CONSERVATISM

Conservatism emerged in
the late 18th century and early 19th century.

Several earlier developments contributed to

the rise of this ideology.
• Renaissance
• Reform
• Scientific Revolution
• French Revolution
• Nationalism
• Liberalism
 All of these developments had introduced
major changes in economic, political and
social lives of people.

Furthermore, when socialism emerged in the 19 th century, conservatives

would also
oppose this ideology.

WHY?
As the name suggests, conservatism is about “conserving”
the traditions and the status quo
(the present status).

To be very simple, conservatism is about protecting the

existing order as much as possible and
as long as possible!

If change is inevitable, or if it cannot be resisted, then it has

to be slowed down as much as possible!
Why do then conservatives want to protect the
existing order or oppose change?

They have a deep respect in traditions!

Tradition is
“the central theme of conservative thought”!
 The conservatives believe that traditions, traditional
practices and traditional institutions must be preserved.
When we say traditional institutions, that also
includes traditional political institutions!

That is why for example, conservatives of the

18th century opposed the French
revolutionaries who destroyed the monarchy
and took away all the privileges of the Catholic
Church as well as the clergy.
So why do conservatives have such an attitude
regarding traditions?

According to them, traditions reflect the

accumulated wisdom and knowledge of
past generations!

They are “tested by time” because

they are still with us!
 The conservatives see traditions as
“best guidelines” keeping people connected to
each other and to the society.

They have kept past generations together and

they will continue to keep future generations
together as well.
 Therefore, conservatives have a
pragmatic attitude towards the traditions!

Why? How?
 First let’s define pragmatism.

Pragmatism is the “belief that action should be

shaped by practical circumstances and practical
goals, that is by ‘what works’” (Heywood)
 For the conservatives, traditions are
“working” as best guidelines!

Otherwise they would not still be with us!

 So we should not try to replace them with some
“abstract” ideas promoted, for example, by the French
revolutionaries such as
“liberty, equality, fraternity”!
 Nobody can define them properly!

There can be no consensus on them!

They are too abstract to be the basis

of any political system!

They will create problems when put against

the traditions!
 They are new ideas that have not been “tested by
time” so they cannot be an alternative to traditions!

They do not trust such abstract concepts.

They also do not trust human rationality.

The conservatives do not believe in human

rationality because for them
humans are imperfect!
First of all, they are limited in capacity, dependent
on others, selfish, greedy, morally corrupt, have a
potential for badness and can commit crime.
 Second, they have their own
passions, emotions and prejudices.
Third, they want power.
 Because of all of these negative aspects of
human nature, humans can never be totally
rational.
These negative aspects “cloud their
judgements”
To be simple, they should not be left on their
own, they need to be guided.

By what?

By traditions!

This is a paternalistic attitude.

 In other words, this is
“paternalistic conservatism”

As Heywood defines, paternalism is “an

attitude or a policy that demonstrates care or
concern for those unable to help themselves
as in a relation between a father and a child”
Paternalistic conservatism was an idea
developed by the British politician
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881).
 Disraeli developed the “One Nation” principle.

He was afraid of a social revolution that could

emerge as a result of the deep divisions within the
British society between the rich and the poor.

So he focused on the national unity of the people

in the society, rather than economic differences
between the rich and the poor.
Disraeli was influenced by an earlier British conservative
thinker Edmund Burke, who had been very much
concerned about the possible negative consequences of
the French Revolution on the British society.
 Burke would emphasize the idea of
“change in order to conserve”

In other words, whenever change is necessary,

it has to be for the preservation of
the status quo in the long run.
Disraeli would also have that kind of an attitude
and he suggested the necessity of social
reforms to be realized in a “paternalistic” way.

The alternative may be a bloody revolution just

as it happened in France!
In other words, “reform from above” is
preferable to “revolution from below”!
Just like a father who wants to protect his child who
cannot make decisions on his/her own, the decisions
to realize change also should not come from the
people (“from below”) as ordinary humans are not
rational or to be trusted!
All these ideas are closely related to three
other key concepts in conservatism:

• Organicism

• Hierarchy

• Natural aristocracy
 Organicism

This is the key term in the conservative

understanding of society.

Conservatives are of the idea that society is

like a living entity or an organic whole.
 Just like a human body, a society has
interdependent parts with their own roles to play
and their own contributions to make.

