On this anniversary of Donald Trump's January 6th, 2021 insurgency in refusing to leave office as POTUS45, we still have, we again have, that clown in office. Sigh. Give me a break...how is such a clod brain President of the United States, ever, or AGAIN? Now we've enabled him yet again in his this time, foolishly invading another country? Unbelievable.
I have long held a simple but deeply considered belief, conservatism is simply wrong-minded. That's never been more supported than today, under Donald Trump and whatever the hell this/his GOP is anymore.
Conservatism is most valuable in times of danger, but in times of strength, stability, and prosperity, progress — sometimes bold progress — is what truly moves societies forward.
That belief is not about partisan sorting or emotional preference. It comes from philosophy, history, and watching what actually happens when societies choose fear over possibility, or recklessness over stability. Understanding the difference matters, especially in an era where the word “conservative” is too often used as a costume for something far more chaotic and destructive than traditional conservatism ever intended to be.
So let’s slow the noise. Let’s talk about what conservatism is supposed to be, where it genuinely shines, where progressive governance excels, and why the right approach depends not only on ideology — but on the moment we are living in.
Conservatism Was Built as a Philosophy of Caution
Traditional conservatism — the intellectual kind associated with Edmund Burke, Michael Oakeshott, Russell Kirk, and others — was never about rage politics, enemies lists, or constant cultural warfare. It was about prudence.
Traditional conservatism says:
Human institutions are fragile
Social orders take generations to build
Fast, sweeping change risks unintended harm
Stability is a moral good
Conservative thinking performs its best work during unsteady times:
when institutions are threatened
when social cohesion is fraying
when economic foundations feel shaky
when the primary danger is collapse rather than stagnation
In those circumstances, slowing down can be wisdom.
Restraint can be virtue.
Continuity can literally save civilizations.
There is real dignity in the idea that not every moment demands upheaval.
But Prosperity Requires More Than Holding Still
There is another truth political conservatives often ignore:
Societies do not grow simply by preserving themselves. They grow by daring.
When a nation is strong — when it has capacity, confidence, economic strength, and resilient institutions — excessive caution becomes paralysis. Conservatism in a time of prosperity can quietly transform into something less virtuous:
a defense of entrenched privilege
a fear of modernization
a refusal to expand rights
a distrust of creativity and change
In other words, it stops being about “stability” and becomes about keeping others from advancing too.
History is full of examples of moments where progress didn’t destroy a society — it renewed it:
Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal rebuilt economic stability and dignity
Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society made rights real rather than theoretical
Postwar Europe rebuilt modern social democracies blending capitalism and social protection
Civil rights expansions did not break the United States — they fulfilled it more fully
Each of these required risk. Each required the belief that improvement is worth trying for. Progressivism, at its best, is not reckless revolution. It is the conviction that we should keep building a better society while we can — not freeze time out of fear.
Risk Tolerance Is the Real Difference
Strip away the slogans and tribal loyalties and political philosophy eventually comes down to one fundamental question:
How much risk are we willing to accept in pursuit of improvement?
Conservatism answers:
Not much. Stability matters more than improvement. Human systems break easily.
Progressivism answers:
Some risk is necessary. Human systems stagnate without reform.
The truth is not that one is always right and the other always wrong. The truth is that each is situationally wise. Healthy societies need:
conservative instincts to keep us from blowing ourselves up
progressive instincts to keep us from falling asleep in our comfort
But context matters.
When Conservatism Stops Being Conservatism
There is an additional complication in our moment: much of what calls itself “conservatism” today — especially in its MaGA form — has abandoned conservatism’s core principles entirely.
Traditional conservatism valued:
institutions
constitutional constraints
civic responsibility
moral character
measured change
MaGA politics often values:
disruption for its own sake
loyalty to leaders over loyalty to law
grievance instead of civic duty
chaos disguised as “strength”
rejection of expertise, tradition, and restraint
That is not conservatism. It is populist reaction, opportunism, and frequently authoritarian sympathy wrapped in conservative language. Conservatives used to see themselves as guardians of democracy. Today too many embrace rhetoric that treats democracy as legitimate only when their side wins.
So when critics argue against “conservatism,” they often are not arguing against prudence or stability. They are arguing against a movement pretending to be conservative while actively attacking the very institutional and moral principles conservatism was built to protect.
A Healthy Society Needs Forward Motion — and a Steady Hand
The idea I keep returning to is simple:
Conservatism works best when danger threatens collapse.
Progress works best when strength allows ambition.
Neither philosophy is evil. Neither is inherently superior in all times. But a society that forgets how to adapt dies slowly. And a society that abandons stability destroys itself quickly.
The goal should never be permanent revolutionary fever or permanent stagnation. It should be balance — with the wisdom to recognize when we need stability most, and when we should dare to build something better while we are strong enough to do so.
The tragedy of our modern politics is that we treat this as a permanent war rather than an ongoing conversation about timing, context, and responsibility.
The future belongs not to those who cling terrified to the past, and not to those who tear down merely for joy, but to those who understand that preservation and progress are not enemies.
They are tools.
And wise societies know when to use each one.
Cheers! Sláinte! Na zdravie!
No comments:
Post a Comment