Owing to their negative belief that humans are morally corrupt and crave “power after power” according to Thomas Hobbes, Conservatives have traditionally supported tough law and order policies to ensure social stability. They believe that crime is a consequence of basic human instinct and appetite, rather than a product of social inequality or disadvantage. The maintenance of order and stability in society therefore requires a strong state and the enforcement of strict laws backed up with the knowledge that harsh punishments will ensue. The Conservative party’s emphasis on custodial punishments and long prison sentences largely reflects this view and explain “tough” policies adopted by Conservative governments, for example John Major’s support for US style “boot camps” for young offenders. A firm belief in respect for authority as a means of achieving stability within society thus naturally follows. Conservatives hold that authority is best exercised from the top downwards, thus providing leadership, guidance and support for those who lack the necessary education, experience and knowledge to govern their own lives prudently. They dismiss the idea of social equality since a “natural aristocracy” emerges from the different roles and functions each social class plays within society. Respect for authority is therefore essential for the achievement of social cohesion as it gives individuals a clear idea of where they stand in society and what is expected from them. The neo-conservative belief in the importance of “family values” reflects this principle, since the family is seen as to be naturally hierarchical: children should respect the authority of their parents, and wives should respect the authority of their husbands as the provider. Should these authority relationships be weakened, children will be brought up lacking a set of decent moral values and respect for their elders.
Given the naturally unequal state of society, hierarchy inevitably follows. Gradation of social status reflects different responsibilities held by different classes and individuals, for example managers and workers, teachers and pupils, children and parents. Nevertheless, despite society’s inherent social inequality and hierarchy, this does not necessarily give rise to conflict and social unrest, since society is bound together by mutual obligations and duties. For example, although the working class do not enjoy the same standard of living as their employers, they do not have the livelihood and security of many other people resting on their shoulders. Freedom thus demands a willingness to accept ones social obligations and ties. Where a parent instructs their child how to behave, for instance, they are not infringing their liberty, but providing guidance for the benefit of their child.
Arising from the principles of organicism, hierarchy and duty is a belief in paternalism, which can be traced back to the writings of Benjamin Disraeli. In a climate of growing industrialisation, economic inequality and revolutionary upheaval in continental Europe, Disraeli warned against the dangers of Britain becoming divided into two nations: the Rich and the Poor, He feared that an oppressed working class would not simply accept their pitiable existence, but revolt in the hope of bringing about change in their interests. Disraeli therefore urged the privileged that reform from above was more favourable than revolution from below, thereby stressing that wealth brought responsibility towards those less fortunate. He appealed to the principles of duty and social obligation manifested in the feudal principle of ‘noblesse oblige’, the idea that the aristocracy should be honourable and generous. Duty is thus the price of privilege; the privileged must look after the poor in the interests of maintaining social stability and preventing revolution. Disraeli was thus responsible for the Social Reform Act of 1867, which extended the right to vote to the working-class. This policy became known as “one-nation conservatism” and is primarily concerned with the amelioration of the conditions of the less well-off in order to remove the threat of revolution to social order and stability. As a part of this ambition, Disraeli also advanced the concept of “jingoism” in order to unite the British people in their enthusiasm and celebration as England progressed successfully in the “scramble for Africa” between other European nations, thus expanding her empire and gaining national glory.
In terms of economics, traditional conservative thought is less clear. While there are many contradictions, an essentially pragmatic attitude towards the economy appears most prevalent. This is perhaps best displayed by Harold Macmillan’s “middle way” policies, which were designed to combine the extremes of laissez-faire liberalism and socialist state planning. He advocated what he called “planned capitalism” which he described as a “mixed system which combines state ownership, regulation or control of certain aspects of economic activity with the drive and initiative of private enterprise”. It was thus seen to provide “private enterprise without selfishness” and sought to ensure both economic freedom and social stability. Yet, believing that a truly free market is vulnerable to change and could result it economic and social instability, an acceptance of some state control in the economy was recognised. Thus, between 1940-1970 Conservatives adopted Keynesian economic theories, which advocate “injection’ of money into the economy by the government so as to enable them to “manage” their economies by influencing the level of aggregate demand. Keynesianism is thus concerned more with economic stability, which is thought to be threatened by the free market, often at the expense of economic freedom. Similarly, many Christian Democrat Parties, most notably the German Christian Democrats, supported the idea of “social market economy”. This concept embraces the idea of a free market, highlighting the importance of private enterprise and competition, but also promotes social values believing that profit gained should be employed to benefit wider society. Government intervention is thus required to ensure a degree of protection. Such thinking is known as “social capitalism”.
Yet, the 1970s marked a shift in conservative economic thinking. Emergent New Right economic ideas were largely based on classical liberal principles advocating a form of negative freedom in terms of economics. New Right theorists were deeply committed to the free market believing it to be the central nervous system of the economy. In this way, New Right advocates strongly opposed such mixed economies, which according to them, sap initiative and discourage enterprise. In order to “roll back the frontiers of the state”, conservative governments, most notably that of Margaret Thatcher, set about privatising previously owned state industries to deliver growth, efficiency and widespread prosperity. Furthermore, the New Right largely criticised Keynesianism for fuelling inflation and causing the “stagflation” of the 1970s, as well as for provoking many social problems such as the decline in respect for authority. Policies such as monetarism were thus implemented to keep interest rates low to allow for economic growth even at the expense of high unemployment, which caused much social discontentment during Thatcher’s premiership.
The New Right’s commitment to ‘rolling back the state” in order to promote economic freedom also meant curbing the welfare state, which was criticised for having created a “culture of dependency”. The New Right advanced a form of individualism, expressed most clearly in Margaret Thatcher’s assertion that “there is no such thing as society, only individuals and their families”, and revived ideas of self-help and individual responsibility. The Victorian era was largely called upon to provide inspiration for how to behave within society, and in some respects how to maintain stability within society by placing the family at the centre. “Victorian values” thus provided the basis for curbing growing social problems, in particular those brought about by rigorous economic policies such as high unemployment, by encouraging people to help themselves before claiming benefits.
Conservatism has been concerned with both social stability and economic freedom over the years. The measure of importance given to each concept has alternated from time to time depending on the dominant mood at different points in time and the prevailing circumstances. Conservatives have adapted their policies to suit current demands, whilst ensuring that “economic freedom” and “social stability” have remained central tenets of conservative thought throughout history. At some time one concept has been more dominant than the other and vice versa. Nonetheless, Conservatives believe that the tw2o are very much intertwined and that there can be no social stability without economic freedom.