Conservatism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Conservativism)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about conservatism as a political and social philosophy. For other uses, see Conservatism (disambiguation).

Conservatism as a political and social philosophy promotes retaining traditional social institutions in the context of the culture and civilization. A person who follows the philosophies of conservatism is referred to as a traditionalist or conservative typically with regard to the values and social structures before the French Revolution of the 1790s when "liberalism" presented a modern alternative. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others, called reactionaries, oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were".[1][2] The first established use of the term in a political context originated with François-René de Chateaubriand in 1818,[3] during the period of Bourbon restoration that sought to roll back the policies of the French Revolution. The term, historically associated with right-wing politics, has since been used to describe a wide range of views. There is no single set of policies that are universally regarded as conservative, because the meaning of conservatism depends on what is considered traditional in a given place and time. Thus conservatives from different parts of the world—each upholding their respective traditions—may disagree on a wide range of issues. Edmund Burke, an 18th-century politician who opposed the French Revolution but supported the American Revolution, is credited as one of the main theorists of conservatism in Great Britain in the 1790s.[4] According to Quintin Hogg, the chairman of the British Conservative Party in 1959, "Conservatism is not so much a philosophy as an attitude, a constant force, performing a timeless function in the development of a free society, and corresponding to a deep and permanent requirement of human nature itself."[5]

Development of Western conservatism[edit]

Great Britain[edit]

In Britain conservative ideas (though not yet called that) emerged in the Tory movement during the Restoration period (1660–1688). Toryism supported a hierarchical society with a monarch who ruled by divine right. Tories opposed the idea that sovereignty derived from the people, and rejected the authority of parliament and freedom of religion. Robert Filmer's Patriarcha: or the Natural Power of Kings, published posthumously in 1680 but written before the English Civil War of 1642-1651, became accepted as the statement of their doctrine. However, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 destroyed this principle to some degree by establishing a constitutional government in England, leading to the hegemony of the Tory-opposed Whig ideology. Faced with defeat, the Tories reformed their movement, now holding that sovereignty was vested in the three estates of Crown, Lords, and Commons[6] rather than solely in the Crown. Toryism became marginalized during the long period of Whig ascendancy in the 18th century.

Edmund Burke (1729–1797)

Conservatives typically see Richard Hooker (1554-1600) as the founding father of conservatism, along with the Marquess of Halifax (1633-1695), David Hume (1711-1776) and Edmund Burke (1729-1797). Halifax promoted pragmatism in government, whilst Hume argued against political rationalism and utopianism.[7] Burke served as the private secretary to the Marquis of Rockingham and as official pamphleteer to the Rockingham branch of the Whig party.[8] Together with the Tories, they were the conservatives in the late 18th century United Kingdom.[9] Burke's views were a mixture of liberal and conservative. He supported the American Revolution of 1765-1783 but abhorred the violence of the French Revolution (1789- ). He accepted the liberal ideals of private property and the economics of Adam Smith (1723-1790), but thought that economics should remain subordinate to the conservative social ethic, that capitalism should be subordinate to the medieval social tradition and that the business class should be subordinate to aristocracy.[10] He insisted on standards of honor derived from the medieval aristocratic tradition, and saw the aristocracy as the nation's natural leaders.[11] That meant limits on the powers of the Crown, since he found the institutions of Parliament to be better informed than commissions appointed by the executive. He favored an established church, but allowed for a degree of religious toleration.[12] Burke justified the social order on the basis of tradition: tradition represented the wisdom of the species and he valued community and social harmony over social reforms.[13] Burke was a leading theorist in his day, finding extreme idealism (either Tory or Whig) an endangerment to broader liberties, and (like Hume) rejecting abstract reason as an unsound guide for political theory. Despite their influence on future conservative thought, none of these early contributors were explicitly involved in Tory politics. Hooker lived in the 16th century, long before the advent of toryism, whilst Hume was an apolitical philosopher and Halifax similarly politically independent. Burke described himself as a Whig.

Shortly after Burke's death in 1797, conservatism revived as a mainstream political force as the Whigs suffered a series of internal divisions. This new generation of conservatives derived their politics not from Burke but from his predecessor, the Viscount Bolingbroke (1678-2751), who was a Jacobite and traditional Tory, lacking Burke's sympathies for Whiggish policies such as Catholic Emancipation and American independence (famously attacked by Samuel Johnson in "Taxation No Tyranny"). In the first half of the 19th century many newspapers, magazines, and journals promoted loyalist or right-wing attitudes in religion, politics, and international affairs. Burke was seldom mentioned but William Pitt the Younger (1759-1806) became a conspicuous hero. The most prominent journals included The Quarterly Review, founded in 1809 as a counterweight to the Whigs' Edinburgh Review, and the even more conservative Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine. Sack finds that the Quarterly Review promoted a balanced Canningite toryism; was neutral on Catholic emancipation and only mildly critical of Nonconformist Dissent; it opposed slavery and supported the current poor laws. It was "aggressively imperialist". The high-church clergy of the Church of England read the Orthodox Churchman's Magazine which was equally hostile to Jewish, Catholic, Jacobin, Methodist, and Unitarian spokesmen. Anchoring the ultra tories, Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine stood firmly against Catholic emancipation, and favoured slavery, cheap money, mercantilism, the Navigation acts, and the Holy Alliance.[14]

In the 19th century, conflict between wealthy businessmen and the aristocracy split the British conservative movement, with the aristocracy calling for a return to medieval ideas while the business classes advocated laissez-faire capitalism.[15]

Although conservatives opposed attempts to allow greater representation of the middle class in parliament, in 1834 they conceded that electoral reform could not be reversed and promised to support further reforms so long as they did not erode the institutions of church and state. These new principles were presented in the Tamworth Manifesto of 1834, which historians regard as the basic statement of the beliefs of the new Conservative Party.[16]

photograph
Robert Peel (1788–1850)

Some conservatives lamented the passing of a pastoral world where the ethos of noblesse oblige had promoted respect from the lower classes. They saw the Anglican Church and the aristocracy as balances against commercial wealth.[17] They worked toward legislation for improved working conditions and urban housing.[18] This viewpoint would later be called Tory Democracy.[19] However since Burke there has always been tension between traditional aristocratic conservatism and the wealthy business class.[20]

In 1834 Tory Prime Minister Robert Peel issued the Tamworth Manifesto in which he pledged to endorse moderate political reform. This marked the beginning of the transformation of British conservatism from High Tory reactionism towards a more modern form based on "conservation". The party became known as the Conservative Party as a result, a name it has retained to this day. Peel, however, would also be the root of a split in the party between the traditional Tories (led by the Earl of Derby and Benjamin Disraeli) and the 'Peelites' (led first by Peel himself, then by the Earl of Aberdeen). The split occurred in 1846 over the issue of free trade, which Peel supported, versus protectionism, supported by Derby. The majority of the party sided with Derby, whilst about a third split away, eventually merging with the Whigs and the radicals to form the Liberal Party. Despite the split, the mainstream Conservative Party accepted the doctrine of free trade in 1852.

Margaret Thatcher (1925–2013)

In the second half of the 19th century the Liberal Party faced political schisms, especially over Irish Home Rule. Leader William Gladstone (himself a former Peelite) sought to give Ireland a degree of autonomy, a move that elements in both the left and right wings of his party opposed. These split off to become the Liberal Unionists (led by Joseph Chamberlain), forming a coalition with the Conservatives before merging with them in 1912. The Liberal Unionist influence dragged the Conservative Party towards the left; Conservative governments passing a number of progressive reforms at the turn of the 20th century. By the late 19th century the traditional business supporters of the UK Liberal Party had joined the Conservatives, making them the party of business and commerce.[21]

After a period of Liberal dominance before the First World War, the Conservatives gradually became more influential in government, regaining full control of the cabinet in 1922. In the interwar period conservatism was the major ideology in Britain[citation needed], as the Liberal Party vied with the Labour Party for control of the left. After the Second World War, the first Labour government (1945-1951) under Clement Attlee embarked on a program of nationalization of industry and the promotion of social welfare. The Conservatives generally accepted those policies until the 1980s. In the 1980s the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher, guided by neoliberal economics, reversed many of Labour's programmes.

Small conservative political parties -such as the United Kingdom Independence Party (founded in 1993) and the Democratic Unionist Party (founded in 1971) - began to appear, although they have yet to make any significant impact at Westminster (as of 2014 the DUP comprises the largest political party in the ruling coalition in the Northern Ireland Assembly).

