Conservatism, Social

Category: Theoretical approaches

Conservativism, as a distinct ideology, arose as a reaction to ideas of enlightenment, liberalism, the French revolution, and, later, socialism and communism. Although internally diverse proponents of conservativism uphold ideas and values of economic and political inequality, authority, and tradition; and support social institutions of religion, family, army, law, state, and private property. The earliest champions of conservatism were English philosopher Edmund Burke (1729–1797), and French philosophers Louis de Bonald (1754–1840) and Joseph de Maistre (1753–1821). Today, conservatism is internally very diverse and doesn't represent a unified theoretical approach in social sciences; instead, it serves as a designation of the ideological approach of social scientists that adhere to it. After the first wave of conservative thought (Burke, Bonald, and Maistre) the second big wave of conservative thought came at the beginning of the 20th century with European authors Robert Michels, Gaetano Mosca, Vilfredo Pareto, and José Ortega y Gasset. The third wave of conservatism started after the Second World War and is represented by scientists and philosophers like: James Samuel Coleman, Seymour Martin Lipset, Robert Nisbet, William Buckley, Nathan Glazer, Friedrich Hayek, Irving Kristol, Friedman Milton, Charles Murray, Michael Oakeshott, and Strauss Leo. Here we will present ideological and theoretical approaches only of representatives of the second and third waves of conservatism.

Second Wave of Conservatism

Robert Michels, in the book Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy (1915, in German 1911) presents the famous "iron law of oligarchy", the view that all political parties are controlled by a small number of people who are at their top. Michels believes that political parties have a dual nature and purpose. Parties are spontaneous associations that combine propaganda and agitation in order to gain political power. On the other hand, parties provide individuals with values and material basis to achieve their own goals, which can be ideological or purely personal - economic, status, or political well-being of the individual. Michels singles out five basic types of parties. The first type is patronage parties - they are led by a charismatic leader (these parties are often named after the leader). The characteristics of a leader are: strength of will, broad knowledge, great ambition, self-sufficiency, the reputation of selflessness, and intoxicating oratory. Michels singles out Mussolini as the best example, who, in his opinion, not only represents the embodiment of the Fascist Party but also the whole of Italy. Charismatic parties are most often formed when the leader establishes them, while much less often is a case that a charismatic leader wins power within a party that was not previously a charismatic party. The second type of party is those that represent a means of realizing the interests of certain classes. Ideological parties are the third type of party. The fourth type of party is parties that are organized around religious identity (Catholic and Protestant parties). The fifth type of party is those that represent the interests of a specific nation or ethnicity. Ideological parties have the most developed and broadest political program, while other parties have programs that focus on specific issues, and have only vague positions on other issues.

All five types of parties function very similarly, regardless of the manner and causes of the formation. The similarity in functioning arises due to several factors: the necessity to regulate the functioning of the organization; the nature of the individual human psyche, and the nature of the mentality of the crowd. Since serious politics requires great knowledge and skills, professional politicians emerge and take over every political party. On the other hand, the masses who do not have that knowledge and technical skills are not able to control the party leaders. In addition, ordinary party members, as well as sympathizers, have the mentality of the crowd and naturally follow their leaders. All these factors lead to the party striving for an oligarchic system, and that, according to Michels, is the iron law of history. However, the power of the oligarchy isn’t limitless, since, in democracies, the success of the party directly depends on the number of voters, so the party oligarchy must encourage and preserve the sympathies of the masses, which enables the masses to have a reciprocal influence on the oligarchic elite.

Gaetano Mosca rejected the idea of social progress. He presented his theory of power and elite in the books Theory of Governments and Parliamentary Government (1884) and The Ruling Class (1896, 1923). Mosca believed that in every society there is an organized minority that rules over an unorganized majority. The mass (majority) can never be organized, because it lacks the will and instinct for it, while there are always individuals who, due to their personal qualities (intellectual or material), stand out from the mass. The ruling class, in any society, strives to legitimize its power by invoking an abstract principle that represents a "political formula", and the very nature of that principle is different in different societies and historical situations. In some societies the divine will is emphasized, and in some the ancient traditional power of the monarch. There are different cultural and material conditions in different societies, which lead to the existence of a different political organization of government and the ruling elite. One society can go through different cycles - periods in which circumstances are stable, so the elite and its source of power are petrified, as well as its stable attitude towards the masses, while there are also periods of sudden change. Sudden change can be caused by external or internal factors, but once it happens, the old elite is replaced or destroyed, and the new elite rises.

