Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Conservatism and liberalism
Compare and Contrast Liberalism and Conservatism
Political party differences
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Conservatism and liberalism
People’s views on a wide range of issues are influenced or determined by the kind of foundational belief systems they hold. Therefore, the difference in the nature of opinions among individuals or groups of people alludes to the existence of distinct belief systems. In the course of history, the distinction between Liberalism and Conservatism has become more vivid particularly in the political arena where various players have expressed opposing points of view regarding the nation’s future. It is indeed undisputable that the foundational beliefs of Liberalism are diametrically opposed to those of Conservatism. This essay will give a definition of each term and describe how the two oppose each other.
Liberalism is a political ideology which takes pride and emphasizes the need for equal rights and respect for human liberty. It encourages implementation of change as the only way to solve today’s challenges. On the other hand, conservatism as a political ideology champions the need to embrace past lessons and apply them to solve problems of today. Therefore, it is opposed to revolution or change and instead finds pride in traditions (Conservatism vs. Liberalism, 2008). Liberalism supports a number of issues.
Firstly, liberalists believe that there should be a contract or formal agreement between the people and their democratically elected government on a number of issues. For instance, the government, while ensuring the common good of all, has the duty to protect people’s rights under the compact of limited powers. In other words, the government is expected to govern with restraint and never attempt to interfere with people’s private rights and liberty. Therefore, on the basis of mutual benefit and convenience, the formal agreement i...
... middle of paper ...
...onservatives paint the human nature in a much less admirable way than the liberals. For instance, they see man as a selfish being, capable of good and evil. Man ought to fight evil with good and any evil committed should not be blamed on the society but on the person who has committed it. Consequently, individuals who commit evil should be punished individually (Downing, 2010).
From the description of liberalism and conservatism given in this essay, it is seen that both aspects of liberalism and conservatism are useful in governance as the opposing views can be utilized to enhance consensus and good for all. Taking one side and ignoring the other can only result in negative social, political, and economic consequences. In order to build a shining democratic system, both liberalism and conservatism have to be merged since both aspects carry valuable ideologies.
Characterized by constitutionally-limited government, an emphasis on (and a wide-spread popular ideological enshrinement of) individual civil rights and liberties, and economic policy exhibiting strong laissez-faire overtones, the American political system certainly warrants the designation liberal democracy. This designation distinguishes the United States from similar advanced industrial democracies whose political systems lend themselves to preserving the public welfare rather than individual rights. With their government bound to precepts established in a constitution drafted and revised by a group of tyranny-fearing individuals, the American populace enjoys one of the most liberal, unrestrictive governments
President Franklin D. Roosevelt is commonly identified as a liberal and President Herbert C. Hoover as a conservative. The validity of these characterizations, however, is conditional upon the definition of these labels. If one adopts the most conventional contemporary definitions of the terms “liberal” and “conversative,” then the characterizations of Roosevelt as a liberal and Hoover as a conservative are valid, but the definitions of liberal and conservative vary and change over time and place.
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.
Let us begin by noting that any basic social structure faithful to liberal principles of political justice will inevitably prove nonneutral in its effects on many comprehensive doctrines and ways of life. This will be true for politically unreasonable doctrines and ways of life (militantly theocratic doctrines, or ways of life centered on violating the basic rights of others). But it may also prove true for comprehensive doctrines and ways of life more or less unopposed to most liberal political values (perhaps the doctrines or ways of life of certain traditional or anti-modern religious sects).
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.
In this essay, I posit that despite the harsh clashes between liberalism and republicanism, both elements play important roles in American politics, and their marriage has given birth to a unique America. I will begin by giving brief explanations about liberalism and republicanism, before showing how their dynamic interaction has given rise to American exceptionalism. It is also important to note that the slight emphasis on liberalism more than republicanism that is also evident in the US Constitution.
middle of paper ... ... This comment suggests that the current idea, liberalism, may just be a phase in human ideology that has spread worldwide. Though he made a compelling argument and posed thought provoking questions that supported his argument, the flaws in his argument, after stringent analysis, contradict his main points. Works Cited Ferguson, C. (Director).
There are three pillars of Modern Conservatism. The first is liberty, or freedom. Conservatives believe that people have the right to life, liberty, property, and freedom from the restrictions of arbitrary force. They use these rights by their natural free will. This means following your own dreams, doing what you want to (so long as you don’t harm others) and reaping the rewards (or facing the penalties). It also encompasses political liberty, which is the...
Liberalism is an ideology and due to the changing views of historical persons, who have each viewed themselves to be Liberals, is difficult to define precisely. There are five agreed defining tenants of Liberalism. The most important of these, percolating through the ideology, is the ‘Importance of the Individual’, and closely interlinked with this is ‘Freedom’, which leads on to the concept of ‘Individual Freedom or liberty’. Liberals believe that humankind is a rational species, and thus ‘Reason’ is a third tenant. Furthermore Liberalism advocates that the principle of ‘Justice’ and Toleration’ are fundamental in the well being of society and each of these aspects relates directly back to the quintessential first tenant. Liberalism, according to Habermas “emphasizes individual freedom from restraint and is usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard; c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties.” As an individualist, rather than a collectivist ideology the individual is placed as the building block of society. J. S. Mill says ...
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 ...
Liberalism is a political or social philosophy that advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary system of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutes to assure unrestricted development in all sphere of the human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
To begin with, anarchy refers to the world as a whole having no government. Individual states have varying degrees of supreme power or authority in their own land, but no single state may create laws for the whole world. However, while the theories discussed in this essay accept that the world is in a state of anarchy, what separates these two theories is how the government should deal with this problem. This essay tries to give an overview on the main assumptions of liberalism and realism and provide explanations of how they relate to one another as well as coexist, yet are opposite in theory. (IN TEXT)
Liberal is defined as "one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways." (Webster's dictionary) A conservative is defined as "one who adheres to traditional methods or views." (Webster's dictionary) The definition of these words have changed throughout history. A liberal in older days was not what one would be today; they were considered a person whom sought to use change, while a conservative is one who opposed change. The differences between a liberal and a conservative is a wide gap that focuses upon the fundamental beliefs of those within each group.
Modern day society is engrossed in a battle for protection of individual rights and freedoms from infringement by any person, be it the government or fellow citizens. Liberalism offers a solution to this by advocating for the protection of personal freedom. As a concept and ideology in political science, liberalism is a doctrine that defines the motivation and efforts made towards the protection of the aforementioned individual freedom. In the current society, the greatest feature of liberalism is the protection of individual liberty from intrusion or violation by a government. The activities of the government have, therefore, become the core point of focus. In liberalism, advocacy for personal freedom may translate to three ideal situations, based on the role that a government plays in a person’s life. These are no role, a limited role or a relatively large role. The three make up liberalism’s rule of thumb. (Van de Haar 1). Political theorists have