Description


This article is from the Conservatism FAQ, by Jim Kalb kalb@aya.yale.edu with numerous contributions by others.

Isn't conservatism essentially nostalgia for a past that never was and can't be restored?

In substance, the objection is that the goals of conservatism are
neither serious nor achievable. That objection fails if in the end
conservatives are likely to get what they want.

Conservatism involves recognition that moral community is required
for the coherence of individual and social life, and that a
reasonably coherent way of life is a practical necessity. Current
trends toward radical individualism, egalitarianism and hedonism
destroy the possibility of moral community. Conservatives are
therefore confident that in some fashion existing trends will be
reversed and in important respects the moral and social future will
resemble the past more than the present. In particular, the future
will see less emphasis on individual autonomy and more on moral
tradition and essentialist ties.

The timing and form of the necessary reversal is of course uncertain.
It plainly can't be achieved through administrative techniques, the
method most readily accepted as serious and realistic today, so
conservatives' main political proposal is that aspects of the modern
state that oppose the reversal be trimmed or abandoned. Those who
consider modern trends beneficial and irreversible therefore accuse
conservatives of simple obstructionism. In contrast, those who see
that current trends lead to catastrophe and that a reversal must take
place expect that if conservatives aren't successful now their goals
will be achieved eventually, but very likely with more conflict and
destruction along the way and quite possibly with a less satisfactory
end result.