Week 3 - Notes on Conservatism—Key Concepts, Varieties, and Scholarly Sources (Bullet Points)
Administrative context and exam approach
Instructor emphasizes you won’t be required to memorize dates, people, or quotations unless explicitly pointed out as important.
Emphasis on understanding and interpreting ideas over rote memorization.
If a specific name or date is mentioned with a directive like “know this,” then it’s worth memorizing; otherwise, focus on concepts and explanations.
Papers will build on initial topics; students are encouraged to start early if a topic appeals to them.
Two parts of the exam/papers: summarize concepts and analyze ideas (not just define terms).
For questions about liberalism vs conservatism, expect analytical questions rather than pure definitions.
Occasional tangents (e.g., sports) happen; the instructor will return to substantive content.
Core aim of today’s lecture on conservatism
Conservatism is often treated as an ideology, but some conservatives resist labeling it as such; still, it functions as a coherent political ideology.
Conservatism originated as a reaction to the political, social, and economic changes of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Historical context: late 18th–19th century transformation includes capitalism, rise of classical liberalism, emergence of socialism and nationalism; conservatives defended an older social order.
Conservatism shares a through line with other ideologies: a pattern of change vs. continuity and defense of established institutions.
Key contrasts and starting patterns
Liberalism (last week) aimed to change power structures by moving toward liberal democracy and middle-class power.
Conservatism defends an embattled social order, resisting radical change.
Conservatism is not monolithic; it includes multiple strands that share core themes but differ in emphasis and strategy.
Neoliberalism later becomes a dominant thread within conservatism, reshaping its stance on markets and the welfare state.
Major themes in conservatism
Tradition as a core value
Human imperfection and skepticism about human rationality
Social order and authority as essential to stability
Private property as both a material and moral pillar
The organic view of society vs. the mechanical view
Hierarchy and inequality as natural and potentially justifiable
The balance between freedom and social obligation
Tradition and the defense of the old
Tradition encompasses customs, institutions, values passed down through generations.
For many conservatives, tradition provides identity and social cohesion and acts as a bulwark against uncertainty.
Burke’s view: society is a partnership between the living, the dead, and those yet to be born.
Change is acceptable only if it serves to conserve or strengthen the enduring social order; the slogan is often summarized as “change in order to conserve.”
Human imperfection and the limits of reason
Conservatives reject the idea that humans are inherently good or can be perfectly improved by changing social conditions alone.
Humans are
imperfect and imperfectible
intellectually limited and prone to unforeseen consequences of actions
fearful of isolation; seek security and belonging within social order
Consequently, strong deterrence and social institutions are favored to maintain order and prevent anti-social behavior.
Social order, authority, and the organic city
Freedom is understood in relation to duties and social obligations, not merely as negative freedom from government.
Society is often described as an organism, where each part (family, church, voluntary associations) sustains the whole; removing or weakening one part can destabilize the entire system.
In contrast, liberal and socialist views tend to see society as a machine or a construct shaped by individuals and planning, thus more easily rearranged.
Conservatives emphasize that authority arises naturally from social institutions (schools, families, employers, churches) and should be exercised within limits to protect the social organism.
Private property and its moral role
Property is central to conservative thought; it provides security and a sense of responsibility.
Property ownership fosters respect for others’ property and supports social stability.
While conservatives support property rights, they also emphasize duties and the obligation to preserve wealth for future generations (social bonds across generations).
The idea is that wealth and property create social order, not just personal gain.
Freedom, security, and the limits of reform
Conservatives often favor stability and predictability over rapid reform.
They worry that rapid changes can produce more suffering than reform and may erode social cohesion.
The belief in order can lead to support for strong criminal justice policies and a robust state presence when needed to deter crime, while still valuing tradition.
Authority and its legitimate scope
Authority is viewed as necessary and beneficial when exercised within natural limits and distributed to avoid tyranny (e.g., Burke’s idea of diffusion of power via little platoons).
Conservatives reject the liberal idea that authority rises purely from social contracts among free individuals; instead, authority is rooted in history, tradition, and social institutions.
In some strands, authority can become absolute or authoritarian, especially in neoconservative or populist forms, but traditional conservatism stresses disciplined, limited authority.
A skeptical stance toward abstract theories
Conservatives distrust grand, abstract systems that claim to explain or redesign society; they favor practical, tested, tradition-based knowledge.
They often prefer gradual reform over sweeping ideological revolutions.
Varieties of conservatism (narrative map)
Burkean/traditional conservatism (often called Toryism in some contexts)
Disraeli and the aristocratic–popular alliance (the “little platoons” and social obligation)
Keynesian-conservative (Toryism in the mid-20th century): acceptance of some welfare-state measures and managed economics
Neoliberalism (market-based conservatism): privatization, deregulation, market discipline, shrinking the state
Neoconservatism: emphasis on social order, traditional values, and national identity; stronger stance on immigration and public morality
Authoritarian populist conservatism: strong-man leadership, nationalism, media control, xenophobia; a more aggressive form of social control
Burke and traditional conservatism
Edmund Burke is central to understanding conservatism's intellectual roots.
Burke argued for thoughtful, cautious change to preserve political and social order.
He supported a representative government but warned against concentrating power; favored a natural aristocracy as a stabilizing force.
He valued private property and argued that the distribution of power among families, churches, and voluntary associations prevents centralized tyranny (the “little platoons”).
