Pros Of Conservatism

Being a relatively newer movement, liberalism has undergone more change in its relationship with society and this is due to liberalism’s changing public perception. “These initial successes of liberal movements had, as the name itself implies, a fundamental purpose: to liberate people from oppression (Riley, Jim).” To understand liberalisms relationship with society, we must take into account how it has transformed from an ideology that was created to minimize governmental intervention but transgressed to become something that welcomed welfare provision and economic management (Heywood 26). To decide whether the state is neutral in the implementation of liberal ideologies, we must fully understand what this philosophy demands from the state:

“The new conservatism is perhaps more a phenomenon of impressionable elites whipping themselves into a trendy lather than a genuine grass-roots movement of popular protest (Whitaker).” Through this critique, we are faced with a vital question regarding conservatism: is this neoconservative movement an accurate representation of traditional conservative ideals? After the following answer of this question, we have to decide whether the neoconservative state is acting on the behalf of popular interest of the society or in regards to its own interest. “In 1995, however, a new age of neo-conservatism was born, that of the neocons, one that persists to this day. It was different from the two previous eras. Neo-conservatism became a full-fledged element of the Republican Party, now unambiguously on the right (Vaisse 11).” The war in Iraq is an apt example that highlights how conservatism, or neo-conservatism, is not only different to the original conservative thinking, but is also over influencing American foreign policy (that is created by the state). Vaisse goes on to talk about how the neoconservative movement is no longer focused on only retaining cultural norms, like its predecessor had; the neoconservative movement has received priority from the government and we see that

Although neither outlook is perfect, it can be said that one has more positives than the other. Before we can come to a conclusion as to which attitude is better, we must understand which has more negatives. “Political discourse is rife with accusations of closed-mindedness, prejudice, and unfair treatment from both liberals and conservatives. However, social psychologists have repeatedly demonstrated that conservatives, compared to liberals, are more likely to discriminate against out-groups (Wetherell, Brandt, Reyna).” The success of a state can only be valid if all communities are thriving- conservatism has its benefits for the economy in certain aspects, but as a whole, it does not cater to the needs of our diversified society. “Conservative values of traditionalism may augment motives to discriminate, while liberal values of equality and tolerance and the conservative value of hard work may attenuate discrimination (Wetherell, Brandt, Reyna 8).” Liberalism is not perfect but it can bee seen as the lesser of the two evils; the discrimination done by liberals can be viewed as discrimination against those who oppose progressiveness. “Conversely, liberals espouse values running counter to discrimination, such as egalitarianism (the desire to promote the welfare of others, and universalism (the value of peace and tolerance) (Wetherell, Brandt, Reyna