College of Political Knowledge
Professor’s Classroom
Subject: Political Philosophy/Government/Conservatism
Paper #33
Well, answer the question? Why do you think you are a conservative? Because Dad was? Or maybe Uncle Bob? Maybe you like Sarah Palin or you think Cantor is a cutey? By the way, none of those are actual reason that someone would be a conservative….as much as you may like to believe it is…it is NOT!
A “true” conservative views things in a certain way…but because of the total lack of understanding a classical conservative has little in common with the so-called modern conservative…..
A classical conservative…the conservatism of Edmund Burke, that is holds a special belief in issues and situations…..first let us look at ideology….they view this as a manifestation of the arrogance of rationalism. The see ideologies as elaborate systems o0f thought that are dangerous and unreliable.
Second, the concept of freedom…..conservs have this weak view of freedom as a willing recognition of duties and responsibilities…..with freedom comes democracy and conservs see this as the need to protect property rights and traditional institutions from the untutored will of the masses or “the many”….and with freedom and democracy there is the human nature…..which they see as limited security seeking drawn to the known, the familiar, the tried and the tested and that human rationality is flawed and unreliable and moral corruption is implicit…..and now the issue of equality….conservs have traditionally viewed society as necessarily hierarchical and dismiss equality as an abstract and unachievable goal……
How about the nation….what would a true conservative think of the nation? They see it as a an organic entity bound together with common ethnic identity and a shared history; it is the source of social cohesion and a collective identity…..they will see the nation as the most important of all the social organizations.
The state….no not the same thing as the nation…conservs want a strong state to protect us from chaos and disorder with authority and discipline……that brings us to the concept of authority…they see it as rising from natural necessity from above by those of unequal distribution of experience, social position and wisdom And that it fosters respect and loyalty and social cohesion……
More simply put…if you are a conserv then you see the needs of the country (or state) are best met by the elites of the nation and that authority and strong government (does not necessarily mean big government) is essential for the state to survive.
According to that description – probably not…
However, in the UK there are two types of conservative (just to confuse things). Conservative (with a capital “C”) is the proper name of the Conservative political party commonly know as the Tory party and, if pressed, I’d probably say that in most things political, I’m a fairly moderate Conservative. Nevertheless, conservative spelt with a small “c” is something I’m really not.
Then again, Americans do seem to have a particular yen for bastardising their native tongue 😆
LOL…well said! Many American sdo not realize that the Federalists were the conservatives of the day…they wanted a strong central government…the radicals were the anti-Federalists…….
Hmmm… I consider myself to be a traditional conservative, which is probably why I’m not a huge Sarah Palin or John McCain fan. I could probably also be considered a constitutionalist on some issues, or even a libertarian at times.
I don’t like for people to put me in little boxes based on labels I, or others, may designate for me.
I would say that without the protection of property rights, there is no real freedom. You will always be dependent on someone else for your housing, food, etc… And with dependency there is a loss of freedom.
We do give up some of our freedom for public safety and law & order, for example. But giving up private property rights can doom us not only to mob rule but also elite rule. Private property rights act as a shield against both ends of the tyranny spectrum.
I don’t know that conservatives push for a “strong State.” Many conservatives are also big proponents of the Tenth Amendment and want more power taken from the hands of the federal government and left to state & local governments and the people. Self-governance rather than central governance except for things like border control and national security and interstate commerce.
I’m not sure what the “needs of the country are.” If the needs of the individual are not met, then how can the needs of the society be met, since it is the collective contributions of individuals that keep this society going?
And individuals need the freedom to grow and prosper. The freedom to work and earn, sow and reap, plow and harvest. And we also need the freedom to pay the penalties of our mistakes rather than having big nanny-state government come to the rescue to bailout our sexual indiscretions, our financial mismanagement, and our inability (or refusal) to plan.
When the country was much younger, the conservatives wanted a strong central government…people like Madison and Hamilton…the radicals were the anti-Feds…like Jefferson..
Most people do not like those boxes you speak of, but that is not from political ideology but rather indecision….some call it pragmatic…I see it as a inability for political will…that is not necessarily a bad thing just a somewhat lazy way of approaching politics….and politics control one’s life, then one should spend a little time knowing what is what…..
I understand the point you are making here, and I agree that pragmatists are oftentimes fence-sitters until it’s their ass that’s on the line.
But too often I have people tell me, “well, since you’re a conservative (like it’s a dirty word or something), then that means you’re for this and against that…”
I don’t like people telling me what it is that I believe and what my principles are.
And I think that a strong central government is a necessary evil, but strong does not have to mean a behemoth with succubus tentacles twisting and snarling their way into anything and everything.
If the government does not exercise its influence over the people how can it be called “strong”?
I agree with you that few like to be told what to believe but politics must do it or they lose their hold on the people/voters….after all the voters make the system (at least that is the idea)….I am for minimal government and that means that they stay out of anything that is more choice as long as it does not impede anyone else in the their pursuits…….
“Strong” in its influence of foreign governments and protection of its citizens. 🙂
I don’t believe it needs to be strong in the marketplace or in American’s lives. Americans should certainly not feel choked and stifled by their central government.
Now we come to economics…..cool…….let us say that the government gets out of the marketplace and we have what some call free markets but other countries and governments do not……is it a free market? This works good if everybody plays by the same rules…..but that will not happen….China is a good example…..
I speak of deliberate market manipulation like health care mandates, heavy-handed regulations, agricultural subsidies, and corporate welfare.
For example, I don’t believe the abortion market is “free.” It is heavily subsidized by the federal government, which artificially lowers prices through taxpayer dollars being funneled to Planned Parenthood clinics and other abortion providers and non-profits who claim to support “women’s rights.”
Money is fungible. A government subsidy to Planned Parenthood or groups like WV Free inevitably serve to lower the price of an elective abortion and make it easier to attain.
If abortionists and affiliated groups received zero state or federal money or tax breaks, then the cost of an elective abortion would rise. If women could not receive state or federal money to pay for abortions, they would have to pay through private means: a private charity, their own money, or private health insurance.
Where does the government subsidize abortion…..I have not been able to find any facts to prove that…..it is a lot of hearsay as far as I can tell……..The Planned Parenthood thing is just not accurate…….I know some women who work in the organization and it is not all about abortion…it is about choices that women have…after all we all have free will….right?
Lobo, like I said, money is fungible.
If you give Planned Parenthood a $100 bill and promise them not to spend that bill on an abortion, they can keep that promise. However, your $100 bill simply frees up a different $100 bill that can be used for an abortion rather than birth control pills or a sex-ed class.
Check out this Washington Times op-ed piece by Rita Diller (June 18, 2010:
We can play this back and forth forever……I will not insult your intelligence by finding liberal sources that say the different…….we can find it both ways……..I will close this by saying that I am personally pro-life…but I refuse to impose my beliefs on others….again it is a private choice and NO one should impede that for any reason….