Germany[edit]

Conservative thought developed alongside nationalism in Germany, culminating in Germany's victory over France in the Franco-Prussian War, the creation of the unified German Empire in 1871, and the simultaneous rise of Otto von Bismarck on the European political stage. Bismarck's "balance of power" model maintained peace in Europe for decades at the end of the 19th century. His "revolutionary conservatism" was a conservative state-building strategy designed to make ordinary Germans --not just the Junker elite--more loyal to state and emperor, he created the modern welfare state in Germany in the 1880s. According to Kees van Kersbergen and Barbara Vis, his strategy was:

granting social rights to enhance the integration of a hierarchical society, to forge a bond between workers and the state so as to strengthen the latter, to maintain traditional relations of authority between social and status groups, and to provide a countervailing power against the modernist forces of liberalism and socialism.[22]

Bismarck also enacted universal male suffrage in the new German Empire in 1871.[23] He became a great hero to German conservatives, who erected many monuments to his memory after he left office in 1890.[24]

With the rise of Nazism in 1933, agrarian movements faded and was supplanted by a more command-based economy and forced social integration. Though Adolf Hitler succeeded in garnering the support of many German industrialists, prominent traditionalists openly and secretly opposed his policies of euthanasia, genocide, and attacks on organized religion, including Claus von Stauffenberg, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Henning von Tresckow, Bishop Clemens August Graf von Galen, and the monarchist Carl Friedrich Goerdeler.

More recently, the work of conservative CDU leader Helmut Kohl helped bring about German Reunification, along with the closer integration of Europe in the form of the Maastricht Treaty. Today, German conservatism is often associated with Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose tenure has been marked by attempts to save the common European currency (EURO) from demise.

United States[edit]

In the United States, conservatism is rooted in the American Revolution and its commitment to republicanism, sovereignty of the people, and the rights and liberties of Englishmen while expelling the king and his supporters. Most European conservative writers do not accept American conservatism as genuine; they consider it to be a variety of liberalism. Modern American liberals in the New Deal do not disagree with that consensus view, but conservatives spend much more emphasis on the Revolutionary origins, with the Tea Party advocates using an episode from the 1770s for their name and some even dress in costumes from that era at their rallies.

Historian Gregory Schneider identifies several constants in American conservatism: respect for tradition, support of republicanism, "the rule of law and the Christian religion," and a defense of "Western civilization from the challenges of modernist culture and totalitarian governments."[25]

Joseph de Maistre (1753–1821)

Latin Europe[edit]

Another form of conservatism developed in France in parallel to conservatism in Britain. It was influenced by Counter-Enlightenment works by men such as Joseph de Maistre and Louis de Bonald. Latin conservatism was less pragmatic and more reactionary than the conservatism of Burke.[citation needed] Many Continental or Traditionalist conservatives do not support separation of Church and state, with most supporting state recognition of and cooperation with the Catholic Church, such as had existed in France before the Revolution.

Eventually conservatives added patriotism and nationalism to the list of traditional values they support. German conservatives were the first to embrace nationalism, which was previously associated with liberalism and the Revolution in France.[26]

Forms of conservatism[edit]

Liberal conservatism[edit]

Main article: Liberal conservatism

Liberal conservatism is a variant of conservatism that combines conservative values and policies with classical liberal stances.[27] As these latter two terms have had different meanings over time and across countries, liberal conservatism also has a wide variety of meanings. Historically, the term often referred to the combination of economic liberalism, which champions laissez-faire markets, with the classical conservatism concern for established tradition, respect for authority and religious values. It contrasted itself with classical liberalism, which supported freedom for the individual in both the economic and social spheres.

Over time, the general conservative ideology in many countries adopted economic liberal arguments, and the term liberal conservatism was replaced with conservatism. This is also the case in countries where liberal economic ideas have been the tradition, such as the United States, and are thus considered conservative. In other countries where liberal conservative movements have entered the political mainstream, such as Italy and Spain, the terms liberal and conservative may be synonymous. The liberal conservative tradition in the United States combines the economic individualism of the classical liberals with a Burkean form of conservatism (which has also become part of the American conservative tradition, such as in the writings of Russell Kirk).

A secondary meaning for the term liberal conservatism that has developed in Europe is a combination of more modern conservative (less traditionalist) views with those of social liberalism. This has developed as an opposition to the more collectivist views of socialism. Often this involves stressing what are now conservative views of free-market economics and belief in individual responsibility, with social liberal views on defence of civil rights, environmentalism and support for a limited welfare state. In continental Europe, this is sometimes also translated into English as social conservatism.

Conservative liberalism[edit]

Conservative liberalism is a variant of liberalism that combines liberal values and policies with conservative stances, or, more simply, the right wing of the liberal movement.[28][29][30] The roots of conservative liberalism are found at the beginning of the history of liberalism. Until the two World Wars, in most European countries the political class was formed by conservative liberals, from Germany to Italy. Events after World War I brought the more radical version of classical liberalism to a more conservative (i.e. more moderate) type of liberalism.[31]

Libertarian conservatism[edit]

Libertarian conservatism describes certain political ideologies within the United States and Canada which combine libertarian economic issues with aspects of conservatism. Its five main branches are Constitutionalism, paleolibertarianism, neolibertarianism, small government conservatism and Christian libertarianism. They generally differ from paleoconservatives, in that they are in favor of more personal and economic freedom.

Agorists such as Samuel Edward Konkin III labeled libertarian conservatism right-libertarianism.[32][33]

In contrast to paleoconservatives, libertarian conservatives support strict laissez-faire policies such as free trade, opposition to any national bank and opposition to business regulations. They are vehemently opposed to environmental regulations, corporate welfare, subsidies, and other areas of economic intervention.

Many conservatives, especially in the United States, believe that the government should not play a major role in regulating business and managing the economy. They typically oppose efforts to charge high tax rates and to redistribute income to assist the poor. Such efforts, they argue, do not properly reward people who have earned their money through hard work.

Fiscal conservatism[edit]

Main article: Fiscal conservatism
Taxpayer March on Washington: Conservative protesters walking down Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D.C.

Fiscal conservatism is the economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt.[34] Edmund Burke, in his Reflections on the Revolution in France, argued that a government does not have the right to run up large debts and then throw the burden on the taxpayer:

...[I]t is to the property of the citizen, and not to the demands of the creditor of the state, that the first and original faith of civil society is pledged. The claim of the citizen is prior in time, paramount in title, superior in equity. The fortunes of individuals, whether possessed by acquisition or by descent or in virtue of a participation in the goods of some community, were no part of the creditor's security, expressed or implied...[T]he public, whether represented by a monarch or by a senate, can pledge nothing but the public estate; and it can have no public estate except in what it derives from a just and proportioned imposition upon the citizens at large.

Most conservatives believe that government action cannot solve society's problems, such as poverty and inequality. Many believe that government programs that seek to provide services and opportunities for the poor actually encourage dependence and reduce self-reliance. Most conservatives oppose affirmative action policies-that is, policies in employment, education, and other areas that aim to counteract past discrimination by giving special help to members of disadvantaged groups. Conservatives believe that the government should not give special treatment to individuals on the basis of group identity.

Many conservatives, especially in the United States, believe that the government should not play a major role in regulating business and managing the economy. They typically oppose efforts to charge high tax rates and to redistribute income to assist the poor. Such efforts, they argue, do not properly reward people who have earned their money through hard work.

Green conservatism[edit]

Main article: Green conservatism

Green conservatism is a term used to refer to conservatives who have incorporated green concerns into their ideology.[35] One of the first uses of the term green conservatism was by former United States Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich, in a debate on environmental issues with John Kerry.[36][37] Around this time, the green conservative movement was sometimes referred to as the crunchy con movement, a term popularized by National Review magazine and the writings of Rod Dreher.[38] The group Republicans for Environmental Protection seeks to strengthen the Republican Party's stance on environmental issues, and supports efforts to conserve natural resources and protect human and environmental health.

National and traditional conservatism[edit]

Gianfranco Fini, former President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, in 2004.

National conservatism is a political term used primarily in Europe to describe a variant of conservatism which concentrates more on national interests than standard conservatism as well as upholding cultural and ethnic identity,[39] while not being outspokenly nationalist or supporting a far-right approach.[citation needed] In Europe, national conservatives are usually eurosceptics.[40][41]

National conservatism is heavily oriented towards the traditional family and social stability as well as in favour of limiting immigration. As such, national conservatives can be distinguished from economic conservatives, for whom free market economic policies, deregulation and fiscal conservatism are the main priorities. Some commentators have identified a growing gap between national and economic conservatism: "most parties of the Right [today] are run by economic conservatives who, in varying degrees, have marginalized social, cultural, and national conservatives."[42] National conservatism is also related to traditionalist conservatism.

