To what extent do conservatives differ on the concept of paternalism?

Conservatism is an ideology born from the reaction to the enlightenment and French Revolution, which saw the radical overthrow of deep-rooted institutions, including the monarch. Conservatism has grown over time to incorporate tradition, organic society, libertarianism, human imperfection, pragmatism, and paternalism. Paternalism is the idea that people in government are best equipped to lead by virtue of their birth, upbringing and inheritance. However, the strands of conservatism's viewpoints on paternalism vary so much, and it is hard to see how traditional, One Nation and the New Right are under one ideology.

All conservatives have a negative viewpoint on human ability. This, therefore, affects each strands reflection on paternalism. Traditional Conservatives believe that morally humans are naturally selfish and morally imperfect. Hobbes theorised about the hypothetical scenario of the ‘state of nature'. If people are free and equal and did not have to answer to any higher authority, a ‘state of war’ would exist. Fearful people would therefore sacrifice many of their rights and freedoms for order and security. Traditional conservatives, therefore, agree that paternalism should live in a ‘social construct’ between the people and government as the people in government know what is best for the rest. Similarly, one nation conservatives believe that humans are intellectually different, meaning that some humans are better to lead government than others.

Michael Oakeshott believed modern society could not be understood in terms of abstract theories and principles such as equality. Rational attempts to make sense of society inevitably distort and simplify facts. Therefore, the similarities here are that the wrong humans in a position of authority can lead to an ‘authority of his own reason’, which will guide the county into a brutal dictatorship. Neo-Conservatives agreed with the idea of a morally ill human model in a reaction to the 1960s when an ‘anything goes’ culture had taken hold. Neo-Conservatives sought to reverse this in a set of anti-permissive policies, such as Section 28 in 1988 introduced by Thatcher, which banned the promotion of homosexuality. This showed that Neo-conservatives believed humans need to be controlled as they aren’t sure what is morally right. The government should be paternalistic in social morality as some people clearly can’t make the right moral decisions, harming society.

Conservatives differ on how far paternalism should be extended via the state. One nation conservatives subscribed to the idea of ‘noblesse oblige’ where people in a well-off position should help improve the position of the poor. As society is arranged in a hierarchy, it falls on the upper class to help them out. This should be ensured by state intervention that would be delivered in a welfare model. Disraeli believed that this would prevent the UK from splitting into ‘two nations’, eventually leading to a violent revolution. To avoid this, Disraeli enacted reforms done via taxation, such as the Sale of Foods And Drugs Act 1875, illustrating the state's role in a one nation system. This was continued via Harold Macmillan and a ‘middle way’ approach to the economy. It was then further developed by Cameron, who enacted ‘compassionate conservatism’, a move away from the nasty party image. This shows us that One-Nation Conservatives believe that because there are people in higher authority than everyone else, they need to help the poor via state intervention, who are intellectually inferior to them and would also help them stay in power. This is in complete contrast to The New Right, which subscribes to the laissez-fair capitalist model. Robert Nozick highlighted this, suggesting the state intervention model was immoral. It amounts to a type of forced labour imposed by the state. Collective ownership included in the welfare state violated self-ownership, which gave the people the right to do what they wanted with their possession. He, therefore, highlighted the need for a ‘night watchmen state’ that helped remove barriers for people to understand their actual ability. This was seen through Thatcher and the ‘Big Bang’ of 1986, which ended the regulation for many sectors. There is not much agreement on the powers of the state as the New Right believe that paternalism shouldn’t be used as an excuse to interfere so deeply in the economy. In contrast, One Nation believes that people in high authority need to intervene via the state to protect the lower class.

Conservatives are divided on how the higher authority can help reform society. Traditional conservatives believe that government should only reform society pragmatically and gradually. Burke believed that the state and society resemble a living organism that could be ‘pruned’ to bring about change but to make sure not to damage part of an organ of society which would lead to the complete breakdown of it. Paternalism should therefore develop along with the ideas of empiricism, with the higher authority continuing with the ‘tested’ wisdom of the past. Therefore, paternalism means that people should be in separate groups within society as this had maintained social harmony in the past and hadn’t failed them yet. This directly contrasts Rand, who believed paternalism shouldn’t get in the way of societal change. She believed in the ‘rolling back of the state. She believed in atomism, where people were self-interested and self-sufficient, a clear rejection of altruism. Organic society is therefore at odds with Rand as libertarianism should trump this, as any attempt by a higher authority to put them in a certain group in society can corrupt them, so paternalism would be limited. As people are self-sufficient, they can bring about the necessary change; whether or not it is gradual or not is irrelevant. Therefore, traditional and the New Right differ on what sort of obligation the aristocracy has, and in Rand’s idea, the aristocracy has a minimal role.

In conclusion, although conservatives all have a relatively negative view on human nature and the idea of controlling this, they aren’t sure to what extent either of those is a problem. While traditional conservatives believe that paternalism should be widely present in all of society and the state, One Nation is less controlling, seeing the need for a middle way. However, the New Right has a different view of how the state and economy should operate, with paternalism playing only a role in law, order, and society. Conservatives differ more than they agree.

Dom Wolf