibility dynamism state only involved in controlling/limiting inflation (inflation is the important thing NOT employment) monetarism
populism:individual able to succeed on own merits
right wing nationalism: cons being torn apart by eu
neo-conservatism: burkian traditional authority
compassionate conservatism
hug a hoody
development of one nation conservatism
organic society-responsible for each other
neo-lib classical economy threatens social unity (london riots in 2011)
much more progressive liberal socially
conservatism as an ideology
is liberalism now an ideology look at Cameron and Osborne continuing with austerity measure when the IMF says to stop (theory about democracy)
the paradox of the new right
nanny state sapping dynamism
paradox because the neo-liberal free market etc creates chaos and disorder when the soical policy of neo-con is all about stability and order
neo-lib might have been fine in 19th cent but not today we need and rely upon a welfare state
-clash over areas like immigration
-flexible work force by nature contradicts social order
conservatism and liberalism: the individual
- one nation conservative freedom has greater parallels with progressive liberals -the state can widen and enhance choice
- whilst the new right has greater parallels to classical liberalism the nanny state sapping our dynamism there is no such thing as society there are individuals and their families
- both like a less involved state