Traditionalist conservatism is a political philosophy emphasizing the need for the principles of natural law and transcendent moral order, tradition, hierarchy and organic unity, agrarianism, classicism and high culture, and the intersecting spheres of loyalty.[43] Some traditionalists have embraced the labels "reactionary" and "counterrevolutionary", defying the stigma that has attached to these terms since the Enlightenment. Having a hierarchical view of society, many traditionalist conservatives, including a few Americans, defend the monarchical political structure as the most natural and beneficial social arrangement.

Cultural and social conservatism[edit]

Cultural conservatives support the preservation of the heritage of one nation, or of a shared culture that is not defined by national boundaries.[44] The shared culture may be as divergent as Western culture or Chinese culture. In the United States, the term cultural conservative may imply a conservative position in the culture war. Cultural conservatives hold fast to traditional ways of thinking even in the face of monumental change. They believe strongly in traditional values and traditional politics, and often have an urgent sense of nationalism.

Social conservatism is distinct from cultural conservatism, although there are some overlaps. Social conservatives may believe that the government has a role in encouraging or enforcing traditional values or behaviours. A social conservative wants to preserve traditional morality and social mores, often by opposing what they consider radical policies or social engineering. Social change is generally regarded as suspect.

A second meaning of the term social conservatism developed in the Nordic countries and continental Europe. There it refers to liberal conservatives supporting modern European welfare states.

Social conservatives (in the first meaning of the word) in many countries generally favour the pro-life position in the abortion controversy and oppose human embryonic stem cell research (particularly if publicly funded); oppose both eugenics and human enhancement (transhumanism) while supporting bioconservatism;[45] support a traditional definition of marriage as being one man and one woman; view the nuclear family model as society's foundational unit; oppose expansion of civil marriage and child adoption rights to couples in same-sex relationships; promote public morality and traditional family values; oppose atheism,[46] especially militant atheism, secularism and the separation of church and state;[47][48][49] support the prohibition of drugs, prostitution, and euthanasia; and support the censorship of pornography and what they consider to be obscenity or indecency. Most conservatives in the U.S. support the death penalty.

Religious conservatism[edit]

See also: Religious Right
March for Life in Paris, France, 2012

Religious conservatives principally seek to apply the teachings of particular religions to politics, sometimes by merely proclaiming the value of those teachings, at other times by having those teachings influence laws.[50]

In most modern democracies, political conservatism seeks to uphold traditional family structures and social values. Conservatives typically oppose abortion, homosexual behavior, drug use, and sexual activity outside of marriage. In some cases, conservatives values are grounded in religious beliefs, and some conservatives seek to increase the role of religion in public life.

Progressive conservatism[edit]

Progressive conservatism incorporates progressive policies alongside conservative policies. It stresses the importance of a social safety net to deal with poverty, support of limited redistribution of wealth along with government regulation to regulate markets in the interests of both consumers and producers.[51] Progressive conservatism first arose as a distinct ideology in the United Kingdom under Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli's "One Nation" Toryism.[51][52]

There have been a variety of progressive conservative governments. In the UK, the Prime Ministers Disraeli, Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain, Winston Churchill, Harold Macmillan,[53] and present Prime Minister David Cameron are progressive conservatives.[54][55] The Catholic Church's Rerum Novarum (1891) advocates a progressive conservative doctrine known as social Catholicism.[56] In the United States, the administration of President William Howard Taft was progressive conservative and he described himself as "a believer in progressive conservatism"[57] and President Dwight D. Eisenhower declared himself an advocate of "progressive conservatism".[58] In Germany, Chancellor Leo von Caprivi promoted a progressive conservative agenda called the "New Course".[59] In Canada, a variety of conservative governments have been progressive conservative, with Canada's major conservative movement being officially named the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada from 1942 to 2003.[60] In Canada, the Prime Ministers Arthur Meighen, R.B. Bennett, John Diefenbaker, Joe Clark, Brian Mulroney, and Kim Campbell led progressive conservative federal governments.[60]

Historic conservatism in different countries[edit]

Further information: Right-wing politics and Political spectrum

Conservative political parties vary widely from country to country in the goals they wish to achieve. Both conservative and liberal parties tend to favor private ownership of property, in opposition to communist, socialist and green parties, which favor communal ownership or laws requiring social responsibility on the part of property owners. Where conservatives and liberals differ is primarily on social issues. Conservatives tend to reject behavior that does not conform to some social norm. Modern conservative parties often define themselves by their opposition to liberal or labor parties. The United States usage of the term conservative is unique to that country.[61]

According to Alan Ware, Belgium, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK retained viable conservative parties into the 1980s.[62] Ware said that Australia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malta, New Zealand, Spain and the US had no conservative parties, although they had either Christian Democrats or liberals as major right-wing parties. Canada, Ireland, and Portugal had right-wing political parties that defied categorization: the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada; Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, and Progressive Democrats in Ireland; and the Social Democratic Party of Portugal.[63] Since then, the Swiss People's Party has moved to the extreme right and is no longer considered to be conservative.[64]

Klaus von Beyme, who developed the method of party categorization, found that no modern Eastern European parties could be considered conservative, although the communist and communist-successor parties had strong similarities.[65]

In Italy, which was united by liberals and radicals (risorgimento), liberals not conservatives emerged as the party of the Right.[66] In the Netherlands, conservatives merged into a new Christian democratic party in 1980.[67] In Austria, Germany, Portugal and Spain, conservatism was transformed into and incorporated into fascism or the far right.[68] In 1940, all Japanese parties were merged into a single fascist party. Following the war, Japanese conservatives briefly returned to politics but were largely purged from public office.[69]

Louis Hartz explained the absence of conservatism in Australia or the United States as a result of their settlement as radical or liberal fragments of Great Britain. Although he said English Canada had a negligible conservative influence, subsequent writers claimed that loyalists opposed to the American Revolution brought a Tory ideology into Canada. Hartz explained conservatism in Quebec and Latin America as a result of their settlement as feudal societies.[70] The American conservative writer Russell Kirk provided the opinion that conservatism had been brought to the US and interpreted the American revolution as a "conservative revolution".[71]

Conservative elites have long dominated Latin American nations. Mostly this has been achieved through control of and support for civil institutions, the church and the armed forces, rather than through party politics. Typically the church was exempt from taxes and its employees immune from civil prosecution. Where national conservative parties were weak or non-existent, conservatives were more likely to rely on military dictatorship as a preferred form of government. However in some nations where the elites were able to mobilize popular support for conservative parties, longer periods of political stability were achieved. Chile, Colombia and Venezuela are examples of nations that developed strong conservative parties. Argentina, Brazil, El Salvador and Peru are examples of nations where this did not occur.[72] The Conservative Party of Venezuela disappeared following the Federal Wars of 1858-1863.[73] Chile's conservative party, the National Party disbanded in 1973 following a military coup and did not re-emerge as a political force following the subsequent return to democracy.[74]

The conservative Union Nationale governed the province of Quebec in periods from 1936 to 1960, in a close alliance with English Canadian business elites and the Catholic Church. This period, known as the Great Darkness ended with the Quiet Revolution and the party went into terminal decline.[75]

Belgium[edit]

Founded in 1945 as the Christian People's Party, the Flemish Christian Democrats (CD&V) dominated politics in post-war Belgium. In 1999, the party's support collapsed and it became the country's fifth largest party.[76]

Canada[edit]

Canada's Conservatives had their roots in the Loyalists – Tories – who left America after the American Revolution. They developed in the socio-economic and political cleavages that existed during the first three decades of the 19th century, and had the support of the business, professional and established Church (Anglican) elites in Ontario and to a lesser extent in Quebec. Holding a monopoly over administrative and judicial offices, they were called the "Family Compact" in Ontario and the "Chateau Clique" in Quebec. John A. Macdonald's successful leadership of the movement to confederate the provinces and his subsequent tenure as prime minister for most of the late 19th century rested on his ability to bring together the English-speaking Protestant oligarchy and the ultramontane Catholic hierarchy of Quebec and to keep them united in a conservative coalition.[77]

The Conservatives combined pro-market liberalism and Toryism. They generally supported an activist government and state intervention in the marketplace, and their policies were marked by noblesse oblige, a paternalistic responsibility of the elites for the less well-off.[78] From 1942, the party was known as the Progressive Conservatives, until 2003, when the national party merged with the Canadian Alliance to form the Conservative Party of Canada.[79]

Colombia[edit]

The Colombian Conservative Party, founded in 1849, traces its origins to opponents of General Francisco de Paula Santander's 1833–37 administration. While the term "liberal" had been used to describe all political forces in Colombia, the conservatives began describing themselves as "conservative liberals" and their opponents as "red liberals". From the 1860s until the present, the party has supported strong central government, and supported the Catholic Church, especially its role as protector of the sanctity of the family, and opposed separation of church and state. Its policies include the legal equality of all men, the citizen's right to own property and opposition to dictatorship. It has usually been Colombia's second largest party, with the Colombian Liberal Party being the largest.[80]

Denmark[edit]

Founded in 1915, the Conservative People's Party of Denmark. was the successor of Højre (literally "right"). In the 2005 election it won 18 out of 179 seats in the Folketing and became a junior partner in coalition with the Liberals.[81] The party is preceded by 11 years by the Young Conservatives (KU), today the youth movement of the party. The Party suffered a major defeat in the parliamentary elections of September 2011 in which the party lost more than half of its seat and also lost governmental power.

