battlegrounds of conservatism (sami)

Question 1

agreement on hn

Answer 1

all cons agree humans are imperfect

tcs and oncs: 1. psychological security-seeking, without security u risk anomie = state of normlessness (durkheim) ∴ tradition important
2. moral burke ‘love of lucre’, i.e. greed
3. intellectual cannot understand everything ∴ pragmatism = what has worked

nr: agree that this is by nature (i.e. can’t be changed, bad people stay bad), thatcher ‘prison works’ reagan ‘war on drugs’
nr agree we are morally imperfect but this is due to our rationally self interested nature (neoliberal)

Question 2

disagreement on hn

Answer 2

disagree on what should be done regarding this imperfection

nr: rationally self interested individuals are doing the morally right thing by maximising self interest (rand ethical egoism),
however tc: this is wrong, state curtails this
oncs: we are ‘fallible but not terrible’ (denying burkean idea of moral imperfection entirely) -> nothing need be done

alternatively, could argue: however they disagree on the implication of this for the state/society/econ (then just use some examples its not that hard dont be silly)

Question 3

agreement on state

Question 4

disagreement on state

Question 5

agreement on society

Question 6

disagreement on society

Question 7

agreement on econ

Question 8

disagreement on econ