According to Mosca, a good ruling class should be composed of brave, persistent, rational, educated, and sincere politicians who are committed to the common good and gradual reforms and are suspicious of the masses. In modern society, such a group is represented by the professional middle class, which, although it would be the best ruling class, has no power, because democracy has enabled the corrupt political elite to abuse democracy and win power. Mosca saw both democracy and socialism as enemies of the meritocratic rule of the middle class.

José Ortega y Gasset explored topics of history, politics, and relations between the masses and the elites in the books Invertebrate Spain (1921) and The Revolt of the Masses (1932, in Spanish 1930). At the core of his understanding of the relationship between history and politics is the belief that the division of society into elite and mass is present in every society, and that the dialectical relationship of these two groups has a key impact on political events and historical development. Ortega y Gasset defines members of the elite, not in the context of the political or economic power they have, but according to individual qualities. Members of the elite, that is, selected and excellent people, have a desire for "authenticity", a desire to achieve a higher ideal of living based on the moral principle. In every society, there is a prominent minority, which makes up the elite, and a majority of the society which makes up the mass. The elite has an innate predisposition to lead society, while the representatives of the masses have an innate predisposition to be led. In the period when the masses refused to be led by the elite, the state and society disintegrates. In Invertebrate Spain, Ortega y Gasset concluded that this was exactly what was happening in Spain at that time. The disintegration of society can also occur when the ruling classes degenerate, that is, they lose their vitality and turn into a mass. He believes that different human races have different proportions of selected and excellent people, so races that have relatively more "elite" people are superior to other races. Similar relations exist between different peoples of one race.

Ortega y Gasset believes that the entire history is characterized by two types of epochs - epochs in which there is a rise and domination of the elite and a period of decline of these elites and the parallel rise and rebellion of the masses against the elite. The changes of these two epochs form historical cycles. The modern rise of the masses began in the 19th century and is connected with several factors: demographic population growth; increasing social wealth; increasing material security and living standards of all classes; the rise of cities; and the expansion of education. However, the two most important factors are the development and spread of liberal democracy and the rise of technology, understood as the application of scientific methods in industrialization. He also believed that equalizing the quality of life and life chances between different classes, genders, and countries, leads to the rise of the masses. Political liberalism, in particular, leads to the politicization of the masses and the creation of a dangerous system of "hyperdemocracy" in which the masses are beginning to dominate politics. This kind of hyperdemocracy has led to the rise of systems that are even worse than liberalism - fascism, trade unionism and Bolshevism. In these systems, the barbarism of the masses and the incompetence of their leaders is most pronounced. The rise of the masses leads to an increase in violence in society, in various forms, from revolutions to direct actions of anarchists, because violence is the only doctrine that the masses have. As a reaction to that violence, the states are carrying out bureaucratization and militarization of life, which is best seen in the huge increase in police forces in all states.

Vilfredo Pareto's explained his approach to sociology in The Mind and Society (1935, in Italian 1916). The basis of Pareto's sociological approach is the initial assumption that the most important area of social life, which should be studied first, is the area of human action. Human actions are the most important sociological data. In order to classify human action, he introduces a division into, what he called, "residues" and "derivations". Residues represent the real reasons or motives for human behavior. Residues form the real basis of human action, while, on the other hand, derivations are only a justification and rationalization for some behavior. Pareto singled out fifty different residues and classified them into six classes:

1) residues of combination,

2) residues of the persistence of aggregates,

3) residues of the manifestation of sentiments through acts, (the need to express feelings through activities),

4) residues in regard to sociability,

5 ) residues of the integrity of the individual, or the need for an individual to integrate with his or her own social environment,

6) sexual residues.

