To What Extent Is Conservatism a Philosophy of Imperfection?

The Death of Conservatism was a highly anticipated book, published in 2009 after the historical election of Barack Obama. Its title alone promised a provocative explanation on how conservatism perished. The contents of the actual book yield no such explanations. Instead, Tanenhaus begins the work by sadly laminating how movement conservatism has not only conquered the ideology but destroyed Burkean and/or classical conservatism. Therefore, allowing the reader to understand that the book aim is not eulogized conservatism but to point toward the deadly progression of movement conservatism. The author uses this book a vehicle to attack and dismiss movement conservatism which he ultimately links to populism therefore incompatible with the American

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’.

Conservatism, traditional or new, was one of the most powerful ideologies in Europe. Otto von Bismarck practiced a new form of conservatism because he advocated for lower class, religious freedoms, and socialized the education system. This new form of conservatism received backlash by most other political groups.

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.

Within today’s society we are commonly faced with the moral question, what seems logically correct vs what seems ethically correct. It is an inquiry that goes hand in hand with if people are born naturally evil, or if that trait itself is developed over time. However, as a whole the overriding debate is not directed towards human nature itself, but rather to what degree should the government really be involved in our economic system in order to create an accommodating society. Over time human nature has drastically evolved to what it is today, but what is still undeniable is that there has, and likely always will be a division among individuals. Those divisions being based upon class structure. The source given states, “Individuals are, by nature, unique and unequal. Efforts by the state to interfere with the lives of individuals will result in a restrictive and inefficient society.” This is a direct link to the perspectives and ideologies presented with the idea of Classic Liberalism. By definition classic liberalism is an ideology that values individual freedoms in the sense of religion, speech, press, etc, as well as supporting limited government involvement economically. This idea has been supported by many in the past, including philosophers such as John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith. The author of the source is clearly a supporter of right wing economics. They believe in individualism over collectivism, and like many philosophers, they also believe that government is only

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).

First of all, one of the conservative principle is the respect of authority figures. Indeed, when the citizens obey to authority figures it is maintaining social stability, because authority figures are often working for people in powers or are the one who have the power over the population. Consequently, if the population are following their orders, the stability will remain. The politicians and the upper class are the benefiters of this conservative rule, because the citizens are not claiming their privileges and powers associated with

Most of the values attached to Conservative Ideology such as gender roles, religious beliefs, racial segregation, non-acceptance of same sex marriage, are all things that had to be challenged politically in order to become acceptable. I try to picture myself in the shoes of many victims to the conservative system like all the women who fought for their rights to vote and all I can think about is how they had to struggle to achieve their goal because the system was not willing to change. This is happening now with same sex marriage where people literally have fought for that right and still have that right threatened to be taken away from them.

Conservatism is defined as the belief in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society (Merriam-Webster). Another definition of it is the dislike of change or new ideas in a particular area (Merriam-Webster). So most of their policies are rooted in tradition and history, generally keeping things the way they have been in the past. Another one of the ideologies they have in their party's Fiscal Conservatism this means they are pro-big businesses and think you should have low income taxes and also they want to deregulate the economy (Justin Quinn). From this economic ideology it goes hand and hand with their main stance on making a smaller government to control less of your life. Also they generally would rather keep things the same than changing

There are many differences between the American conservatives and American liberals view of human nature. Conservatives believe that the individual Americans have a right to defend themselves and their families with guns and that the right cannot be taken away by any methods short of a Constitutional

Together with understanding the beliefs of neoconservatism and the importance, the attractiveness presents itself. With the disorder that can come from liberalism, conservatism proves to be a more secure, orderly option. A mother with children would no longer have to worry about the barrage of obscenity. In order for people to live in healthy society, while cultivating happiness, consideration is key. By human nature, stepping on the toes of others is a popular outcome. With order being provided by neoconservatism, the possibility of widespread would be a higher probability.

Centuries of philosophers have attempted to apply reason to why mankind has certain tendencies. Hobbes when discussing human nature often uses beast-like tendencies as a comparison. “The imagination that is raysed in man (or any other creature indued with the faculty of imagining) by words, or other voluntary signes, is that we generally call Understanding; and is common to Man and Beast.” (Hobbes 93) Relating man to beast exemplifies Hobbes position on what he believes is human nature. Furthering his argument that civilization rescues humanity from an otherwise barbaric state. Hobbes view on government stems from these beliefs as well. As explained in Leviathan, government’s ultimate purpose is to control by imposing law and order in order to protect human nature from taking over. In respect to parenting, proper and necessary discipline is required in order to establish order within the household. Hobbes view of man as naturally selfish and constantly occupied with thoughts of how something may benefit them exemplifies his pessimism. His view on the state of nature is why an absolute ruler is necessary for a successful society. Like society a household needs a sole ruler to head that state otherwise there would be chaos among the children and masses. Children of Thomas Hobbes would undoubtedly be raised conservatively with a ‘head of the household holds all control’

This essay will assess the relationship between liberalism and conservatism by exploring the differences in ideological beliefs of these two ideologies. Ideology can be defined as “set of interrelated and more or less coherent ideas” that constitutes of both “descriptive and normative element” on how a society works (Heywood, 2007, pp. 6-7). One of the most popular ideology in contemporary politics is liberalism which accord individual liberty and free market as its primary priority. On the other hand, conservatism is generally known for advocating tradition, societal state and authority. Firstly, we will look at theories developed by liberalism and conservatism on creation of state. It would then be followed by liberalism’s notion of individuality and individual liberty versus conservatism’s emphasis on individual imperfectionism and need for society. Thereafter, we will observe liberalism and conservatism as political ideology and how it has evolved over time. The essay will be summed up by a conclusion in the end. The terms, liberalism and conservatism mentioned in this essay are intended to be synonymous to their traditional or classical thoughts and beliefs. Every argument presented in this essay are intended to support the claim that liberalism and conservatism are not compatible ideologies. By compatible, I meant being consistent without any disagreements.

Romanticism showed an emphasis on individualism, emotion, faith, and nature. A prime example of Romanticism is Lord Byron. Byron personifies a romantic hero in that he fought and died for Greek independence when he had no relation to the country at all. Liberalism is belief in liberty, equality, universal voting rights, and democracy, pretty much everything against conservatism. An example of liberalism is Greek independence as it went against Metternich and the Congress of Vienna, who wanted to keep everything like it was, under the control of monarchs and empires. Conservatism is monarchy, bureaucracy, and aristocracy, basically maintaining the status quo. The best example of conservatism is Metternich and the Congress of Vienna. Their purpose

Liberalism and conservatism have been political ideas and thoughts from the very birth of our democracy. Their views and points of the government's role in a democratic society have changed over the years, but the basic ideas and principles have remained the same. There are many different degrees of liberalism and conservatism as almost anyone can be labeled. Some individuals are radical and extreme while others stand on more of a neutral territory, but the debates between the understood ideas of each group have continued throughout the history of the United States. We will take liberalism's Gary Doore and conservatism's Irving Kristol as modern day examples and compare and contrast the