Finland[edit]

The conservative party in Finland is the National Coalition Party (in Finnish Kansallinen Kokoomus, Kok). The party was founded in 1918 when several monarchist parties united. Although in the past the party was right-wing, today it is a moderate party. While the party advocates economic liberalism, it is committed to the social market economy.[82]

France[edit]

Following the Second World War, conservatives in France supported Gaullist groups and have been nationalistic, and emphasized tradition, order, and the regeneration of France. Gaullists held divergent views on social issues. The number of Conservative groups, their lack of stability, and their tendency to be identified with local issues defy simple categorization. Conservatism has been the major political force in France since the second world war.[83] Unusually, post-war French conservatism was formed around the personality of a leader, Charles de Gaulle, and did not draw on traditional French conservatism, but on the Bonapartism tradition.[84] Gaullism in France continues under the Union for a Popular Movement.[85] The word "conservative" itself is a term of abuse in France.[86]

Greece[edit]

The main interwar conservative party was called the People's Party (PP), which supported constitutional monarchy and opposed the republican Liberal Party. It was able to re-group after the Second World War as part of a United Nationalist Front which achieved power campaigning on a simple anticommunist, ultranationalist platform. However, the vote received by the PP declined, leading them to create an expanded party, the Greek Rally, under the leadership of the charismatic General Alexandros Papagos. The conservatives opposed the far right dictatorship of the colonels (1967–1974) and established the New Democratic Party following the fall of the dictatorship. The new party had four objectives: to confront Turkish expansionism in Cyprus, to reestablish and solidify democratic rule, to give the country a strong government, and to make a powerful moderate party a force in Greek politics.[87]

The Independent Greeks, a newly formed political party in Greece has also supported conservatism, particularly national and religious conservatism. The Founding Declaration of the Independent Greeks strongly emphasises in the preservation of the Greek state and its sovereignty, the Greek people and the Greek Orthodox Church.[88]

Iceland[edit]

Founded in 1926 as the Conservative Party, Iceland's Independence Party adopted its current name in 1929. From the beginning they have been the largest vote-winning party, averaging around 40%. They combine liberalism and conservatism, supporting nationalization and opposed to class conflict. While mostly in opposition during the 1930s, they embraced economic liberalism, but accepted the welfare state after the war and participated in governments supportive of state intervention and protectionism. Unlike other Scandanivian conservative (and liberal) parties, it has always had a large working-class following.[89]

Italy[edit]

After WW2 in Italy the conservative theories were mainly represented by the Christian Democracy, which government form the foundation of the Republic until party's dissolution in 1994. Officially DC refused the ideology of Conservatism, but in many aspects, for example family values, it was a typical social conservative party.

In 1994 the media tycoon and entrepreneur Silvio Berlusconi founded the liberal conservative Forza Italia movement. Berlusconi won three elections in 1994, 2001 and 2008 governing the country for almost ten years as Prime Minister.

Besides FI, now the conservative ideas are mainly expressed by the New Centre-Right party led by Angelino Alfano, former Berlusconi's protégé who split from the reborn Forza Italia founding a new conservative movement. Alfano is the current Minister of the Interior in the government of Matteo Renzi.

Luxembourg[edit]

Luxembourg's major conservative party, the Christian Social People's Party (CSV or PCS) was formed as the Party of the Right in 1914, and adopted its present name in 1945. It was consistently the largest political party in Luxembourg and dominated politics throughout the 20th century.[90]

Norway[edit]

The Conservative Party of Norway (Norwegian: Høyre, literally "right") was formed by the old upper class of state officials and wealthy merchants to fight the populist democracy of the Liberal Party, but lost power in 1884 when parliamentarian government was first practised. It formed its first government under parliamentarism in 1889, and continued to alternate in power with the Liberals until the 1930s, when Labour became the dominant political party. It has elements both of paternalism, stressing the responsibilities of the state, and of economic liberalism. It first returned to power in the 1960s.[91] During Kåre Willoch's premiership in the 1980s, much emphasis was laid on liberalizing the credit- and housing market and abolishing the NRK TV and radio monopoly, while supporting law and order in criminal justice and traditional norms in education[92]

Sweden[edit]

Sweden's conservative party, the Moderate Party, was formed in 1904, two years after the founding of the liberal party.[93] The party emphasizes tax reductions, deregulation of private enterprise, and privatization of schools, hospitals and kindergartens.[94]

Switzerland[edit]

There are a number of conservative parties in Switzerland's parliament, the Federal Assembly. These include the largest, the Swiss People's Party (SVP),[95] the Christian Democratic People's Party (CVP),[96] represented in the Federal Council or cabinet by Doris Leuthard (in 2011), and the Conservative Democratic Party of Switzerland (BDP),[97] which is a splinter of the SVP created after a failed attempt to expel Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf from the SVP.[97]

The Swiss People's Party (SVP or UDC) was formed from the 1971 merger of the Party of Farmers, Traders, and Citizens, formed in 1917 and the smaller Swiss Democratic Party, formed in 1942. The SVP emphasized agricultural policy, and was strong among farmers in German-speaking Protestant areas. As Switzerland considered closer relations with the European Union in the 1990s, the SVP adopted a more militant protectionist and isolationist stance. This stance has allowed it to expand into German-speaking Catholic mountainous areas.[98] The Anti-Defamation League, a non-Swiss lobby group based in the USA has accused them of manipulating issues such as immigration, Swiss neutrality and welfare benefits, awakening anti-Semitism and racism.[99] The Council of Europe has called the SVP "extreme right", although some scholars dispute this classification. Hans-Georg Betz for example describes it as "populist radical right".[100]

United Kingdom[edit]

Conservatism in the United Kingdom is related to its counterparts in other Western nations, but has a distinct tradition. Edmund Burke is often considered the father of conservatism in the English-speaking world. Burke was a Whig, while the term Tory is given to the later Conservative Party. One Australian scholar argues, "For Edmund Burke and Australians of a like mind, the essence of conservatism lies not in a body of theory, but in the disposition to maintain those institutions seen as central to the beliefs and practices of society."[101]

The old established form of English and, after the Act of Union, British conservatism, was the Tory Party. It reflected the attitudes of a rural land owning class, and championed the institutions of the monarchy, the Anglican Church, the family, and property as the best defence of the social order. In the early stages of the industrial revolution, it seemed to be totally opposed to a process that seemed to undermine some of these bulwarks. The new industrial elite were seen by many as enemies to the social order. Robert Peel was able to reconcile the new industrial class to the Tory landed class by persuading the latter to accept the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846. He created a new political group that sought to preserve the old status quo while accepting the basics of laissez-faire and free trade. The new coalition of traditional landowners and sympathetic industrialists constituted the new Conservative Party.

Benjamin Disraeli gave the new party a political ideology. As a young man, he was influenced by the romantic movement and medievalism, and developed a devastating critique of industrialism. In his novels, he outlined an England divided into two nations, each living in perfect ignorance of each other. He foresaw, like Karl Marx, the phenomenon of an alienated industrial proletariat. His solution involved a return to an idealised view of a corporate or organic society, in which everyone had duties and responsibilities towards other people or groups. This "one nation" conservatism is still a significant tradition in British politics.[citation needed] It has animated a great deal of social reform undertaken by successive Conservative governments.[citation needed]

Although nominally a Conservative, Disraeli was sympathetic to some of the demands of the Chartists and argued for an alliance between the landed aristocracy and the working class against the increasing power of the middle class, helping to found the Young England group in 1842 to promote the view that the rich should use their power to protect the poor from exploitation by the middle class.[citation needed] The conversion of the Conservative Party into a modern mass organization was accelerated by the concept of Tory Democracy attributed to Lord Randolph Churchill, father of Britain's wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill.[citation needed]

David Cameron is the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and leader of the Conservative Party.