However, again just like a human body,

not all parts are equal!
Compare for example brain versus finger!
Or heart versus eyebrow!
 So in terms of their roles and their contributions to
the body, brain and heart are crucial as compared to
finger and eyebrow!

In other words, although finger and eyebrow have

certain functions, a person can survive without them.

However, a person cannot survive

without a brain or a heart!
This brings us to the concepts of
hierarchy and natural aristocracy.
 Hierarchy

In an organic society, there is a

natural and inevitable hierarchy!

Different groups of people have different roles

and responsibilities.
For example, brain surgeons, judges, political leaders are much
more critical in terms of their roles and responsibilities as
compared to street sweepers, janitors, cleaning ladies!
Although we need them all for a healthy society,
duties and responsibilities are not equal.

The leader of a country has more duties and

responsibilities as compared to a cleaning lady.
 So those people with more duties and
responsibilities also should have more privileges!

“Duty is the price of privilege”

 “Nobility obligates” understanding of the feudal times!
(“Asilin yükü ağırdır”)

Aristocrats (landed nobility) taking care of their serfs!

Aristocrats, having more responsibilities and duties should

also have more rights and privileges
 Therefore, people who are more prosperous,
privileged and powerful should take care of
those who are less fortunate and less well-off.
This is very different than the liberal understanding
of society (atomistic society) in which individuals
come first as unique and separate beings and they
owe little or nothing to each other.
 For the conservatives, however, for a healthy
society, social cohesion and unity are important.

Different parts in a society are kept together

with the traditions as well as with
a paternalistic attitude in which the more
fortunate take care of the less fortunate.
 That brings us to the idea of
natural aristocracy,
a term that is mostly about politics!
 Natural aristocracy

This idea is related to political leadership.

Aristocracy literally means

“the rule of the best”!
 According to conservatives, there is a
“natural aristocracy” in a society.

Leadership is a quality that cannot be acquired

through self-advancement.

Some people are “naturally” talented and

they should naturally rule!
Governing is a serious business that requires
knowledge, education, experience, wisdom.

Most people (ordinary people) do not

possess these qualities!
Unlike the liberals, conservatives believe that
authority should come and be exercised
“from above”!

They believe that it should be the elites who

should rule and ordinary people should stay
away from politics.
So to sum up, in an organic society in which
there is a hierarchy among different groups
of people, only the best (“aris”) should
naturally rule!
 NEW RIGHT

As is the case with liberalism, conservatism

also has its more recent versions.

These versions are generally referred to as

New Right
New Right emerged during the 1970s and made its mark in the 1980s.

Thatcherism in the United Kingdom and Reaganism in the United

States are the most prominent cases.
New Right has two distinct traditions:

neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism.

These traditions have some political and

ideological tensions between them.
 Neo-liberalism

This is an updated version of classical liberal

economic understanding favoring free market!
Markets should not be regulated by the state and
individuals should be free.

Only then do we see efficiency, growth and

widespread prosperity!

If there is state or government intervention to the

economy, this kills initiative and discourages
free enterprise!
 The basic idea: “Private good, public bad”!

Thatcher: “There is no such thing as society, there

are individual men and women and there are
families”
 No more “nanny state”!

A nanny state is one in which there are

“extensive social responsibilities”
such as welfare programs.
 This is both “unwarranted” (unjust, not
defendable) and “demeaning to the individual”
(hurting the pride of the individual)

It sees individuals unable to help themselves!

However, the individuals are capable of both

self-help and initiative!
 Neo-conservatism

This is the renewed and revised version of

conservatism which aims:

To restore authority of the state

To return to traditional values

Neo-conservatives want to restore the state
authority as they believe that people need
discipline and they have to show respect to
state authority.
Furthermore, traditional values such as family,
religion, nation which are the common cultural
values of societies should be revived.

These are the values that create social cohesion.

Neo-conservatives do not like permissiveness,
in fact see it as an enemy!
 Permissiveness is the willingness to allow
individuals to make their own moral choices,
to let everyone do their own thing!
 Neo-conservatives also do not like
multi-cultural and multi-religious societies!

They believe that such societies are

“conflict-ridden and inherently unstable”
so they have a skeptical approach.
So in Europe, for example, neo-conservatives are
against the European Union.