"The modern conservative is, in fact, not especially modern. He is engaged, on the contrary, in one of man's oldest, best financed, most applauded and, on the whole, least successful exercises in moral philosophy. That is the search for a truly superior moral justification for selfishness." - J.K. Galbraith, speaking to the US Senate in 1963
The oldest moral philosophies that I know of don't say that at all. Not even Adam Smith would have agreed, if you read his Theory of Moral Sentiments. I think JKG's hyperbole here is aimed at neo-classical economic theory which does assume self-interest.
Great post. It seems to me that the appeal of conservatism (including the extreme versions of the 'Far Right' in Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and Austria) is that it challenges the overwhelming support for market forces/neo-liberalism that dominates modern liberal democracies - including NZ. That what matters is profit and everything has a economic value. In this the parties of the right capture the support of those who feel left out with their appeal to 'the people' and 'community' and differentiating between those who belong and immigrants (who don't). Short-sighted and potentially dangerous (e.g riots in Northern England) - especially when it is combined with a nostalgia for an imagined past where there was a greater sense of belonging and community - but it explains the appeal.
The comment that to conservatives "society is seen as an organic whole (not a collection of individuals)" does not reflect Thatcher's view that there is no such thing as the public interest (am I quoting her correctly?) nor our own National Party's supposed focus on the individual as opposed to the state. There is also a libertarian slice in the conservative spectrum (?)
Yes, thanks David, that famous quote from a 1987 interview. We need to read it in context, as she repeated the point that "there is no such thing as society". I believe she meant that "society" is abstract, whereas people, families and neighbours are tangible actors. We need to accept responsibility for ourselves first but "then also to help look after our neighbour".
It's been often quoted as if she was uttering an absolute heresy. It did fit within the individualism of neoliberalism, which was thriving at that time. From her viewpoint, society isn't a tangible "body" that can have duties. The National Party tends to focus on the individual, as Thatcher did.
In the continental European context, the welfare state originates in conservatism – not socialism. Bismarck used social security to attach workers to the state, and to detach them social democrats.
Grant, this is excellent. (Sorry to sound like a schoolteacher!) but we take conservatism for granted - and of course expect others to do so too. I have great respect for the ToW, those who framed it, translated it and signed it, and see its revisionist interpretation by our academics, judiciary and clergy and being tantamount to sacrilege. This of course makes me 'right wing'. So be it, but debate over it throughout the country is fantastic. And I think the conservative view of it is correct and will win the day.
Today's newsletter is a particularly good one!
"The modern conservative is, in fact, not especially modern. He is engaged, on the contrary, in one of man's oldest, best financed, most applauded and, on the whole, least successful exercises in moral philosophy. That is the search for a truly superior moral justification for selfishness." - J.K. Galbraith, speaking to the US Senate in 1963
https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Kenneth_Galbraith
The oldest moral philosophies that I know of don't say that at all. Not even Adam Smith would have agreed, if you read his Theory of Moral Sentiments. I think JKG's hyperbole here is aimed at neo-classical economic theory which does assume self-interest.
Great post. It seems to me that the appeal of conservatism (including the extreme versions of the 'Far Right' in Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and Austria) is that it challenges the overwhelming support for market forces/neo-liberalism that dominates modern liberal democracies - including NZ. That what matters is profit and everything has a economic value. In this the parties of the right capture the support of those who feel left out with their appeal to 'the people' and 'community' and differentiating between those who belong and immigrants (who don't). Short-sighted and potentially dangerous (e.g riots in Northern England) - especially when it is combined with a nostalgia for an imagined past where there was a greater sense of belonging and community - but it explains the appeal.
The comment that to conservatives "society is seen as an organic whole (not a collection of individuals)" does not reflect Thatcher's view that there is no such thing as the public interest (am I quoting her correctly?) nor our own National Party's supposed focus on the individual as opposed to the state. There is also a libertarian slice in the conservative spectrum (?)
Yes, thanks David, that famous quote from a 1987 interview. We need to read it in context, as she repeated the point that "there is no such thing as society". I believe she meant that "society" is abstract, whereas people, families and neighbours are tangible actors. We need to accept responsibility for ourselves first but "then also to help look after our neighbour".
https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/106689
It's been often quoted as if she was uttering an absolute heresy. It did fit within the individualism of neoliberalism, which was thriving at that time. From her viewpoint, society isn't a tangible "body" that can have duties. The National Party tends to focus on the individual, as Thatcher did.
In the continental European context, the welfare state originates in conservatism – not socialism. Bismarck used social security to attach workers to the state, and to detach them social democrats.
Grant, this is excellent. (Sorry to sound like a schoolteacher!) but we take conservatism for granted - and of course expect others to do so too. I have great respect for the ToW, those who framed it, translated it and signed it, and see its revisionist interpretation by our academics, judiciary and clergy and being tantamount to sacrilege. This of course makes me 'right wing'. So be it, but debate over it throughout the country is fantastic. And I think the conservative view of it is correct and will win the day.
Thanks for your support Mike. I’ll say more about ToW when the Bill Is introduced