A Liberal-Conservative coalition during World War I, coupled with the ascent of the Labour Party, hastened the collapse of the Liberals in the 1920s. After World War II, the Conservative Party made concessions to the socialist policies of the Left. This compromise was a pragmatic measure to regain power, but also the result of the early successes of central planning and state ownership forming a cross-party consensus. This was known as Butskellism, after the almost identical Keynesian policies of Rab Butler on behalf of the Conservatives, and Hugh Gaitskell for Labour.

However, in the 1980s, under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher, and the influence of Keith Joseph, there was a dramatic shift in the ideological direction of British conservatism, with a movement towards free-market economic policies.[citation needed] As one commentator explains, "The privatization of state owned industries, unthinkable before, became commonplace [during Thatcher's government] and has now been imitated all over the world."[102] Some commentators have questioned whether Thatcherism was consistent with the traditional concept of conservatism in the United Kingdom, and saw her views as more consistent with radical classical liberalism. Thatcher was described as "a radical in a conservative party",[102] and her ideology has been seen as confronting "established institutions" and the "accepted beliefs of the elite",[102] both concepts incompatible with the traditional conception of conservatism as signifying support for the established order and existing social convention.

Modern conservatism in different countries[edit]

While conservatism has been seen as an appeal to traditional, hierarchical society, some writers, such as Samuel P. Huntington, see it as situational. Under this definition, conservatives are seen as defending the established institutions of their time.[103]

Australia[edit]

The Liberal Party of Australia adheres to the principles of social conservatism and liberal conservatism.[104] It is Liberal in the sense of economics. The party is considered to be more right-wing than the Conservative Party (UK).[105] Other conservative parties are the National Party of Australia, a sister party of the Liberals, Family First Party, Democratic Labor Party, Shooters Party and the Katter's Australian Party.

The second largest party in the country, the Australian Labor Party's dominant faction is Labor Right, a socially conservative element. Australia is generally considered one of the most conservative western nations.[106] Australia undertook significant economic reform under the Australian Labor Party in the mid-1980s. Consequently issues like protectionism, welfare reform, privatization and deregulation are no longer debated in the political space as they are in Europe or North America. Moser and Catley explain, "In America, 'liberal' means left-of-center, and it is a pejorative term when used by conservatives in adversarial political debate. In Australia, of course, the conservatives are in the Liberal Party."[107] Jupp points out that, "[the] decline in English influences on Australian reformism and radicalism, and appropriation of the symbols of Empire by conservatives continued under the Liberal Party leadership of Sir Robert Menzies, which lasted until 1966."[108]

South Korea[edit]

South Korea's major conservative party, the Saenuri Party or 새누리당, changed its form throughout its history. First it was the Democratic-Republican Party(1963~1980); its head was Park Chung-hee who seized power in a 1961 military coup d'état and ruled as an unelected military strongman until his formal election as president in 1963. He was president for 16 years, until his assassination on October 26, 1979. The Democratic Justice Party inherited the same ideology as the Democrati-Republican Party. Its head, Chun Doo-hwan, also gained power through a coup. His followers called themselves the Hanahoe. The Democratic Justice Party changed its form and acted to suppress the opposition party and to follow the people's demand for direct elections. The party's Roh Tae-woo became the first president who was elected through direct election. The next form of the major conservative party was the Democratic-Liberal Party. Again, through election, its second leader, Kim Young-sam, became the fourteenth president of Korea. When the conservative party was beaten by the opposition party in the general election, it changed its form again to follow the party members' demand for reforms. It became the New Korean Party. It changed again one year later since the President Kim Young-sam was blamed by the citizen for the IMF[clarification needed]. It changed its name to Grand National Party (Hannara-dang) (1998~2011). Since the late Kim Dae-jung assumed the presidency in 1998, GNP had not been the ruling party until Lee Myung-bak won the presidential election of 2007. It renamed to Saenoori Party (새누리당) in 2011.

United States[edit]

President Ronald Reagan in 1982

The meaning of "conservatism" in America has little in common with the way the word is used elsewhere. As Ribuffo (2011) notes, "what Americans now call conservatism much of the world calls liberalism or neoliberalism."[109] Since the 1950s conservatism in the United States has been chiefly associated with the Republican Party. However, during the era of segregation many Southern Democrats were conservatives, and they played a key role in the Conservative Coalition that controlled Congress from 1937 to 1963.[110]

Major movements within American conservatism include support for tradition, law-and-order, Christianity, anti-communism, and a defense of "Western civilization from the challenges of modernist culture and totalitarian governments."[25] Economic conservatives and libertarians favor small government, low taxes, limited regulation, and free enterprise. Some social conservatives see traditional social values threatened by secularism, so they support school prayer and oppose abortion and homosexuality.[111] Neoconservatives want to expand American ideals throughout the world and show a strong support for Israel.[112] Paleoconservatives, in opposition to multiculturalism, press for restrictions on immigration.[113] Most U.S. conservatives prefer Republicans over Democrats, and most factions favor a strong foreign policy and a strong military. The conservative movement of the 1950s attempted to bring together these divergent strands, stressing the need for unity to prevent the spread of "Godless Communism", which Reagan later labeled an "evil empire".[114] During the Reagan administration, conservatives also supported the so-called "Reagan Doctrine" under which the U.S., as part of a Cold War strategy, provided military and other support to guerrilla insurgencies that were fighting governments identified as socialist or communist.

Other modern conservative positions include opposition to world government and opposition to environmentalism.[115]

Most recently, the Tea Party movement, founded in 2009, has proven a large outlet for populist American conservative ideas. Their stated goals include rigorous adherence to the U.S. Constitution, lower taxes, and opposition to a growing role for the federal government in health care. Electorally, it was considered a key force in Republicans reclaiming control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010.[116][117]

Comparison of conservatism in four countries[edit]

This is a broad comparison of modern conservatism in four different countries.

France France Russia Russia United Kingdom United Kingdom United States United States
Main parties Union for a Popular Movement, Front National United Russia Conservative Party, UKIP, Democratic Unionist Party, Ulster Unionist Party Republican Party
Government Strong defenders of republicanism. Strong defenders of Russian statehood and the Federation.
Celebratory of Russia's Tsarist and Communist past.
Strongly defends monarchism and unionism.
Rejects republicanism.
Supports unelected House of Lords chamber.
Defends first-past-the-post voting system.
Defenders of the union of states, and of republicanism.
State control Bonapartism, Gaullism.
Moderate sized state.
Statism.
Strong, powerful, centralised state.
Small, minimal, centralised state. Small, minimal, decentralised state particularly at federal level.
Strongly influenced by libertarianism.
Social views Rule of law, traditionalism, authority, liberty, defence of traditional family, public healthcare.
Strongly supportive of French culture, Francophone, and against Americanisation.
Rule of law, authority, state unity, public unity, law and order, traditionalism.
Against modernism and Western culture.
Hierarchy, rule of law, liberty, freedom, traditionalism, British stoicism, against abortion in Northern Ireland. Freedom, liberty, individualism, traditionalism, law and order, gun ownership, defence of traditional family, against euthanasia, abortion, and gay marriage.
Strong supporters of the American Constitution and the separation of powers.
Religious views Defends secularism.
Influenced by Catholic social teaching.
Strong adherents to the Russian Orthodox Church. High Anglicanism.
Presbyterianism in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Christianity and Judaism.
Economic views UMP: Social market economy, distributism, nationalisation of major industries, loosely influenced by neoliberalism, moderate welfare system.
FN: Nationalisation of major industries, protectionism and moderate re-distribution of wealth.
Mixture of state regulation and market freedoms, nationalisation of major industries, moderate re-distribution of wealth, rejection of communism. Neoliberalism, low taxation, privatisation, free trade, small welfare state but nationalised healthcare. Neoliberalism, libertarianism, free trade, low taxation, privatisation.
International government UMP: Supportive of the United Nations and NATO. Moderately supportive of the European Union.
FN: Sceptical about the United Nations, NATO and the European Union.
Supportive of Commonwealth of Independent States. Sceptical about the United Nations. Supportive of the United Nations, NATO, and the Commonwealth. Sceptical about the European Union. Supportive of NATO. Sceptical about the United Nations.
International affairs UMP: Interventionist.
FN: Non-interventionist.
Interventionist. Conservatives, UUP and DUP: Interventionist.
UKIP: Non-interventionist.
Interventionist, with non-interventionist factions.