Burke’s approach emphasizes localism: address local concerns at the local level and resist over-centralization of power.
Disraeli and Toryism
Disraeli linked conservatism to the needs of a changing industrial society, arguing for social reform and the duties of the powerful to the less fortunate.
He proposed an alliance between the aristocracy and the working class to prevent revolutionary change driven by the middle class.
The idea of the upper class’s obligation to the poor becomes a cornerstone of Tory conservatism.
This form of conservatism blends respect for tradition with pragmatic social reform; it sought to stabilize society by addressing worsening conditions while preserving order.
The mid-20th century: Toryism and Keynesian social democracy
In the 1950s–60s, conservative parties in the UK and Canada often aligned with Keynesian welfare-state policies, presenting as a moderate middle between laissez-faire liberalism and socialist planning.
This phase shows conservatism’s capacity to adapt to new socio-economic realities rather than reject reform outright.
Neoliberalism and the emergence of market-based conservatism
Neoliberalism is a radical form of conservatism focused on free markets, privatization, and a limited state.
Core idea: private goods are preferred, public goods and state action are constrained; negative freedom (freedom from external restraint) is central to policy.
Neoliberalism is linked to classical liberal roots (free market, individual autonomy) but is integrated within conservative political movements.
Thatcher (UK) and Reagan (US) are emblematic: promoted privatization, deregulation, and rolling back the welfare state, leading to broader neoliberal influence globally.
Neoliberalism vs neoconservatism
Neoliberalism: market freedom, ample use of private property, reduction of state intervention; faith in market mechanisms to discipline social activity; distrust of centralized planning.
Neoconservatism: combines neoliberal economic policies with a strong emphasis on social order, public morality, and national identity; often supports immigration controls and cultural conservatism.
Both share a skepticism toward expansive welfare states but differ in their emphasis on social order and morality.
Authoritarian conservatism and populist strands
Some modern conservatism blends traditional themes with authoritarian tendencies, including a belief in a strong centralized leadership, order, and national identity.
Authoritarian populism features strong-man leaders, vilified enemies, and an appeal to popular sovereignty while undermining liberal democratic norms.
Examples cited include figures like Trump (US), Le Pen (France), Farage (UK), Modi (India), Erdogan (Turkey).
This strand presents a shift away from older, institutionally constrained conservatism toward direct, forceful governance in the name of national unity and cultural cohesion.
Conservatism in Canada and the United States: historical arcs
Canada: Tory/conservative traditions dominated much of the country’s history; shift toward neoliberal policies from the 1980s onward, but pockets of traditional Tories remain (e.g., Atlantic Canada).
United States: minimal acceptance of conservatism until 1964, when Barry Goldwater presented a clearly conservative presidential bid; the movement accelerated through the 1980s under Reagan; Thatcherism/ Reaganomics popularized; neoliberalism became dominant in many liberal democracies.
Distinguishing features within conservatism
Natural hierarchy and suspicion of social equality: inequality is seen as natural and not inherently unjust; rights are balanced by duties and social responsibilities.
Social responsibilities of wealth: the wealthy have duties to the less advantaged; wealth distribution is not automatically seen as unjust if it serves social stability and obligation.
The conservative view of human beings: capable of fear and error; social arrangements help mitigate risk and provide security.
The balance between tradition, order, and reform: reform is acceptable when it preserves social cohesion and continuity.
The rhetoric of tradition and the fear of breakdown: strong emphasis on preserving inherited institutions against revolutionary change.
The paper assignment and scholarly sources
Students must consult two scholarly sources in addition to the lecture material and readings.
Scholarly sources are typically peer-reviewed and published in academic journals or by university presses.
Do not rely on Google Scholar for peer-review verification; use library databases and set filters to peer-reviewed sources.
Practical library guidance: search the McMaster library, then filter to peer-reviewed results; this ensures credible scholarly sources.
The assignment expects integration of lecture content, readings, and two scholarly sources to support arguments.
Questions and study cues for the exam
With neoliberalism as the dominant ideological force today, is there a meaningful difference between conservatism and liberalism?
How do the notions of tradition and social order shape conservative attitudes toward freedom and equality?
How do Burkean ideas of the little platoons and natural aristocracy differ from Marxist or liberal views of power distribution?
When is reform acceptable to conservatives, and how does this differ from liberal reformism?
What are the distinguishing features of neoconservatism and neoliberalism, and how do they interact in contemporary politics?
Key dates and numerical references (for quick reference)
Key historical periods and markers referencing conservatism and its shifts:
: US shift to a clearly conservative electable candidate (Goldwater).
: conservative takeover in the US (Reagan) and UK (Thatcher) with neoliberal reforms.
to : Canadian Conservative Party used the label progressive conservatism for a period; later shifts toward neoliberalism.
and : references to shifts toward authoritarian populism and neoliberalism in various contexts.
Final takeaway for study planning
Focus on core themes: tradition, human imperfection, social order, authority, private property, and the organic view of society.
Understand the spectrum of conservatism from Burkean traditionalism to neoliberal and neoconservative/more authoritarian tendencies.
Be able to compare conservatism with liberalism and socialism in terms of change, power, and how society should be organized.
For papers, integrate two scholarly sources from peer-reviewed sources and connect to lecture themes and course readings.
Practice explaining how a single term like “tradition” or “authority” can take different meanings across conservative traditions and historical periods.