Conservatism - state

?
  • Created by: mfwe
  • Created on: 22-05-19 12:42

Conservatism - state

Similarities

  • Trad + ON believe state should be paternalistic - those best equipped to rule should do so for benefit of everyone (like father over a family).
  • Trad: Burke developed idea of natural aristocracy; social elite that has hereditary abilities to rule. Paternalism + state = naturally hierarchical.
  • Hobbes: Leviathan would keep people in awe but rule for good of all.
  • Burke: state also needs to be pragmatic, 'change to conserve'.
  • ON: agreed with Trad that state = paternalistic. Disraeli: 'noblesse oblige', nobility had obligation to look after peasants. Supported idea of natural aristocracy, with leaders such as Lord Salisbury as PM.
  • Disraeli: agreed with Burke's 'change to conserve'. Social reforms (eg 1874 Factory Act limited working hours) were benign attempts to improve lives of poor.
  • Cons believe state should serve disciplinary function. Shown in Hobbes' Leviathan; role of state = stop people from killing eachother. State before society; Hobbes: without order, there can be no freedom. Order gained through set of clear laws backed up by firm authority.
  • Neo-Cons strand of NR puts emphasis on state upholding law and order. Nozick: believed in minimal state, but believed the state should exist to protect rights (Anarchy, State and Utopia).
  • States are not rational decisions that come about through revolutions - emerge gradually, through organic development.
  • Burke: criticised French Rev as it attempted to create single, artificial French 'state' in place of centuries-old monarchy.
  • Oppose written constitution as it was written in one place, at one time, by one group of people, meaning it's probably flawed.

Differences

  • ON practiced softer form of paternalism than Trad; Disraeli extended franchise to include working men in 1967, showed acceptance that voters would choose who to rule.
  • NR: Neo-Lib strand fundamentally rejects paternalism. ON saw massive expansion of state, Neo-Lib NR expressed desire to shrink state as much as possible.
  • Neo-Lib belief in individualism means they see paternalistic state as limiting individual potential.
  • Rand + Nozick: fundamentally opposed noblesse oblige expressed by Disraeli. Rand: altrusim = morally wrong.
  • Rolling back of state, economic reasons; paternalistic state = economically inefficient, Rand + Nozick embraced 'invisible hand' (Smith).
  • Rolling back of state, moral reasons; welfare state contributed to dependency culture which stripped individuals of dignity/purpose.
  • Idea of authoritarian state advocated by Trad is strongly rejected by NR - cannot accept restrictions on individual freedom that would arise from restrictive state.

Overall comparison

In conclusion, whilst there is common agreement between Trad and ON over the need for a paternalistic state, there is fundamental disagreement between them and the Neo-Lib NR, with the latter completely rejecting the paternalistic state.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Government & Politics resources:

See all Government & Politics resources »See all Conservatism resources »