First off apologies for my first post as my friend quite rightly said I sounded like a 14 year old girl. I put it down to post B.A stress and needed an outlet.
This will be just a quick one I am hoping to develop this further when I have more time so if anyone has anything they feel would support this view let me know, discussion should be encouraged!
Anyway down to the real stuff...
With age I have appeared to become more socially Liberal (and I do mean it with a 'L') this change I don't think I can explain but I certainly don't think it has anything to do with Mr. Cameron. As a Conservative I pride myself (and I hope others do to) on the fact it is more of a disposition rather than a rigid dogma. It is what one can define Conservatism as fluid strands of thought that although these may appear opportunistic have become more of an omnipresent logic in British political thought.
It struck me whilst listening to a presentation on socialism that there is still somewhat of a idealogical tribalism whereby failure in statecraft appears to push a party to return to what could be considered its idealogical roots as an attempted to reclaim political ground which may of been untouched for some years. As William Hague showed in 2001 this can result in disaster but only time will tell to see if the Labour Party will make the same mistake following the election of a new leader.
It would far to simplistic to say the Conservative Party have reverted to socialist ideas and have accepted what is traditionally seen as 'socialist territory'. What I mean by this is initiatives such as 'the big society' and the protection of the NHS. These things historically may mark a leap in socialist ideas but surely the longevity of institutions such as the NHS signifies a shift in social attitudes whereby health care is no longer a privilege but a fundamental right. Anyone who has watched Micheal Moore's 'Sicko' knows exactly what I'm talking about.
Since my last post the Queens speech was put before Parliament and as a whole I think we can be fairly happy with it, but what do we mean when we talk of 'Liberal Conservatism'?
For me Conservatism has always had this classical liberalism strand but it has to be noted this is far from the concept of the 'night watchman' state that is associated. A good example that one might not think of would be von Hayek's view of welfare. Surprising for some Hayek moves away from this night watchman style state where the state has control of the absolute minimum. Hayek belives there are people who cannot make their own living in the market:
- The sick
- The disabled
- Widows
- Orphans
These people are in the situation they are in through no fault of their own. From Hayek’s point of view these people should be helped as these people’s circumstances cannot be pre-empted. Through ‘communal action’ which is enabled by government relinquishing centralised power can a community help those in need-which appears to echo the contemporary concept of big society.
But this throws up a wider debate of if the state should help those who don’t help themselves for example smokers being a burden on the NHS however making the choice that they could potentially harm them.
However Hayek stresses that individual freedom of one to make those decisions must be upheld. Hayek feel to help those who are disadvantaged in society there is a need for a minimum income which provides a floor which is a protection against misfortune. Hayek regards it is an individuals responsibility to make provisions for themselves as they would become a charge on the public purse. An example of this would be car insurance that we have compulsory car insurance for an eventuality we cannot predict. This principle can then be applied to forms of welfare such as pensions, housing, and life insurance and of course Hayek intends the minimum income guarantee to enable those suffering temporary misfortune t continue to pay their premiums and as such this lifts pressure on the state and in fact one could argue that it would be cheaper and more responsive.
For me the basic concept is spot on and really echo's much of the German attitude to healthcare would be. However although it is highly unlikely the U.K would revert to this model the principles remain the same of taking away the power of the state and allowing communities (if they so wish) to make decisions without state interference which I think has been exemplified in the 'decentralisation and localism bill' and the 'police reform and social responsibility reform bill' (amongst others).
What I suppose I am arguing (as much of a rant this may seem) is that there always has been a certain degree of 'Liberal Conservatism' that has appeared to influence conservative political thought, even Edward Heath spoke of the 'unacceptable face of capitalism'. It is still early days to see if the coalition will define an era as the 'new politics' but what is certain is that the Conservative Party have continued to do what they have (and quite successfully) for the past century and adapted to the needs of the times.
No comments:
Post a Comment