‘Conservatism Merely Reflects the Interests of the Privileged and Prosperous.’ Discuss (45)

As liberalism ideology evolved and championed by the economic leaders, it pose a threat to the existing social settings such as the presence of the nobility, and the church. The attempt to defend existing social arrangement is what brought about conservatism. Conservatives stood against the ideas of liberals in a rational for maintaining existing traditional political structures and the centralization of power. They stood against transferring political responsibility to the common people under the disguise of equality (Shively, 2014).

The further development of industrialisation led to social and economic inequality. This led to a revision of classical liberal ideas to prevent the spread of ignorance and poverty. It is suggested that modern liberals have betrayed classical liberal ideas as they embrace collectivism and diverge from classical liberalism on issues such as freedom. However, it can be argued that modern liberals have simply built on classical liberal ideas such as its commitment to the individual.

On February 5,1794 Robespierre wrote a speech justifying the use of terror in the French government. He talks about how if people themselves are corrupted then liberty is lost and you might as well start over. Robespierre would stop at nothing to get rid of anyone who opposed the revolution. “it rallies all vicious men against us, all those who in their hearts contemplated despoiling the people and all those who intend to let it be despoiled with impunity, both those who have rejected freedom as a personal calamity and those who have embraced the revolution as a career and the Republic as prey.” (Use of Terror) He is saying that the anti revolutionists rally all these angry men together and try to hurt France as

This means that essentially they crave social order ahead of liberty. This way of prioritising social order over liberty is a view also taken by Thomas Hobbes in his work Leviathan, in which he talks of the sacrifice of but a few rights for the assurance of protection from the government. In this way, human imperfection can be seen to link to the other conservative concepts of Hierarchy and Authority – because of the fact that humans are inherently imperfect, they need a structured hierarchy to protect them and keep them in line. Conservatives, in this way believe in strong punishment as it can act as a deterrent to others doing the same crime. A structured hierarchy, protecting citizens and individuals lower down the chain link to the conservative theory of the ‘noblesse oblige’ which is where the rich or those higher up have a social obligation to help the less well off. Similarly Conservatives also believe that some are natural leaders, like those in positions of power, and some are inferior as a result of their imperfect qualities and are therefore not worthy of being a leader.

George Gilder stays true to Old Right’s pure-market position in his book Wealth and Poverty, where he promoted uncurbed capitalism and pure free enterprise. He rejected all forms of welfare and redistribution, arguing that “current welfare and other subsidy programs substantially reduce work” and “incurs bitter resistance of the real working class”. Gilder strayed from establishment ideology when he added a moral element to his position, citing monogamous heterosexual marriage as a requirement for upward mobility. Gilder is an example of how New Right intellectuals borrowed Old Right economic theory and then tainted it by adding elements of morality and traditionalism.

The ideas of Enlightenment philosophers rippled throughout the globe, however, they seemed to have the most interesting effect on France. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a major contributor to Frances political and social structure post-French revolution. These ideas weren’t the only triggers for the French Revolution. A combination of strangling taxes, economic disparity, and an impotent ruler led to the development of an intense need for reform in France. “France spent an enormous amount of money during the American war which put them on the verge of bankruptcy” (McKay et al., pg. 662). To make up for this immense national debt, taxes were raised which put more pressure on the already struggling working class in France. The privileged classes

Typically, liberalism is categorised into two separate components; classical liberalism, which was fashioned during the 19th century as a result of the industrial revolution, and the more recent Modern Liberalism which emerged as industrialisation continued within the UK. Although both divisions of Liberalism unavoidably overlap in attitudes and approaches regarding the theory behind the ideology, I believe, fundamentally, that clear tensions between these aspects of Liberalism are more evident when analysing this ideology.

Conservatism as a Tension between Paternalism and Libertarianism There are many different strands of conservatism within the ideology, the most significant of which in modern terms are paternalism and libertarianism. This conflict can be illustrated by the rival traditions of one-nation conservatism and New Right, or in particular neoliberal, conservatism. The basic idea of paternalism is to have authority over people for their own good. Whereas continental conservatives in the nineteenth century opposed any change, an Anglo-American tradition began with Edmund Burke which was more cautious, modest and pragmatic - these type of conservatives were willing to ‘change in order to conserve’.

