New Right conservatism: a contradictory doctrine? Flashcards
Controversial ideology…
New Right conservatism proved to be one of the most controversial ideologies of the late 20th century. Yet some of its fiercest critics were themselves conservatives.
Some conservative commentators, for example Ian Gilmour argued that the New Right marked a ‘betrayal’ of traditional conservative principles. Other studies of conservatism contested that because it mixes neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism, the New Right enfolds a series of ‘fundamental contradictions’.
New Right’s fundamental contradictions…
> While neo-liberals wish to ‘roll back the frontiers of the state’ (hence the Thatcher govt’s promotion of privatisation), neo-conservatives wish to roll the frontiers of the state forward (hence the Thatcher govt’s restrictions upon trade unions and local authorities).
> While neo-liberals are relaxed about immigration (Rand saw it as a side effect of free markets and individual choice), neo-conservatives are much more wary (hence Thatcher’s fear that immigration in the 1960s had ‘swamped’ traditional communities and Britain’s traditional culture).
> While neo-liberals are keen to minimise government spending, in pursuit of what Nozick called the ‘minarchist state’, neo-conservatives are prepared to increase it so as to strengthen the nation’s profile (hence Thatcher’s decision to upgrade the UK’s nuclear deterrent, plus her govt’s ongoing financial commitment to the defence of the Falkland Islands).
New Right conservatism as a blend…
Yet despite these tensions, there is a reason to argue that New Right conservatism is a blend rather than a mismatch, and that neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism complement, rather than contradict each other. This can be illustrated in three ways.
A New Right conservative was a ‘liberal mugged by reality’…
First, Irving Kristol famously observed that a New Right conservative was a ‘liberal mugged by reality’. By that he meant that neo-liberals, with their optimistic view of human nature, fail to anticipate the tensions arising from a free-market capitalist society, where inequality flourishes. So to contain such tensions, they require a strong authoritarian state (the sort favoured by neo-conservatives) to maintain order and protect private property.
Reducing levels of state spending on welfare…
Second, to achieve the low taxation they desire, neo-liberals would have to reduce dramatically levels of state spending on welfare. But for this to be viable, there have to be alternative sources of support for those blamelessly in need. So neo-conservatives provide an answer: the restoration of traditional morality (which neo-conservatism supports) and an end to the ‘permissive society’ should lead to the restoration of supportive families and altruistic voluntary communities, while reviving a sense of individual responsibility. All this will effectively ‘privatise’ compassion and social security and thus weaken the state’s obligations.
Strengthening the state by force…
Third, neo-conservatives wish to strengthen the state by reinforcing the police, security services and armed forces. All this requires extra state funding. But neo-liberals claim this will be easier once state spending has been reduced in other areas, following measures like privatisation and welfare reform. So neo-liberalism’s wish to ‘roll back the frontiers of the state’ in economic and welfare policy effectively finances the more statist objectives of neo-conservatism.
