Conservatives…
and Ideologies

Conservatives are often referred to in the media as being “ideological conservatives”. That is a misnomer, a contradiction in terms. Ideologues are the antithesis of conservatives because they exalt time over place. For the ideologue, time is unfolding a better and better society. What has gone before has no import to the ideologue. Ideology is about what is “not” instead of reality; about what could be instead of what exists. Ideologues fit nicely with scientific materialists who believe that we live in a closed system of random origin without outside influence or ideals and we alone are responsible for “getting it right” and that requires time.

On the other hand we have the conservative. Russell Kirk said being a conservative is a:

…cast of intellect or a type of character, and inclination to cherish the permanent things in human existence…to join in resistance to the destruction or the old patterns of life [and] damage to the footings of civil social order…

Note two things in particular that sets the conservative apart from the ideologue. The first is “permanent things”. That is non-negotiable virtues without which a society cannot exist and operate. Ideologues are about changing social order because nothing is permanent. Why? Because, for the ideologue, there is the unfolding enlightenment of man that allows him to move to higher and higher plains of goodness. There is not a good, an ideal, to be cherished because we are making things better and better.

Second, the conservative is “against destruction” of the old social order. This is why conservatives resist ideologues and their ideologies. Conservatives know that ideologues leave in their wake of change dismantled foundations and non-functioning institutions that had served the society before the “change for the better”. On striking example, but by no means the only, is the “better way” of sexual liberation leaving in its wake the broken and destroyed family as it had functioned for thousands of years in the world.

At their core, ideologues are about the rejection of reality and destruction of what is. In place of reality ideologues what to build a “possibility” that has never existed and is not possible. The ideologue represents a smug, self-righteous attitude that by subverting and dismantling the “way it is” there can be a “better way”. This attitude is rejected by the conservative. This is not a rejection of change, for change is inevitable. It is a rejection of the radical change that dismantles what we know for what is imagined. Conservatives desire to maintain the permanent virtues and patterns of life that have been the basis of society since there have been societies and promote change within.

The hubris of ideology ignores the fallibility of man. The ideologue wants to dismiss the accrued wisdom of men through the ages for the enlightened view of modern man. The traditional virtues, tested through time and experience, are found wanting by the 21st century ideologue. They are viewed as oppressive and not in step with what is now happening. For improving the world, wholesale change is needed. Bringing the world in line with the desires of modern man is the way to a better world. This is why there are no “permanent things” or “footings of society” for the ideologue. The desires of man are always changing, so change is inevitable. Tying society to the desire of man means a constantly moving target unmoored to anything permanent.

Virtuous terms do not disappear; just the meaning of them. Take for instance the modified definition of honor. At one time honor meant standing on principles believed regardless of the consequences or impact on the person of honor. But, today we do not see honor as a permanent virtue that is manifested in an individual as part of his character. Honor in a “changed” society is now defined as status, or respect for personal accomplishment. It is an “I did it my way” view of things. Honor is no longer attached to virtue or a part of a person’s character. We honor those judged to be successful at fulfilling his or her personal desires. Honor is now recognition of the individual rather than the individual representing service, sacrifice, or even death for a cause that is virtuous.

A brief examination of the world we now live inn exposes the foolishness of ideologies. Do we really see in the unfolding of time a continuing revelation of a higher and better humanity? Do we see in our world societies finally “getting it right” after centuries of misplace emphases on permanent things? Globalism, multi-culturalism and neo-conservatism are ideologies that are moving us away from the “old ways” to “new ways” that promise an elevated humanity. Is that what we see? One a grand scale we see a movement to a one world economic order doing away with nation-states and on a micro scale it is personal autonomy shedding the shackles of oppressive communities. I am sure you can come up with many other examples.

The dream of ideologues is progress driven by the engine of technology. Ideologues love progress for it is indicative of the better. Surely the new is always better than the old? Progress is defined by the ideologue as moving ahead. We are the most advanced folks because technology has made our lives easy, comfortable and pleasurable. So, we surely must also be the most advanced in ideas and consequent behavior. We march into the future armed with technology and believing that we can ignore the past and create a new social order. To T.S. Eliot’s famous statement:

We are what we are because they were what they were,

the ideologue answers yes…but we must be different because we now know better.

The late Gerhart Niemeyer asserted that ideologies fail because of two reasons. One, they are frauds. They substitute the philosophical questions about what is given for a set of assertions about what is not given. As a willful assertion of unreality or willful denial of reality, ideology is an intellectual perversion. Second, because and ideologue does not embrace reality and act within it to achieve real possibilities they are destroyers of societies not builders.

Two examples of 20th century history…National Socialism and Communism…prove Niemeyer’s point. Going forward in the 21st century we must be vigilant in identifying the unreality and destruction of ideologies. They can come from anywhere. No group or party has a monopoly on ideology. This is where the conservative must play an assertive role in society. Ideologies must be called ideologies. And, the conservative must continue to stand for permanent things and keep the foundations of society from being destroyed. Conservatives look to the past to seek the accumulated wisdom of those who have gone before and the time worn verities that maintain a society. This is not a romantic return to “Ozzie and Harriet. He does not live in the past but is guided by the old order built on permanent virtues that have stood the test of time. Change will come but as a modification of the old not the substitution of a new order built on human progress driven by technology and human desires of modern man.