The residues of the combination lead to social change, while the residues of the persistence of aggregates lead to the maintenance of the stability of society. Pareto considers both of these classes of residues to be central to sociology. Change and stability are always present in every society, only the relative strength of the influence of these two factors is changing. The first class of residues is the combination of different things without the use of logic. Only later do we give logical explanations for these actions. The most obvious example of combining is magic and superstition, where two unrelated things are presented as magically connected - for example, a rooster that is crowing at midnight is taken as an omen of death. The second class of residues are aggregates that have become so stable over time that they are very difficult to change. The best example of such residues are customs. Fourth-class residues serve to enable a person to accept and apply behaviors that characterize his or her group or society. The aim is to standardize the model of behavior, while at the same time expressing fear of innovation. The remnants of the fifth class are aimed at opposing any change in the previously established balance in society. These residues focus on behavior that society considers unjust or immoral. The relative prevalence and influence that any class of residues has varied from society to society, but all classes of residues are always present, at least to some extent, in every society. The proportions of residues that exist in a society and their proportional distribution within different strata in society, crucially affect the situation in that society.

Derivations arise as an a posteriori attempt to rationalize the residues, an attempt to present the activities as logical. Derivations can take many forms - activities can be justified through religion, morality, authority, law, or ideology. Sometimes derivations are presented as if they came from a practical, rational, and logical process of thinking, but even then, they usually represent ordinary rationalizations, because the explanation was not devised by scientific, that is, the logical-experimental method. Pareto singles out four classes of derivations:

1) affirmations - a simple statement that is not the product of empirical verification, but is presented as a fact;

2) authority - some claims are presented as true because there is an authority behind them, and behind that authority may be a person, group, tradition, religion, or something else;

3) Accord with sentiment or principles - the tendency to present attitudes as important, because most members of society have them;

4) verbal proof - the use of inadequate terms to make certain attitudes valid or invalid.

Pareto believes that derivations are never the causes of human activities, the residues are always the cause of human activities. However, there are relationships of interdependence between residues and derivatives, as well as relationships between derivations themselves. Some derivations can be disseminated through propaganda (e.g. the press and other media) or through imitation. Although derivations do not directly affect human actions, they affect people's feelings and help create and maintain the moral order of society, and in that respect, they are useful for society.

In the further development of his theory, Pareto introduces the difference between logical and illogical (nonlogical) behavior. He believes that the relationship between residuals and derivatives in a particular activity can show whether that activity is logical or illogical. If an activity leads to success in realizing our residues, then that activity is logical, regardless of what derivatives we use to rationalize that behavior. If we justify an activity by some derivation, but we do not achieve success in achieving the residue, then such activity is illogical. People who completely direct their behavior in accordance with some derivation, act illogically because they are not able to change their behavior and harmonize it with real external circumstances. Pareto believes that politicians and other social leaders should justify their views with derivations, in order to gain the support of the people, but in their activities, they should act only pragmatically, regardless of derivations, in order to achieve the goals set by the residues.

Pareto justifies such hypocrisy in behavior with his theory of the elite. Like other theorists of the elite, Pareto divides every society into two separate strata - the elite that should lead the masses and the masses that should obediently follow the leadership of the elite. He believes that the elites that lead always exist, even when society seems completely democratic, or when mass revolutions take place. In both cases, the elites who manage social events are at the forefront of order, or at the forefront of change. However, relations between the elite and the masses are never static. There are always several parallel processes that change this dynamic. The first type of process is what Pareto calls " circulation of elite." In the circulation of elites, we can single out two sub-processes. The first refers to individuals who fall out of the elite, because they lack personal qualities, while, at the same time, some members of the masses, also because of personal qualities, join the elite. The second sub-process occurs when the self-isolation of the elite occurs (the first sub-process is stopped), because, in that case, inferior individuals accumulate in one elite or ruling class, and superior individuals accumulate in a subordinate class, and, finally, there is a complete change of ruling class, with another, who then becomes the new elite. Paret's famous quote describing this shift is that "history is the graveyard of aristocracy."

