Conservatism – Short Answer Questions
- How does Burke understand the idea of the “social contract”? How does his traditionalist conservative idea of the social contract differ from a liberal one, like Locke’s?
(pg. 158-9) Locke believed in the people’s right to revolution, or ideological innovation, meaning that a given society’s social contract can be nulled and restructured at any point they see fit; sometimes it becomes necessary to overthrow the old form of government in order to implement an entirely different one. To Burke, the occurrence of such a drastic change breaks time-established societal continuity and rids any social contract – past, current or future – of any lasting legitimacy, and in fact works to destabilize society with the constant threat of invalidating its ideological foundation. It is more prudent to cautiously reform an inherited contract through our cultivated prejudices than to time and time again scrap the base of society for an untested, abstract reconstruction of political purpose and function, which will always result in unpredictable and often detrimental consequences.
- De Maistre rejects the Constitution of 1795, drawn up by the French Revolutionaries, as a ridiculous and absurd document. What reason(s) does he give for this?
(pg. 162-3) There are three distinct reasons he gives for this absurdity and they are all founded in the conservative affirmation that humanity is inescapably flawed. First, it was written for an unspecified and vaguely described “man” rather than for an actual French citizen of a particular geography, tradition, and sociopolitical climate. It is an abstract reimagining of society with no basis in reality. Second, when inherently short-sighted and irrational men seek to create their own rules they therefore place themselves and their authority above that of the law and the established social contract, which is contradictory to its purpose. Lastly, it is, to him, an absurdist claim to believe a single generation of men can construct something better than that which government has been founded on and molded by generational wisdom, or a prescribed set of Burkean prejudices; a government guided by Providence is logically more prudent than one based on fashionable theory and intellectual idealism in place of historical fact.
- Oakeshott contends that changes, especially “innovations,” are things that “have to be suffered.” According to him, why is the experience of change a form of suffering for conservatives?
(pg. 167-70) To be conservative is to see and act on the merit of upholding current sociopolitical conditions that compose the society inherited by a People. It is also to seek stability through tried and trusted tradition rather than uncertain experimentation. A conservative is inclined to prefer familiarity and continuity, therefore making him or her a skeptic of incremental change and a direct opponent of innovation, or drastic change that forsakes a People’s foundational history in favor of ideological continuity. Change is always a loss of something, but not necessarily something from which to gain. For a conservative, gradual change over time allows society to try new things without losing or invalidating itself; such cautious reform is the best way to avoid major political unrest and social disintegration.
- Why does Kirk believe that conservatism is not an ideology?
(pg. 175) According to Kirk, rather than an ideology with systemic tenets that describe an ideal way of being, conservatism is an attitude of appreciation towards the current state of affairs (whatever they may presently be) and a marked hesitation to change or adapt them with any urgency. Conservatism does not claim one political system or ideology to always prevail over another. Instead, it is a cautionary approach to change rather than an agent of it; it is primarily concerned with minimizing the damage change may bring instead of advocating a desire for it and the likelihood of unforeseen circumstances.
- What reasons does Kristol give for why neoconservatives are so keen to cut taxes, and so unafraid of large budgetary deficits?
(pg. 190-1) For neoconservatives, tax cuts are a way of promoting economic growth by keeping more money in the private sector, while also reigning in the monetarily backed influences of big government. Economic growth across class divides promotes societal well-being which culminates in increased patriotism. While large budget deficits are preferably avoided, they are seen as a (hopefully) temporary though necessary condition to increase private wealth with public programs geared towards bolstering widespread financial independence that will eventually decrease the need for such public expenditure rather than engendering a maternal state in the long run.
- Why, according to Antle, did the libertarians become increasingly disenchanted with “fusionism”?
(pg. 194-5) What started as a compromised front of traditional conservatism and libertarian ideals has lost its appeal as the growing popularity of neoconservative beliefs now advocate policy that is directly opposed by libertarians, namely economic interference, moral imposition, and an imperialist foreign policy. The limited government libertarians strive for is no longer a goal or even periphery point of concern for the modern Republican Party at large, reestablishing the political rift. Libertarians now accuse the American Right of pandering to the constituency over ideological consistency and integrity.
- What is Reagan’s philosophy and why is it considered modern conservatism?
(pg. 181-8) Reagan’s modern conception of the conservative ideal embodied by his presidency was a response to the post-New Deal expansion of government, the three main proponents of it being: smaller government, a renewed focus on family values, and the achievement of peace through ever-present defense. Reagan sought to reduce the size and influence of government by taking legislative power from it and returning it to the hands of each State, and by extension the citizens. He accomplished this by means of fiscal responsibility that included lower taxes on one end and decreased government expenditure on the other. His argument for this was that higher taxes hinder private economy by stifling productivity, and that increased public spending to treat today’s problems creates compounding problems for our and our children’s futures by way of a staggering budgetary deficit. He also believed America was founded on the Christian conception of God as the ultimate arbiter of liberty, and it is only through his moral guidance that we can be a people who champion righteous freedom. Because of this belief he endorsed institutionalized prayer, outlawing abortion to restore the sanctity of life, the regulation or outlawing of vices and encouraging patriotism as an extension of one’s faith, and faith as a show of patriotism. To protect our God-given liberties and the American way of life we must maintain an active and formidable resistance to those nations who consider us an enemy. At the same time, it is prudent to negotiate beneficial relationships with other friendly nations in order to spread our message of peace as well as establish global markets to reinforce the dominance of our economy. Reagan brought forgotten conservative ideology back into the mainstream by adapting it to the concerns of Cold War-era America.