Psychology[edit]

Following the Second World War, psychologists conducted research into the different motives and tendencies that account for ideological differences between left and right. The early studies focused on conservatives, beginning with Theodor W. Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality (1950). This book has been heavily criticized on theoretical and methodological grounds, but some of its findings have been confirmed by further empirical research.[118]

In 1973, British psychologist Glenn Wilson published an influential book providing evidence that a general factor underlying conservative beliefs is "fear of uncertainty".[119] A meta-analysis of research literature by Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, and Sulloway in 2003 found that many factors, such as intolerance of ambiguity and need for cognitive closure, contribute to the degree of one's political conservatism.[118] A study by Kathleen Maclay stated these traits "might be associated with such generally valued characteristics as personal commitment and unwavering loyalty." The research also suggested that while most people are resistant to change, liberals are more tolerant of it.[120]

According to psychologist Bob Altemeyer, individuals who are politically conservative tend to rank high in right-wing authoritarianism on his RWA scale.[121] This finding was echoed by Theodor Adorno. A study done on Israeli and Palestinian students in Israel found that RWA scores of right-wing party supporters were significantly higher than those of left-wing party supporters.[122] However, a 2005 study by H. Michael Crowson and colleagues suggested a moderate gap between RWA and other conservative positions. "The results indicated that conservatism is not synonymous with RWA."[123]

Psychologist Felicia Pratto and her colleagues have found evidence to support the idea that a high social dominance orientation (SDO) is strongly correlated with conservative political views, and opposition to social engineering to promote equality, though Pratto's findings have been highly controversial.[124] Pratto and her colleagues found that high SDO scores were highly correlated with measures of prejudice. They were refuted in this claim by David J. Schneider, who wrote that "correlations between prejudice and political conservative are reduced virtually to zero when controls for SDO are instituted".[125] Kenneth Minogue criticized Pratto's work, saying "It is characteristic of the conservative temperament to value established identities, to praise habit and to respect prejudice, not because it is irrational, but because such things anchor the darting impulses of human beings in solidities of custom which we do not often begin to value until we are already losing them. Radicalism often generates youth movements, while conservatism is a condition found among the mature, who have discovered what it is in life they most value."[126]

A 1996 study on the relationship between racism and conservatism found that the correlation was stronger among more educated individuals, though specifically anti-Black racism did not increase. They also found that the correlation between racism and conservatism could be entirely accounted for by their mutual relationship with social dominance orientation. The authors concluded that opposition to affirmative action, especially among more highly educated conservatives, was better explained by social dominance orientation than by principled conservatism.[127]