Another type of dynamic within the elite are divisions and conflicts that occur within the elite itself. In cases where such conflicts are pronounced, the subordinate classes can derive some benefit for themselves. The next type of change within the elite is related to what means (force or cunning), and in what proportions, the elite uses in order to maintain its elite position. In that sense, Pareto refers to the division that Niccolò Machiavelli introduced between "lions" and "foxes" as different types of leaders. Lions use only force to stay in power, while foxes use cunning to trick the masses into following them. The application of either of these two strategies depends on many circumstances, so neither has a permanent primacy over the other. When one elite becomes conservative and applies only one type of leadership, and when that type of leadership ceases to be effective, then that elite is replaced by another. This new elite came to power because it used the type of leadership, force or cunning, that was more appropriate to the circumstances. The last type of dynamics within the elite is the division into "speculators" and "rentiers". There is a difference in the way of earning between these two groups. Speculators are trying to find new ways to make money, so their economic success depends on talent, hard work, and cunning. Renters are those whose income is constant and stable, while the source of income is not important. Rentiers can be the owners of the land from which they receive rent, or they can receive interest on money deposited in a bank, or they have a stable service for which they receive a salary. The first class of residues predominates in speculators, while the second class of residues predominates in rentiers. Both types of economic activity of the elite are needed in one society because every society needs stability, but also innovations and combinations introduced by speculators.

In economics, Pareto was a follower of his teacher Leon Valras, and Pareto's most important original contributions to this science are: the theory of economic optimum, classification of capital into three types (immovable, movable, and humane), theory of the influence of personal tastes on consumption, and research on the causes of economic cycles (ups and downs of the economy). Pareto's scientific views were shaped by his conservative and cynical views of society. He was skeptical about the possibility and usefulness of any real social progress. He believed that patriarchy was a natural and universal order among civilized nations, and he believed that women were biologically destined to be fickle and promiscuous.

Third Wave of Conservatism

Robert Nisbet, in the book Conservatism: Dream and Reality (1986), finds the roots of conservatism in reaction to the French Revolution, and especially in Edmund Burke's book Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790). Nisbet believes that conservatism is an alternative to the liberal utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham. According to Nisbet, utilitarianism is "mechanical" and "soulless" and is based on pure reason. He believes that people need a different way of thinking that is based more on emotions, experience, and pure logic. In addition, Nisbet defends the concept of prejudice, because prejudice gives people inner wisdom that precedes the intellect. Prejudice allows us to act in moments when it is necessary to make split-second decisions. Nisbet opposes any form of redistribution of wealth, including social benefits and affirmative action programs. An attempt to demolish the existing hierarchical structures in society would be an attack on cultural and psychological diversity in society. According to Nisbet, individualism, which is represented by modern social science, denies people the need to belong to the community and leaves them to fight alone against the central government of the state. In addition, Nisbet sees militarization, centralization, bureaucratization, and conformism as threats to political and personal freedoms.

Authors: Coleman, Samuel James; Lipset, Martin Saymour; Michels, Robert; Mosca, Gaetano; Ortega y Gasset, José; Pareto, Vilfredo; Nisbet, Robert. Buckley, William; Burke, Edmund; de Bonald, Louis; de Maistre, Joseph; Glazer, Nathan; Hayek, Friedrich; Kristol, Irving; Milton, Friedman; Mises, von Ludwig; Murray, Charles; Oakeshott, Michael; Strauss, Leo.

Books:

Buckley, William F., Jr., and Charles R. Kesler, eds. Keeping the Tablets: Modern American Conservative Thought (1988);

Burke, Edmund, and Isaac Kramnick. The Portable Edmund Burke (1999);

Carlyle, T. The French Revolution (1837);

De Maistre, J. Considerations on France (1994, in French 1797);

Goldwater, Barry M. The Conscience of a Conservative (1960);

Hayek, Friedrich A. von. The Road to Serfdom (1944);

Mannheim. Conservatism: A Contribution to the Sociology of Knowledge. (1986, in German 1925);

Michels. Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchial Tendencies of Modern Democracy (2016, in Italian 1911);

- First Lectures in Political Sociology (1949, in Italian 1927);

Milton, Friedman. Capitalism and Freedom (1962);

Mosca. The Ruling Class (2018, in Italian 1896, 1923);