in history. This may seem to misdescribe the history of many national institutions;
for example, the United States and modern France had ‘founding moments’, and
the process of decolonisation in the period after 1945 resulted in the creation of
many new states. However, conservatives argue, first, that the instability of many
newly created states is evidence of the importance of evolution, and, second,
where institutions appear to be successful it is because they have adapted over
time. The US political system is a good example – contemporary US institutions
are radically different to those created by the founding fathers. The fact that
many Americans do not recognise this fact, and hold that their institutions are
continuous, actually reinforces the conservatives’ argument: a belief in continuity,
alongside adaptation, is a ‘necessary fiction’.
6.Suspicion of authority This feature of conservatism may seem to contradict the
last one; however, to say that conservatives are suspicious of authority does not
entail its rejection. What conservatives are wary of is the accumulation of state
power, which for reasons discussed above is incompatible with a recognition of
the limits of individuals to grasp complex social relations. Although politicians
calling themselves ‘conservatives’ are not shy about using state power to suppress
movements they consider to be a threat to social order, more reflective
conservatives will argue that institutions are not abstract entities, but have to be
run by human beings, who are always in danger either of abusing their position
or, even if well meaning, of putting into practice policies which have unintended
bad consequences. From this position conservatives can make some interesting
alliances – while rejecting statements of universal human rights detached from a
social or legal system, they nonetheless stress ‘our ancient liberties’ and will join
forces with civil liberties groups against, for example, measures intended to
combat terrorism.
These points are intended to provide an overview of conservatism. To get a better
idea of conservative thought, and to understand its strengths and its weaknesses,
we will consider the work of particular thinkers. We focus on four: David Hume
(1711–76), Edmund Burke (1729–97), Michael Oakeshott (1901–90) and Leo
Strauss (1899–1973). Of the four, Leo Strauss’s work least manifests the above
elements of thought. However, he is an important influence on neo-conservatism –
a largely American phenomenon – and the discussion of Strauss will allow us to
assess the degree to which neo-conservatism is really conservative.David Hume
Eighteenth-century Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711–76) is often described
as the first conservative political theorist; certainly he is the first major thinker to
offer a philosophicaldefence of conservatism. For that reason it is necessary to
explain how Hume derives his political theory from his epistemology (what we can
know) and practical philosophy (how we should behave, or what motivates us to
act in certain ways).
Although their relevance to politics may not, at first sight, be obvious, it is
necessary to set out a number of Hume’s philosophical claims:Chapter 9 Conservatism 197