Is conservatism a political philosophy derived from fear?
|
There's a pretty big difference between the philosophy of conservatism compared to the Bush Administration, which is where I assume the "fear" implication comes from. The truth of the matter is that the current philosophy being followed in Washington isn't really conservatism in it's truest sense. For example, conservatives tend to favour minuscule government spending, whereas the Bush Administration spends like no other. The philosophy in Washington is different enough that is has been labeled with it's own name: Neo-conservatism. Both liberals and conservatives, and everyone in between, are just ignorant to some certain extent. Even this question shows a lack of understanding. As I see it, we are all looking for the same destination, but taking different routes to get there. That destination is peace and prosperity (with whatever you wish to prosper). The liberals might think that peace and prosperity are human nature, and the conservatives might think, in order to have peace with so many people around you have to stabilize society, even if you do it by force. Liberals, on the left, are more open to change, and this might be because their world view is polarized. Hell, if you think about it, you could probably build a better case as to say that liberals are more afraid than republicans. On the far left you have people thinking that the world will end soon, that the governing body of any nation consists of ancient shape-shifting reptilians from another dimension that control the population via mind control and fear, alien abductions and so on. Then, on the right, we have people with a more "practical" world view, but that is highly religious and is disturbed when you interrupt their normal way of things, which is to say, they don't welcome change. This might make them seem "afraid" of change, but in reality, how do you know the difference between someone fearing change and bluffing, and someone who is authentically annoyed by change? It would be difficult. On both sides you have fear because it's a human emotion. Dread, worry, fear and doubt. How can one in this age not feel these things when it comes to politics. These politicians are so far away and doing things that we didn't think they had the power to do, and no matter how we protest and no matter how many people we talk to, it doesn't seem to change... it's like, the only way to change things is to go through everything that these politicians have went through, and perhaps come to the end when you realize you've been corrupted somewhere down the line and now you're just as bad as the person you've searched to correct. I'm not talking about the typical conservatives though, or the typical liberals, I'm talking about the people who actually know why they are one over the other and have considered both views and know the goods and bads about each. Like I said, they are just different roads to peace, one is less confrontational and likes to go with the flow, and the other is more confrontational and demands order. I think if you're looking for peace in the real world, you have to be a little of both. What is the same destination we are seeking? I see it as a process not a destination, and its the process I address with the question above. I find it interesting you think it a lack of understanding. I think you walk a fence actually. How is a Liberal world view more polarized than a conservative? Where on the far left do they think the world will end soon? heh. You obviously are answering from an uninformed bias. But that's okay. I'm not sure the history of a "conservative philosophical" outlook or party has shown it to be "practical" Conservatiism by definition is "a political or theological orientation advocating the preservation of the best in society and opposing radical changes" and why I ask is because of the portions of the definition "preservation" and "opposing radical change". Opposing radical change, if fear had been followed...would have kept women from the voting booths, many men in slavery, and really from the US from ever coming into being. While fear is a human emotion not everyone is motivated by it, or has it as a root of their philosophy. I agree with you however about the difficulty in believing in people in politics these days...or possibly ever. Chasing power in the ways that they do, one must wonder if corruption on some level is inevitable. I think demanding order in a chaotic world suggests fear of that chaos...while going with the flow does not. But yes it's often about balance...although that was not my question. Limited government suggests fear of being controlled. Keeping Traditions alive suggests desire for sameness or fear of the new. While neither is necessarily wrong to have or want, both have fear as one of its roots. I suppose I also asked the question because so much of the current administration has run on "fear" but largely because the majority of individuals I've met that call themselves conservatives come off as reacting to politics in ways that seem steeped in fear. Still...thank you all for your responses. 0
points
No. I don't know how it would be. Conservatives (typically) like limited government interference and traditional values. The former is for philosophical as well as feasibility reasons, whereas the latter is (whether you agree with it or not) equally as valid as nontraditional beliefs. The only difference there is that traditional came first chronologically, hence "tradition". |
