More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities between liberalism and conservatism ideologies
Similarities between liberalism and conservatism ideologies
Similarities between liberalism and conservatism ideologies
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The rise of conservative ideology during the mid-20th century has been the biggest political development in modern American history. The Republican party was dead and buried in the aftermath of the Great Depression and the rise of liberal governance under Roosevelt and Johnson – for nearly fifty years the Democrats controlled the House and it appeared that their stranglehold over the government would never end. However, over several decades, the Republicans and the conservative movement slowly gathered strength until finally breaking the Democratic majority and taking the mantle as the permanent party in power. Conservatism, by its very nature, must stand in opposition to differing forms of governance. As William F. Buckley said in his introduction to the National Review, conservatism “stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.” (Buckley 1) But, as Samuel Huntington points out in Conservatism as an Ideology, the conservatives of his era appeared uncertain as to what they were trying to conserve – he argues that often these conservatives wish to return to an antiquated past rather than defending the Constitution. …show more content…
As Buckley states, “Instead of covetously consolidating its premises, the United States seems tormented by its tradition of fixed postulates having to do with the meaning of existence, with the relationship of the state to the individual, of the individual to his neighbor, so clearly enunciated in the enabling documents of our Republic.” (1) Both Buckley and Huntington would posit conservatism as a reactionary ideology, ostensibly for the same reason – to protect and uphold the Constitution. However, the conception of conservatism in the mid-20th century would not stop at
There are thousands of years of history that have taken place. History is not like art(less subjective), but there is still plenty of room for speculation, criticism, and debate among historians, professors, as well as average citizens. However, not all these moments are documented, or done successfully specifically. Some of these moments end up becoming movies, books, or even historical fiction novels, but what about those fundamental moments that aren’t readily documented? In the book The Birth of Modern Politics Lynn Hudson Parsons claims that the 1828 election was momentous in the history of both political history, as well as our nation. Parsons not only discusses the behind the scenes of the first public election of 1828, but the pivotal events in Andrew Jackson and John Quincy Adams’ lives leading up to the election as well. Parsons succeeds in proving her thesis that the 1828 election was crucial to American politics as we know it today, as well as provoking evidence from various sources with her own logic and opinions as well.
Since its very conception, the Constitution of the United States has while holding great reverence, been a great topic of debate amongst the political scholars left to analyze it in all its ambiguity. Two such scholars, John Roche and Charles Beard, in their analyses of the Constitution aim to tackle a layer of the uncertainty: how democratic the Framers truly intended the Constitution to be. John Roche speaks in unquestionably high regard of the Framers in advocating that they so evidently compromised their own values in order to create a democratic document that would strengthen the US as a whole. Charles Beard conversely insists that as the economic elite of their time, the Framers were influenced primarily by their private interests to
2. Roche, John P. "The Founding Fathers: A Reform Caucus in Action". American Politics. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, MA. 1999. (Pages 8 -- 20).
In the late1960’s American politics were shifting at a National level with liberalism being less supported as its politics were perceived as flawed, both by people on the left who thought that liberalism was not as effective as more radical political enterprises and by conservatives who believed that liberal politics were ostensibly crippling the American economy.
Looking at the United States in 1965, it would seem that the future of the liberal consensus was well entrenched. The anti-war movement was in full swing, civil rights were moving forward, and Johnson's Great Society was working to alleviate the plight of the poor in America. Yet, by 1968 the liberal consensus had fallen apart, which led to the triumph of conservatism with the election of President Reagan in 1980. The question must be posed, how in the course of 15 years did liberal consensus fall apart and conservatism rise to the forefront? What were the decisive factors that caused the fracturing of what seemed to be such a powerful political force? In looking at the period from 1968 to the triumph of Reagan in 1980, America was shaken to the core by the Watergate scandal, the stalling of economic growth, gas shortages, and the Vietnam War. In an era that included the amount of turbulence that the 1970's did, it is not difficult to imagine that conservatism come to power. In this paper I will analyze how the liberal consensus went from one of its high points in 1965 to one of its lows in 1968. From there I will show how conservatism rose to power by the 1980 elections. In doing so, I will look at how factors within the American economy, civil rights issues, and political workings of the United States contributed to the fracturing of the liberal consensus and the rise of conservatism.
James Oakes’ The Radical and the Republican narrated the relationship between two of America’s greatest leaders: Frederick Douglass, the “radical” abolitionist, and Abraham Lincoln, the “Republican” politician. He did an astonishing job of demonstrating the commonalities between the views of Douglass and Lincoln, but also their differences on their stance of anti-slavery politics and abolitionism. Despite being on the same side of the argument of slavery, Douglass and Lincoln went about their opinions separately. Lincoln held a more patient and orthodox stance on anti-slavery, while Douglass was proven to be obstinate and direct with
The early years of the Constitution of the United States were full of political strife. The two prominent political ideals were complete opposites. The Jeffersonian Republicans were focused on giving power to the people and maintaining a pastoral economy, while the Federalists supported the control of the government by the elite class, and maintaining “positive” democracy. Both parties feared the influence and effect the other party would have on the public. In Linda K. Kerber's article, “The Fears of the Federalists”, the major concerns Federalists held in the early 19th century are described. Ever since the war with and separation from England, the citizens of America were seen to be continually drive to “patriotic rebellion” as a way to voice their wants. Violence was not an uncommon practice of the era (the use of mob tactics was prevalent), but Federalists feared that if Democratic values were abused and unrestrained, the country would fall into anarchy.
