To what extent do conservatives agree on the importance of paternalism?

Point 1 State- a duty to care + natural hierarchy

Agreement: One nation and Traditional conservatives are generally united on the belief that paternalism and the view in noblesse oblige requires the exercising of state sponsored social reform which is necessary in order to elevate the conditions of the people- Factory act 1874- DISRAELI influenced partly by ideas of

BURKE- little platoons ruled by the natural elites amongst society- must intervene in order to extend their duty of care . The ruling class are duty bound to care for those below them- without such a responsibility towards the poor their and society is put in jeopardy and the two nation problem will arise.

One nation conservatives exercise this principle today- DAVID CAMERON'S emphasis on a ‘Big society’ introduced a national citizenship qualification acknowledging the importance of our shared membership of society - Johnsons levelling up scheme- creating opportunities for everyone across the UK

P2-Agreement:  Furthermore traditional and one nation conservatives are in general agreement about the part paternalism plays in the economy.

Justifying the view that in some cases intervention is needed- all value the free market and laissez faire economics but with some management as to not cause radical change- undermines the idea of tradition- skepitcal about free market economic.

As OAKESHOTT argues the free market is the natural state of the market, state involvement should be limited to pragmatic moderation- in more recent times one nationism has become sympathetic to the idea of state involvement in the economy in order to extend paternalistic values of duty to care- 2016 chancellor of the exchequer

OSBORNE introduced a national living wage which by 2020 should have risen to 60% of median earnings representing significant economic intervention to protect interests of the poorest

Point 3- State- a duty to care

 

Disagreement: Conservatives differ on how far paternalism should be extended via the state, and their interpretations of paternalism in this context. For instance traditional conservatives such as

Hobbes understand paternalism as an authoritarian approach, the state knows what is best so the people must do what they are told by contrast one nation conservatives argue paternalism is an obligation on the wealthy to look after those who are unable to look after themselves. Oakeshott for instance emphasises this.

 

 New right- altruism through noblesse oblige creates an artificial sense of obligation and is not compliant with rational self-interest. Humans only moral purpose is objectivism through the pursuit of individual happiness and self-fulfilment in order to thrive in society- RAND.

People will become hopelessly dependent on the state and the societal obligations of traditional conservatism will be completely forgotten- State must permit 'self-ownership' so that humans can realise full potential - 'no more state extensive than a minimal state can be justified'

NOZICK Whilst new right respect that there must exist some state intervention they wish to narrow the parameters and scale of assistance rather than extend them

Point 4- natural hierachy

Disagreement: New right conservatives reject the idea of a natural hierarchy in which an aristocratic government rules, this is due to their belief in meritocracy- our social position should be determined by merit in a free market society not our heritage.

Lazy people slither into poverty and skillfull, energetic individuals are rewarded with wealth and social status- rugged individualism- RAND atomistic individuals- society therefore does not need a natural hierachy