These types of beliefs and strong traditions have been good examples for western civilization absorbing their rules and respect. This has been ideal to help restoring their family values.

In Edward McClelland’s essay “RIP, the Middle Class: 1946-2013,” McClelland discusses to his audience that the middle class is slowly vanishing and soon enough we will only be left with the rich and the poor. Throughout the essay, McClelland uses various examples to demonstrate how the middle class will no longer exist. McClelland talks about how education is vital for pursuing a job at a reasonable pay that a person can live off of. Before, people were able to leave high school and go straight into a job with a pay that could support them. Nowadays, the same jobs that were supporting people before require a lot more education and still aren’t giving enough money that will allow them to live comfortably. Even though there are still jobs people can thrive at that will make more money without a serious education , the middle class is struggling to make it economically, because it is harder to find a job without education and financially it’s harder to make ends meet.

The New Right has significantly revised the relationship between conservatism and tradition, however. The New Right attempts to fuse economic libertarianism with state and social authoritarianism. As such, it is a blend of radical, reactionary and traditional features. Its radicalism is evident in its robust efforts to dismantle or ‘roll back’ interventionist government and liberal social values. This radicalism is clearest in relation to the liberal New Right, which draws on rational theories and abstract principles, and so dismisses tradition. New Right radicalism is nevertheless reactionary in that both the liberal and conservative New Right hark back to a 19th century ‘golden age’ of supposed economic prosperity and moral fortitude. However, the conservative New Right also makes an appeal to tradition, particularly through its emphasis on so-called ‘traditional values’.

Tim Dickinson published an intriguing article in the Rolling Stone, “How the GOP Became the Party of the Rich”, which scrutinizes the complicated history of the American government. Dickinson’s objective is to persuade the audience that the Republican party is giving leniency towards the upper class through the reduction of taxes, which results in the upper class becoming even more wealthy and the middle and lower classes struggling to make ends meet. He not only utilizes credible sources in order to convey the unreasonable actions of the Republican party, but also uses a multitude of historical facts pertaining to the central concept of his argument to strengthen his statement.

The French Revolution was based on an assortment of Enlightenment ideals. French philosophers, including Voltaire and Rousseau led the revolution leading up to the revolution, so to speak, coming up with progressive ideals as to government, social structure, and the nature of people. Indeed, the ideals which the revolution was fought in the name of progressed throughout France and, eventually, Europe. Though the revolution took wrong turns along the way, the ideals which it was based on never wavered. Even during the heart of his Reign of Terror, Robespierre spoke of a state where each citizen wants to do good by his country. This shows Robespierre with an unwavering commitment to the state, an ideal which came out of the Enlightenment. Though he may have carried out his beliefs in a gruesome and perhaps wrong way, his ideals were the same as the Enlightenment philosophers: make the state better for all to live in.

The French Revolution of 1789 was inarguably a significant turning point in the history of Europe. However, there have been historical debates over the major contributing factor that had caused the French Revolution. Many historians have argued that the French Revolution was sparked by the emerging new age ideas of Enlightenment in the 18th century, which encouraged people to think logically and critically about their society. Many notable writers such as Diderot and Voltaire began to publicly criticise the social structure and the governance of France. (Darlington et al., 2004, p.25) But other historians argue that ideas affected the way people saw

G. William Domhoff is by trade a psychologist and sociologist and is the author of several books on the theory of power and class structure. In his book, Who rules America Now? Domhoff provides an in depth analysis of the structure of wealth and power in America. He asserts the existence of an institutional upper class in America that is able to dictate/direct the politics, economy and government by virtue of its wealth and power. I contend that Domhoff through his analysis of the wealth and power structure of the American upper class can be considered as a lay cultural theorist. This is based upon his identification of the cultural processes of the upper class - those learned shared patterns of behaviors and interactions that allow them