After the civil war, especially during the late 1800s, the US industrial economy has been thriving and booming which reflected on the numerous improvements that occurred in transportation through new railroad, in new markets for new invented goods and in the increased farm yield. However, most of this wealth has been captured by the capitalists, they looked down on the working poor class and expected them to submit to them. Also, they had control over the government seeking to maintain a system of monopoly to allow them to grow richer from others. Thus, they were controlling both political and economic conditions of the country.
Starting during the 1970s, factions of American conservatives slowly came together to form a new and more radical dissenting conservative movement, the New Right. The New Right was just as radical as its liberal opposite, with agendas to increase government involvement beyond the established conservative view of government’s role. Although New Right politicians made admirable advances to dissemble New Deal economic policies, the movement as a whole counters conservativism and the ideologies that America was founded on. Although the New Right adopts conservative economic ideologies, its social agenda weakened the conservative movement by focusing public attention to social and cultural issues that have no place within the established Old Right platform.
During the 1820’s - 1830’s America went through some would call a political revolution when government issues were diverted from being only for the elite to now they would include the common man as well. This change of power brought a lot of power to the people contributing to the Jacksonian democratic belief of guarding the Constitution. Yet, many of the people under Jackson still saw no change in their liberties, as they did not meet the Jacksonians target audience of white males. Despite expanding the political conversation, Jacksonian Democrats used the Constitution to limit individual liberty and political democracy by only protecting the rights of only a select few of people and seeking to fulfill their goal of obtaining their own gain and maintenance of the then status quo lifestyle therefore not truly guarding the Constitution.
At the turn of the century, America and the views of its people were changing. Many different ideas were surfacing about issues that affected the country as a whole. The Republican Party, led by William McKinley, were concentrating on the expansion of the United States and looking to excel in power and commerce. The Democratic Party at this time was led by William Jennings Bryan, who was absorbed in a sponge of morality and was concerned with the rights of man. The nation’s self-interest was divided into different ideas between the two parties. At this time imperialism and anti-imperialism were the dominant topics regarding America’s destiny.
The idea of political culture is found within the state’s history. The history of the state is impacted by the people settled in the region, religious backgrounds, and geography. The history of the state influences the attitudes and beliefs that people hold regarding their political system. Daniel Elazar theorized a connection between the states’ history and attitude towards government by explaining differences in government between states. Every state is different with some common ground. Elazar’s theory divides states into three types: moralistic, traditionalistic and individualistic. The state’s constitution defines the powers of government with political culture bias. Because of the state constitution, the political culture influences the power and limitations of governors, legislative, and judiciaries.
Modern liberalism and modern conservatism are both political outlooks that involve acceptance or support of the balance of the degree of social equality and social inequality; while they tend to avoid political changes that would result in extreme deviation of society to either side. Modern liberalism and modern conservatism tend not to be as centrist or middle-of-the-road ideologies as they once could be. Ideology is a set of ideas and beliefs that guide the goals, expectations, and actions of a group (Webster’s Dictionary). Individuals who are conservative or liberal tend to have views that align within a political party, whether it be Republican or democratic, but this is not always the case. There are conservative democrats, such as, Jim Costa and Jim Cooper and there are liberal republicans, such as, Nathaniel Banks and George Washington Julian. Another name for conservative democrats would be blue dog democrats while the nickname for liberal republicans is the Rockefeller republicans. These two ideologies tend to be more of the centrist ideologies. Modern liberals tend to be members of the Democratic Party because they support a wide range of welfare programs and government support of the public sector and tighter corporate regulations (PP Modern Liberalism). U.S. Conservatism evolved from classical liberalism, which makes them similar, yet there is many differences between modern conservatism and modern liberalism. There are principles and tenets that govern each ideology. A tenant is a belief or idea that is held as being true from a group (Webster’s Dictionary). In understanding both ideologies, it is imperative to have an understanding of classical liberalism. Classical liberalism was built on ideas from the seventeenth ...
We are first and foremost Christians, and then Americans. Our political stance is Conservatism because it espouses our Christian beliefs. We believe in a small central (Federal) government and we believe in the Ten Commandments first and the Constitution second. We believe people need to make the best life for themselves and not count on the Federal Government to support them (aside from the elderly who, thankfully, have Social Security and others such as that can't care for themselves). We believe in the rule of law, that means we believe the laws should be respected and enforced, including immigration laws. We believe in lower taxes so that folks who work can keep more of the money they EARNED to do whatever they want with it. We believe
Liberalism is the foundation of America. This ideology is found in the country’s early fledgling literature and in the very document that made America free. Both the selected works of Phyllis Wheatley and Thomas Jefferson are actively working for the ideology of liberalism, which is a political ideology that is against any system that threatens the freedom of the individual and his natural rights and prevents the individual from becoming all the individual can be, specifically the importance of human individuality and the freedom of humanity from subservience to another group. The natural rights of man, in the words of John Locke, are “life, liberty and property.” These passages compliment each other because they are both in the support of the ideology of liberalism and support the freedom of all members of the human race. The big picture that is at stake is that the ideology of liberalism was the principle founding ideology in America and it was presence was felt in the social context via literature.