Conservatism

How valid is the claim of moderate conservatives that conservatism is 'pragmatic' rather than 'ideological'?

The birth of conservatism came about as a direct reaction to the French Revolution that finished in 1799. It advocated tradition, religion (namely Christianity), a conservation of social structures and political institutions and the idea of society as an 'organism' against the revolutionary change that was threatening to engulf Europe. To claim that conservatism is pragmatic and not ideological is to claim that the principles it encourages are ones grounded in practical use rather than "alien knowledge" , knowledge that seeks transformation rather than refuge in settled life. Robert Ecclehsall argued the case for a "tendency to represent the conservative doctrine as a form of naturalism" , a disposition. Others like Frank O'Gorman argued that we should "not take too seriously the fostered impression of a safe, pragmatic and thoroughly non-doctrinaire conservatism" . The rise of Neo-Conservatism has also brought about a seemingly more ideological side to conservatism but its greatest proponents (Thatcher, in particular) would fervently defend this claim.

A key feature of moderate conservatism is that its fundamental foundations are rooted in pragmatism, stemming from the acceptance that human nature is imperfect. Therefore, conservative theories and ideas all derived from direct empirical observations of direct reality. Such a doctrine was more moderate and flexible than the radical ideologies that had motivated the revolutionaries behind the French Revolution; conservatives saw such ideologies as "a powerful poison, the stuff of extremists and fanatics" . Whilst the revolutionaries were fighting in France, a fear of the unknown was sweeping across Europe. It was this fear of the unfamiliar that gave rise to the birth of conservatism, a doctrine that drew upon the "accumulated wisdom of the past and used it to supply a guide to the future" .

One reason why many have tended towards the "non-doctrinaire" descri ption of conservatism is that its key themes and principles lend themselves to this idea. Although it is a very limp definition of conservatism as simply seeking to conserve, its major themes differ drastically from other ideologies. Karl Mannheim argued that ideology was a presentation of socio, economic and political aspirations by a certain section of society . For example, liberalism seeks greater freedom and quality for individuals, socialism seeks better treatment of workers but conservatism does not make such claims. It offers a conservation of social structure and political institutions, a respect for tradition, an appreciation of the imperfections of human nature and a cautious approach to change. A state that strives to create a utopian society will become over mighty, encroaching upon the lives of individuals and infringing upon their basic civic rights. Thus, "conservatism may rarely announce itself in maxims, formulae or aims. Its essence is inarticulate, and its expression, when compelled sceptical" . That is not to say conservatism isn't capable of expression but rather that its basic form is as a theory of instinct and thus, to try and articulate an intuition is almost contradictory. As Thatcher put it, " the root of the approach we pursued.lay deep in human nature" .

Moreover, because early conservatism doesn't explicitly present radical solutions to society's problems, its critics have labelled it a 'philosophy of imperfection' held by men "who are either too indolent to face a new world or too complacent to risk sacrificing one which they have vested interest in preserving" . Conservatism is willing to conserve a present state, the same present state which the other major ideologies are trying to improve and better. This raises certain issues for conservatism with regard to change and using the state as a vehicle to alter society. Conservatives believe that society is organic and we, its people, are its unequal but functional parts. The society we inhabit, predates us as individuals and when born, individuals enter into a partnership with "the living, the dead and those to be born" into the society. Thus, a manipulation of the 'organism' of society is ill advised. The state has no business in prescribing fixed ideological remedies to society, the 'rich tapestry of life' should not be governed by exterior principles as it is a natural organism .

Early conservatism's central theme centres upon the belief humans are imperfect; there is "inherent evil in man" which relates back to the idea of Original Sin in the Bible. Therefore, in recognising the limits and weaknesses of humans and human nature, moderate conservatives are cautious in presenting radical visions of a utopian future; conservatism is a politics of moderation. As Michael Oakeshott articulates it, the conservative "prefers the familiar to the unknown.the limited to the unbounded.and present laughter to utopian bliss" . Radical change for the conservative disrespects the traditions and institutions that have built up over time. In essence, conservatism is a "politics of timely accommodation within an organic community whose rulers are attentive to the social dangers of a fallen human nature" .

For a while, moderate conservatives argued that as conservatism was not an ideology but rather a disposition or intuition, it did not need thorough articulation. There existed no conservative "blueprint for ideal society" , it seemed there was "a veil of discretion over the basic message conservatives wished to transmit" . With the growth of the other major ideologies, critics of conservatism began to demand a greater conservative literature to raise the conservative 'way of existence' to an intellectual level. Roger Scruton contends that despite the natural inarticulateness of conservatism, in a world flustered by faction, the conservative intellectuals were forced to articulate a conservative dogma for fear or otherwise standing exposed, without arguments . Thus, a form of conservative canonization took place as writers began to structure the once, unsubstantiated, and essentially 'uncodified' conservative doctrine. For instance, Glen Wilson outlined nine aspects of conservative character in 'The Psychology of Conservatism'. This 'conservative canonization' could be seen as a movement by the conservatives away from the pragmatic, intuitional conservatism and towards a more structured, ideological form of conservatism.

Conservatism may have undergone an articulation, but its essence remained the same. The articulation took place so that conservatism could continue its existence and compete with the other intellectual traditions; it provided further evidence of the malleability and adaptability of the conservative tradition. Conservatives used the articulate doctrine of their political ideas to "attract support, secure power and maintain it" . Ideas had to be put forward for conservatives to obtain moral legitimacy, promote national unity and reconcile conflicts. Particularly with the rise of party politics, conservatives have had to take ideological stances on certain issues in order to attract and maintain voters. Conservatism therefore remained a theory of continuity and pragmatism.

The rise of Neo-Conservatism and the 'New Right' in the last 30 years has arguably taken the pragmatic conservatism and made it more ideological. Neo-conservatism took aspects of economic liberalism and wedded them with the conservative social policies. Significantly, it rejected the organic view of society with Thatcher famously denying the existence of a society: "there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families." . Neo-conservatives argued for minimal state intervention ('rolling back the state') into the lives of individuals, a viewpoint that could hardly be seen to be un-ideological as it implicitly criticized the existence of a welfare state. As O'Gorman stresses, one should not take that seriously the "thoroughly non-doctrinaire conservatism" because conservatives have been, over the years, very willing to engage in controversy and defend themselves against criticisms leveled at them. Although the neo-conservative has a deep regard for continuity and tradition, they have shown themselves to be less cautious of radical change than their earlier ancestors. Margaret Thatcher for example, instigated enormous reforms both economically and socially in Britain and she was criticized heavily for doing so. Her response to the critics, "if to react against the politics of the last few years, which undermined our way of life and devastated our economy, if that is reactionary, then we are reactionary" . Whilst early conservatism offered a modest account of what politics could achieve, the neo-conservatives were far more willing to offer radical solutions to the deficiencies of the current economy and society, willing to alter the status quo. If the status quo is rotting and decaying, it requires renovation. Notably, the conservative ideology can be differentiated from other ideologies for not instigating reform for the sake of it, if the status quo is adequate, then it will be left alone. In other words, the conservative tradition supports an improvement of social conditions by measured statecraft and piecemeal reform rather than by grand design" .