A 2008 research report found that conservatives are happier than liberals, and that as income inequality increases, this difference in relative happiness increases, because conservatives (more than liberals) possess an ideological buffer against the negative hedonic effects of economic inequality.[128]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan, "Conservatism", Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics, Third Edition, "Sometimes it (conservatism) has been outright opposition, based on an existing model of society that is considered right for all time. It can take a 'reactionary' form, harking back to, and attempting to reconstruct, forms of society which existed in an earlier period.", Oxford University Press, 2009, ISBN 978-0-19-920516-5.
  2. ^ "Conservatism (political philosophy)". Britannica.com.  Retrieved on 1 November 2009.
  3. ^ Jerry Z. Muller (1997). Conservatism: An Anthology of Social and Political Thought from David Hume to the Present. Princeton U.P. p. 26. ISBN 0691037116. "Terms related to 'conservative' first found their way into political discourse in the title of the French weekly journal, Le Conservateur, founded in 1818 by François-René de Chateaubriand with the aid of Louis de Bonald." 
  4. ^ Frank O'Gorman (2003). Edmund Burke: His Political Philosophy. Routledge. p. 171. ISBN 9780415326841. 
  5. ^ Quintin Hogg Baron Hailsham of St. Marylebone (1959). The Conservative Case. Penguin Books. 
  6. ^ Eccleshall, pp. ix, 21
  7. ^ Jerry Z. Muller, ed. Conservatism: an anthology of social and political thought from David Hume to the present (Princeton University Press, 1997); Sheldon Wolin, 'Hume and Conservatism', American Political Science Review 48 (1954), 999-1016.
  8. ^ Stanlis, Peter J. Edmund Burke: selected writings and speeches. New York: Transaction Publishers (2009), p. 18
  9. ^ M. Morton Auerbach. The Conservative Illusion. Columbia University Press (1959). p. 33. 
  10. ^ Auerbach, The Conservative Illusion. (1959), p. 40
  11. ^ Auerbach, The Conservative Illusion. (1959), p. 37
  12. ^ Auerbach, The Conservative Illusion (1959), pp. 52–54
  13. ^ Auerbach, The Conservative Illusion, (1959), p. 41
  14. ^ J.J. Sack, "The Memory of Burke and the Memory of Pitt: English Conservatism Confronts Its Past, 1806-1829," Historical Journal (1987) 30#3 pp. 623-640; in JSTOR; quote on p 627
  15. ^ Auerbach, M. Morton The Conservative Illusion. Columbia University Press (1959), pp. 39–40
  16. ^ Eccleshall, pp. 79–80
  17. ^ Eccleshall, p. 83
  18. ^ Eccleshall, p. 90
  19. ^ Eccleshall, p. 121
  20. ^ Eccleshall, pp. 6–7
  21. ^ Feuchtwanger, p. 273
  22. ^ Kersbergen, Kees van; Vis, Barbara (2013). Comparative Welfare State Politics: Development, Opportunities, and Reform. Cambridge UP. p. 38. 
  23. ^ Moore, Robert Laurence; Vaudagna, Maurizio (2003). The American Century in Europe. Cornell University Press. p. 226. 
  24. ^ Richard E. Frankel, "From the Beer Halls to the Halls of Power: The Cult of Bismarck and the Legitimization of a New German Right, 1898–1945," German Studies Review, Vol. 26, No. 3 (Oct., 2003), pp. 543–560 in JSTOR
  25. ^ a b Gregory Schneider, The Conservative Century: From Reaction to Revolution (Rowman & Littlefield. 2009) p. xii
  26. ^ ams, Ian Political Ideology Today (2nd edition), Manchester University Press, 2002, p. 46
  27. ^ Analyzing Politics: An Introduction to Political Science Ellen Grigsby, Cengage Learning, 2008 ISBN 978-0-495-50112-1, ISBN 978-0-495-50112-1 pp. 108, 109, 112, 347
  28. ^ (French) Ipolitique.fr
  29. ^ Parties-and-elections.de
  30. ^ M. Gallagher, M. Laver and P. Mair, Representative Government in Europe, p. 221.
  31. ^ Allen R.T., Beyond Liberalism, p. 13.
  32. ^ "New Libertarian Manifesto". 
  33. ^ "Interview With Samuel Edward Konkin III". 
  34. ^ Freeman, Robert M. (1999). Correctional Organization and Management: Public Policy Challenges, Behavior, and Structure. Elsevier. p. 109. ISBN 978-0-7506-9897-9. 
  35. ^ Gray, John (1995). Beyond the New Right. Routledge. p. 124. ISBN 978-0-415-10706-8. 
  36. ^ We Can Have Green Conservatism – And We Should – HUMAN EVENTS. Retrieved February 20, 2010.
  37. ^ The Case for Green Conservatism – Redstate. Retrieved February 20, 2010.
  38. ^ Dreher, Rod (2006). Crunchy Cons: The New Conservative Counterculture and Its Return to Roots. Random House. ISBN 1-4000-5065-0. 
  39. ^ Mandal, V.C. (2007). Dictionary Of Public Administration. Sarup & Sons. p. 306. ISBN 978-81-7625-784-8. 
  40. ^ http://www.parties-and-elections.de/content.html
  41. ^ Traynor, Ian, The EU's weary travellers The Guardian, April 4, 2006
  42. ^ National questions - conservatives fragmenting as liberals unite, National Review, June 30, 1997
  43. ^ Frohnen, Bruce, Jeremy Beer, and Jeffrey O. Nelson, ed. (2006) American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, pp. 870–75.
  44. ^ Seaton, James (1996). Cultural Conservatism, Political Liberalism: From Criticism to Cultural Studies. University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-10645-5. 
  45. ^ The Next Digital Divide (utne article)
  46. ^ "No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." President George H. W. Bush, http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ghwbush.htm
  47. ^ The World & I.: Volume 1, Issue 5 (1986). The World & I.: Volume 1, Issue 5. Washington Times Corp. Retrieved 19 August 2011. "militant atheism was incompatible with conservatism" 
  48. ^ Peter Davies; Derek Lynch (2002). The Routledge Companion to Fascism and the Far Right. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-21494-0. Retrieved 19 August 2011. "In addition, conservative Chrsitians often endorsed far-right remines as the lesser of two evils, especially when confronted with militant atheism in the USSR." 
  49. ^ Peter L. Berger; Grace Davie; Effie Fokas (2008). Religious America, Secular Europe?: A Theme and Variations. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6011-8. Retrieved 19 August 2011. "If anything the reverse is true: moral conservatives continue to oppose secular liberals on a wide range of issues." 
  50. ^ Andersen, Margaret L., Taylor, Howard Francis. Sociology: Understanding a Diverse Society Cengage Learning, 4th Ed. (2005), pp. 469–70. ISBN 978-0-534-61716-5
  51. ^ a b Patrick Dunleavy, Paul Joseph Kelly, Michael Moran. British Political Science: Fifty Years of Political Studies. Oxford, England, UK; Malden, Massachusetts, USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2000. pp. 107–08.
  52. ^ Robert Blake. Disraeli. Second Edition. London, England, UK: Eyre & Spottiswoode (Publishers) Ltd, 1967. p. 524.
  53. ^ Trevor Russel. The Tory Party: its policies, divisions and future. Penguin, 1978. p. 167.
  54. ^ David Marr. "Power Trip: The Political Journey of Kevin Rudd", Issue 38 of Quarterly Essay Series. Black Inc., 2010. p. 126. (British Conservative Party leader David Cameron launched the Progressive Conservatism Project at Demos.)
  55. ^ Ruth Lister. Understanding Theories and Concepts in Social Policy. Bristol, England, UK; Portland, Oregon, USA: The Policy Press, 2010. p. 53.
  56. ^ Emile F. Sahliyeh. Religious resurgence and politics in the contemporary world. Albany, New York, USA: State University of New York Press, 1990. p. 185.
  57. ^ Jonathan Lurie. William Howard Taft: The Travails of a Progressive Conservative. New York, New York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2012. p. ix.
  58. ^ Günter Bischof. "Eisenhower, the Judiciary, and Desegregation" by Stanley I. Kutler, Eisenhower: a centenary assessment. p. 98.
  59. ^ John Alden Nichols. Germany after Bismarck, the Caprivi era, 1890–1894: Issue 5. Harvard University Press, 1958. p. 260.
  60. ^ a b Hugh Segal. The Right Balance. Victoria, British Columbia, Canada: Douglas & McIntyre, 2011. pp. 113–48.
  61. ^ Ware, Alan. Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. ISBN 978-0-19-878076-2, pp. 31–33
  62. ^ Ware, Alan. Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. ISBN 978-0-19-878076-2
  63. ^ Ware, Alan. Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. ISBN 978-0-19-878076-2, p. 44
  64. ^ Flecker, Jörg. Changing working life and the appeal of the extreme right. Hampshire, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2007 ISBN 978-0-7546-4915-1, p. 19
  65. ^ Lewis, Paul G. Political parties in post-communist Eastern Europe. Routledge, 2000. ISBN 978-0-415-20182-7 pp. 54-55
  66. ^ Smith, Denis Mack. Modern Italy: a political history. University of Michigan Press, 1997. ISBN 978-0-472-10895-4 p. 31
  67. ^ Daalder, Hans and Irwin, Galen A. Politics in the Netherlands: how much change? Routledge, 1989. ISBN 07146336 pp. 154-57
  68. ^ Blinkhorn, Martin. Fascists and conservatives. Routledge, 1990. p. 7
  69. ^ Takemae, Eiji, and Ricketts, Robert. The allied occupation of Japan. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003. ISBN 978-0-8264-1521-9 pp. 262–63
  70. ^ Fierlbeck, Katherine. Political thought in Canada: an intellectual history. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. ISBN 978-1-55111-711-9 pp. 87–88
  71. ^ Kirk, Russell. The Conservative Mind. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2001. ISBN 978-0-89526-171-7, 2001. ISBN 978-0-89526-171-7 pp. 6, 63
  72. ^ Middlebrook, Kevin J. Conservative parties, the right, and democracy in Latin America. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000 ISBN 978-0-8018-6386-8 pp. 1-52
  73. ^ Peeler, John A. Latin American Democracies: Colombia, Costa Rica, Venezuela. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1985. p. 79
  74. ^ Oppenheim, Lois Hecht. Politics in Chile: socialism, authoritarianism, and market democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-8133-4227-6 pp. 151–52
  75. ^ Conway, John Frederick. Debts to pay: the future of federalism in Quebec. Toronto: James Lorimer & Company, 2004. ISBN 978-1-55028-814-8 pp. 57, 77
  76. ^ Annesley, Claire. A political and economic dictionary of Western Europe. London: Routledge, 2005. ISBN 978-1-85743-214-5, p. 124
  77. ^ Kornberg, Allan and Mishler, William. Influence in Parliament, Canada. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1976. p. 38
  78. ^ Schultze, Rainer-Olaf; Sturm, Roland and Eberle, Dagmar. Conservative parties and right-wing politics in North America: reaping the benefits of an ideological victory?. Germany: VS Verlag, 2003. ISBN 978-3-8100-3812-8 p. 15
  79. ^ Panizza, Francisco. Populism and the mirror of democracy. London: Verso, 2005. ISBN 978-1-85984-489-2 p. 180
  80. ^ Osterling, p. 180
  81. ^ Annesley, Claire. A political and economic dictionary of Western Europe. London: Routledge, 2005. ISBN 978-1-85743-214-5, p. 68
  82. ^ Siaroff, Alan. Comparative European party systems: an analysis of parliamentary elections since 1945. New York and London: Garland Publishing Inc., 2000. ISBN 978-0-8153-2930-5, p. 243
  83. ^ Viereck, Peter and Ryn, Claes G. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2005. ISBN 978-0-7658-0576-8 p. 205
  84. ^ Ware, Alan. Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. ISBN 978-0-19-878076-2, p. 32
  85. ^ Hauss, Charles. Comparative Politics: Domestic Responses to Global Challenges. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2008. ISBN 978-0-495-50109-1 p. 116
  86. ^ Knapp, Andrew and Wright, Vincent. The government and politics of France. New York: Routledge, 2006. ISBN 978-0-415-35733-3 p. 211
  87. ^ Penniman, Howard Rae. Greece at the polls: the national elections of 1974 and 1977. Washington: American Enterprise Institute, 1981. ISBN 978-0-8447-3434-7 pp. 49–59
  88. ^ Founding Declaration of Independent Greeks
  89. ^ Grofman, Bernard and Lijpart, Arend, editors. The evolution of electoral and party systems in the Nordic countries. New York: Agathon Press, 2002. "The Icelandic electoral system 1844–1999" by Olafur Th. Hardarson ISBN 978-0-87586-138-8, pp. 107–08
  90. ^ Urwin, Derek W. A Dictionary of European History and Politics, 1945-1995. London: Pearson UK, 1996. ISBN 978-0-582-25874-7 p. 76.
  91. ^ Heidar, Knut. Norway: elites on trial. Boulder Westview Press, 2001. ISBN 978-0-8133-3200-0, pp. 66–67
  92. ^ Francis Sejersted Høyrebølgen Store norske leksikon. Retrieved 18 December 2013 (Norwegian)
  93. ^ Grofman, Bernard and Lijpart, Arend, editors. The evolution of electoral and party systems in the Nordic countries. New York: Agathon Press, 2002. "The Icelandic electoral system 1844-1999" by Olafur Th. Hardarson ISBN 978-0-87586-138-8, pp. 107–235
  94. ^ Thomas, Clive S. (editor). Political Parties and Interest Groups: Shaping Democratic Governance. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2001. ISBN 978-1-55587-978-5 "Sweden: Weakening Links Between Political Parties and Interest Organizations" by Anders Widfeldt
  95. ^ Ziebertz, Hans-Georg (2011). How Teachers in Europe Teach Religion: An International Empirical Study: An International Empirical Study in 16 Countries. Lit Verlag. p. 237. ISBN 978-3-643-10043-6. 
  96. ^ Juravich, Tom (2000). Ravenswood: The Steelworkers' Victory and the Revival of American Labor. Cornell University Press. p. 133. ISBN 978-0-8014-8666-1. 
  97. ^ a b Schwok, René (2009). SWITZERLAND – EUROPEAN UNION: AN IMPOSSIBLE MEMBERSHIP?. Peter Lang. p. 143. ISBN 978-90-5201-576-7. 
  98. ^ Siaroff, Alan Comparative European Party Systems. New York: Garland, 2000. ISBN 0-8153-2930-X p. 446
  99. ^ The Stephen Roth Institute. Anti-semitism worldwide Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2002 ISBN 0-8032-5943-3 p. 120
  100. ^ Hainsworth, pp. 44, 74
  101. ^ Worthington, Glen, Conservatism in Australian National Politics, Parliament of Australia Parliamentary Library, 19 February 2002
  102. ^ a b c Davies, Stephen, Margaret Thatcher and the Rebirth of Conservatism, Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs, July 1993
  103. ^ Winthrop and Lovell, pp. 163–66
  104. ^ Barns, Greg. Wanted:genuine liberal party for political scene. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation 2011
  105. ^ Barns, Greg (15 November 2011). "Wanted: genuine liberal party for political scene". Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 29 March 2013. 
  106. ^ After Howard's decade is Australia more conservative? Australian Review of Public Affairs Gabrielle Meagher and Shaun Wilson
  107. ^ David Mosler; Robert Catley (1998). America and Americans in Australia. p. 83. ISBN 9780275962524. 
  108. ^ James Jupp (2004). The English in Australia. p. 172. ISBN 9780521542951. 
  109. ^ Leo P. Ribuffo, "20 Suggestions for Studying the Right now that Studying the Right is Trendy," Historically Speaking Jan 2011 v.12#1 pp. 2–6, quote on p. 6
  110. ^ Kari Frederickson, The Dixicrat Revolt and the End of the Solid South, 1932–1968, p. 12, "...conservative southern Democrats viewed warily the potential of New Deal programs to threaten the region's economic dependence on cheap labor while stirring the democratic ambitions of the disfranchised and undermining white supremacy.", The University of North Carolina Press, 2000, ISBN 978-0-8078-4910-1
  111. ^ Cal Jillson (22 February 2011). Texas Politics: Governing the Lone Star State. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780203829417. Retrieved 19 January 2012. "Social conservatives focus on moral or values issues, such as abortion, marriage, school prayer, and judicial appointments." 
  112. ^ Bruce Frohnen, ed. American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia (2006) pp. ix–xiv
  113. ^ Michael Foley (25 October 2007). American credo: the place of ideas in US politics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780191528330. Retrieved 18 January 2012. "Against accusations of being pre-modern or even anti-modern in outlook, paleoconservatives press for restrictions on immigration, a rollback of multicultural programmes, the decentralization of the federal polity, the restoration of controls upon free trade, a greater emphasis upon economic nationalism and isolationism in the conduct of American foreign policy, and a generally revanchist outlook upon a social order in need of recovering old lines of distinction and in particular the assignment of roles in accordance with traditional categories of gender, ethnicity, and race." 
  114. ^ Paul Edward Gottfried, Conservatism in America: Making Sense of the American Right, p. 9, "Postwar conservatives set about creating their own synthesis of free-market capitalism, Christian morality, and the global struggle against Communism." (2009); Gottfried, Theologies and moral concern (1995) p. 12
  115. ^ Peter J. Jacques; Riley E. Dunlap; Mark Freeman, The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism, Environmental Politics. v12 m3 (2008), pp. 349–85
  116. ^ Theda Skocpol and Vanessa Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism (2012) pp. 45–82
  117. ^ "Katie Couric interviews Tea Party Leaders", CBS News, January 25, 2010.
  118. ^ a b Jost, J.J, Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A.A., & Sulloway, F.J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–75.
  119. ^ Wilson, G.D. (Ed.)(1973) The Psychology of Conservatism, London: Academic Press.
  120. ^ Berkeley.edu
  121. ^ Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
  122. ^ Rubinstein, G. (1996). "Two Peoples in One Land: A Validation Study of Altemeyer's Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale in the Palestinian and Jewish Societies in Israel". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 27 (2): 216–30. doi:10.1177/0022022196272005. 
  123. ^ Crowson, H. Michael, Stephen J. Thoma, and Nita Hestevold. "Is political conservatism synonymous with authoritarianism?." The Journal of Social Psychology 145.5 (Oct 2005): 571(22). Expanded Academic ASAP. Gale. Remote Access. 20 May 2009 Galegroup.com
  124. ^ Pratto, Felicia; Sidanius, Jim; Stallworth, Lisa M.; Malle, Bertram F. (1994). "Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67 (4): 741–63. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741. 
  125. ^ The psychology of stereotyping, David J. Schneider, Guilford Press, 2005 ISBN 978-1-59385-193-4, ISBN 978-1-59385-193-4. p. 275
  126. ^ The Social science encyclopedia, Jessica Kuper, Taylor & Francis, 1985 ISBN 978-0-7102-0008-2, ISBN 978-0-7102-0008-2. pp. 155–56
  127. ^ Sidanius, J; Pratto, F; Bobo, L (1996). "Racism, conservatism, affirmative action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance?" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (3): 476–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.476. 
  128. ^ Napier, J. L.; Jost, J. T. (2008). "Why Are Conservatives Happier Than Liberals?". Psychological Science 19 (6): 565–572. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02124.x. PMID 18578846. 

References[edit]

  • Eccleshall, Robert. English Conservatism since the Restoration: An Introduction and Anthology. London: Unwin Hyman, 1990 ISBN 978-0-04-445346-8
  • Hainsworth, Paul. The extreme right in Western Europe, Abingdon, OXON: Routledge, 2008 ISBN 0-415-39682-4
  • Osterling, Jorge P. Democracy in Colombia: Clientelist Politics and Guerrilla Warfare. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1989 ISBN 0887382290, 9780887382291
  • Winthrop, Norman and Lovell, David W. "Varieties of Conservative Theory". In Winthrop, Norman. Liberal Democratic Theory and Its Critics. Beckenham, Kent: Croom Helm Ltd., 1983 ISBN 0-7099-2766-5, 9780709927662

Further reading[edit]

  • Blee, Kathleen M., and Sandra McGee Deutsch, eds. Women of the Right: Comparisons and Interplay Across Borders (Penn State University Press; 2012) 312 pages; scholarly essays giving a global perspective on women in right-wing politics.
  • Theodore Dalrymple. Our Culture, What's Left of It: the Mandarins and the masses /, 2005
  • Blinkhorn, Martin. Fascists and conservatives : the radical right and the establishment in twentieth-century Europe / 1990
  • Crunden, Robert Crunden. The Superfluous Men: Critics of American Culture, 1900–1945 1999
  • Fryer., Russell G. Recent conservative political thought : American perspectives 1979
  • The Conservative Movement / Paul E. Gottfried., 1993
  • The British Right : Conservative and right wing politics in Britain / Neill Nugent., 1977
  • America alone: the neo-conservatives and the global order / Stefan A. Halper., 2004
  • Conservatism / Ted Honderich.
  • The Conservative Mind / Russell Kirk., 2001
  • The Politics of Prudence / Russell Kirk., 1993
  • The conservative press in twentieth-century America / Ronald Lora., 1999
  • From the New Deal to the New Right: race and the southern origins of modern conservatism / Joseph E. Lowndes., 2008
  • Conservatism / Jerry Z. Muller.
  • Right-wing women: from conservatives to extremists around the world / P. Bacchetta., 2002
  • Unmaking law: the Conservative campaign to roll back the common law / Jay M. Feinman., 2004
  • Radicals or conservatives?: the contemporary American right / James McEvoy., 1971
  • Conservatism: Dream and Reality / Robert Nisbet., 2001
  • Ought the Neo-Cons be Considered Conservatives?: a philosophical response / AQ: Journal of Contemporary Analysis. 75(6):32–33/40. 2003
  • Conservatism / Noel O'Sullivan.
  • The new racism : conservatives and the ideology of the tribe / Martin Barker., 1982
  • A time for choosing: the rise of modern American conservatism / Jonathan M. Schoenwald., 2001
  • The Meaning of Conservatism / Roger Scruton.
  • Facing fascism: the conservative party and the European dictators, 1935–1940 / N. J. Crowson., 1997
  • The End of Politics: triangulation, realignment and the battle for the center ground / Alexander Lee and Timothy Stanley., 2006

Primary sources[edit]

  • Schneider, ed. Conservatism in America since 1930: a reader (2003)
  • Witonski, Peter, ed. The wisdom of conservatism (4 vol. Arlington House, 1971) 2396 pages)

Online sources[edit]

External links[edit]