Michael Oakeshott

who the heck is he?

Oakeshott was a political philosopher

lived between 1901-1990

influential figure in the movement of ‘one nation Conservatism’

definition of rationalist politics

politics based on abstract principles and systems of ideological thought

definition of pragmatism

making flexible political decisions based on what we know already works

what was the context of Oakeshott’s thinking

• post war Britain is dominated by ‘big government’ politics

• The Atlee led labour government were focused on a social democracy characterised by mixed economy and a welfare state

  • e.g. establishment of NHS in 1948, nationalisation of key industry like coal, and the bank of England

• there had been a number of brutal fascist regimes in the 20th century

  • Mussolini, Hitler, Franco

• Oakeshott opposed teleocratic governments that were prominent at the time - believing it was dangerous to act on an artificial ideology rather than experience of government

what is the conservative disposition as argued in ‘On Being Conservative’ (1956)

‘prefer the familiar to the unknown, the tried to the untried, the present laughter to utopian bliss.”

key work: 1956

On Being conservative

• wanted a more positive view on conservatism - to prove it wasn’t just an opposition to change and an entrenchment in the ways of the past

• Oakeshott defines conservatism as a disposition rather than an ideology

• he emphasises that being conservative is valuing tradition and gradual change over radical reform

• politics should be about navigating change rather than aiming for a destination

  • this is because he believed humans were not capable of a perfect society - ‘humans are fallible, but not terrible’

Oakeshott’s view on human nature

humans are fallible but not terrible

we are incapable of a perfect society - but we can still create a pretty decent one through gradual changes

this opposes the pessimistic view of Thomas Hobbes who believed humans needed to be controlled as much as possible to avoid ‘a state in constant fear of war’

this aligns with Burke who agreed with the liberals that humans have natural rights - but that defining of solidifying these rights would create a disaster of abstraction - instead believing the government should work to maintain human dignity where possible

oppositions to Oakeshott’s thinking

lots of critics from the new right

Nozick said that the ‘Oakeshott mentality’ was lazy as the lack of desire for active progression was fatalist and made way for the expansion of socialist thought in late 20th century

where does Oakeshott differ from Burke’s thinking

Oakeshott’s ideas do not align with Burke’s localism as he is concerned less with detail social structures, and more on the attitude behind political decision making

• this could stem from the fact that Oakeshott was a philosopher and Burke a politician