The Definition Of Conservatism And The Language Of Political Identity
By Hans Zeiger (01/05/03)
From time to time, I have heard the question: does political philosophy match the tag often placed upon it by the contemporary lexicon? Are conservatism and liberalism the appropriate words for the beliefs with which they are associated? My answer is yes, with a few exceptions. Yes, I am generally satisfied with the descriptions of political identity commonly applied in America. In other words, I am a conservative consistent with the timeless definition of conservative. My liberal friends are likewise liberal consistent with the timeless definition of liberal.
Allow me to define the two competing political philosophies. Conservatism is the belief that the moral values of an inevitably flawed society should be preserved and individuals should take responsibility for their lives and their government because they are accountable to God. Liberalism is the belief that the moral values of a perfectible society should be changed and the state should take responsibility for its people because it is accountable to the progress of humanity. Again, I believe these descriptions are appropriate for American political philosophy today.
I am a conservative because I believe in God, because I believe that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, and because I believe we must work within the framework of human nature to address realistic issues of order and liberty. Russell Kirk explained conservatism as "a way of looking at the civil social order." For the conservative, he said, politics is the art of the possible, not the art of the ideal. Though issues and circumstances change, conservatism remains a consistent and salient way of looking at the civil social order.
There is nothing truly to be ashamed of in our title, so our objective must not be to find a new one, but to undermine the false connotations of the current one. The current name for our moral beliefs has not changed since Edmund Burke first coordinated the conservative movement of the West. Therefore, let me explain the exception to my identification with the title of conservative. Our hurdle in the title of conservative is not that it is intrinsically misapplied when it is defined as I have defined it. The challenge is that the perception of the masses is tainted by recent political misassociations and misdefinitions orchestrated by the Left. We must seek to reform the culture of false connections that causes many conservatives in our country to label themselves "independents."
What false connections are associated with conservatism? Primarily, the "extreme Right" of Nazis, skinheads, Klansmen, and others are all too often seen as bearing close resemblance to the position of conservatism. But consider Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party in light of my definitions above. Was Hitler a conservative who believed that the moral framework of society must be preserved and that individuals are accountable to God? Or did he believe that society was perfectible, should be changed, and that the state is accountable to the progress of humanity. The answer is, Nazism was clearly and prolifically a liberal ideology. F.A. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom makes abundantly obvious that Hitler was a socialist and aimed at the overthrow of traditional society. Hitler viewed politics as the limitless art of the ideal.
On the other hand, consider a concept that is improperly associated with liberalism by some people. It is true that revolutions are, in most any case, liberal. Marx, Lenin, Rousseau, Castro, and Mao regarded politics as the art of the ideal when they waged utopian revolution against the moral foundations of their respective societies. Liberal historians like to claim that the Founding Fathers were liberal because they fought the American Revolution. Yet in reality, the war between the colonies and Great Britain is more appropriately dubbed the War for Independence, because it shares none of the characteristics of the French Revolution, the Bolshevik Revolution, or any other utopian revolution. If it was a revolution at all, it was a conservative revolution that is limited to the transfer of political authority only. It was conservative because it sought to preserve the fundamental framework of society that had existed since the Puritans had championed self-government in the early seventeenth century. Every element of conservatism, as I have defined it, was present in the American War for Independence.
Some on the Right have maintained for years that conservatism is classically liberal, that it must reclaim the language of political identity from the Left. "We are the true liberals," say some conservatives. And perhaps as a complementary economic philosophy, classic liberalism still applies to conservatism. The flaw in classic liberalism as a primary ideology is that it prioritizes the economic issues of profit and property. Classic liberalism has been inherited primarily by the libertarians who make one concession on principle that conservatives do not: they concede that society and mankind is perfectible. Conservatism, on the other hand, is necessarily based on issues of life and of moral value. Libertarians and conservatives often associate because they agree about the free market, but conservatives fully recognize the need for moral order in society. Therefore, conservatism remains the only philosophy consistent with a balance between liberty and order.
Yet conservatism is more than a label; it is a political and moral worldview. It is an intellectual movement that must not lose its intellect. "In the face of questioning classes," wrote Walter Bagehot, "every unthinking conservative endangers what he defends – he is a vexation to the liberal, and a misfortune to his country."
Conservatives have a burden in the lexicon wars. That is, we must first maintain ourselves as an intellectual movement. And second, we must reclaim the control of the culture from the Left. We have allowed them to control the institutions that relay a false perception of conservative principles and positions to the American public, and that is the real problem we face.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Hans Zeiger
