Tuesday 16 November 2021

What is Conservatism?

There is an endless supply of articles and books about the ideas and doctrines that might have shaped the politics of those who embrace Conservatism (in the sense that encompasses Conservatives in the UK and Canada, Republicans in the US, the Liberal Party in Australia, and the National Party in New Zealand). But while the works of Burke, Oakeshott, Hayek, and Scruton may provide some post-hoc rationalisation here and there, Conservative politics has never been about theoretical doctrines, but is above all a strategic agenda for defending and expanding power advantages in society.

If we look closely at what the political leadership of parties aligned with Conservatism has sought over time and in different countries, the one common feature that stands out is the focus on securing public office to help entrench arrangements that will continue to safeguard the greater wealth, status, privileges of those in dominant positions in society.  And so long as a group can gain that dominance, their interests will become paramount for the champions of Conservatism – remember how 18thcentury Tories looked down on merchants and manufacturers but held them in high esteem in the 20thcentury.

Correspondingly, what Conservatism stands against is any political idea, campaign, movement, or party that may challenge that dominance.  It does not matter what the reason is behind that challenge – the opposition to inequalities, concern for the environment, liberation from oppressive customs, the fight against poverty, objection to corrupt practices – so long as it poses a threat to the advantages possessed by the dominant ones, it will be a target for Conservatives to discredit and defeat.


Conservatism is not inherently kind or nasty.  Where showing kindness can promote gratitude and contentment amongst those who might otherwise start supporting their political rivals, kindness may be readily bestowed – so long as it does not undermine the overall power structure of society and the ‘have plenty’ can stay well above the ‘have little’.  Nastiness, similarly, could be brought into play if it would help to win political battles.  Stirring up prejudices against foreigners and minorities is one of the oldest tricks.  Blaming the poor for their own predicament is another favourite.  Fuelling ‘culture wars’ is a natural extension of the familiar divide-and-rule tactic.

 

Writers seeking philosophical doctrines or political theories that supposedly define (or ought to define) Conservatism may find it a diverting pastime. But ultimately, while some Conservative politicians may genuinely appreciate the intellectual respectability that such talk may confer, Conservatism is best understood as the relentless manoeuvring to protect and strengthen hierarchies and practices that serve those who have gained the most from them.

No comments: