Jump to content

Talk:Conservative liberalism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Distinguishing liberal conservatives from conservative liberals

[edit]

"Since classical liberal institutions were gradually accepted by conservatives, there is very little to distinguish liberal conservatives from conservative liberals." I do not dispute this in general but I think it should be said that when someone refers to liberal conservatism in certain political cultures like the UK, they are referring to a moderate strain of centre to centre-right conservativm that supports LGBT+ rights etc. It should also be said that technically speaking "liberal conservatism" is also in general a very broad term for conservatives who embrace classical liberalism, so Margaret Thatcher would technically be a liberal conservative even though I think it would be more accurate to classify her as a conservative liberal. 78.16.34.224 (talk) 15:55, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The important thing is that each article have a discrete topic, which one expects in an encyclopedic article, rather than explain the different meanings a term can have. I always thought that liberal conservatism was a form of conservatism that accepted some liberal premises, such as the right to own private property, while conservative liberalism was a liberalism that refused to go beyond its core beliefs in the 19th century.
Since Thatcher was a politician not a political theorist, it is challenging to classify her. But she took her inspiration from her father, who was a Liberal Nonconformist and small businessman and Friedrich Hayek, while coming into conflict with nobility and other traditional institutions. That would make her more liberal.
While early liberals supported minority rights, that mostly meant the rights of Nonconformists, i.e., people like themselves as opposed to the elites. As conservative liberals argue, both straight and gay people have an equal right to marry people of the opposite sex. TFD (talk) 04:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Japan's LDP

[edit]

Regarding my latest edit, whose edit summary was cut by my cat (!), I have to say that there is no way that a party can be removed from the list, when it has both consensus (a long-established one!) and sources on its side. As long as there is list comprising all the parties that are conservative-liberal or have conservative-liberal factions, the LDP should stay. Let's avoid edit wars and seek consensus before ditching the status quo! -- Checco (talk) 16:12, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are not advocating the status quo. In particular, in Liberal conservatism articles, LDPJ did not originally exist on the list. The LDPJ has never been described as a conservative-liberal in the 21st century. Mureungdowon (talk) 07:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong. The party has been on the list with at least one reference for almost seven years, it not a “new edit”. Please revert your aggressive removal of it, it isn’t consensus.— Autospark (talk) 07:44, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not talking about Conservative liberalism articles, I'm talking about the Liberal conservatism article. However, in the Conservative liberalism article, it is true that my editing is a new one. I just doubt Checco really wants to keep the "status quo". Mureungdowon (talk) 08:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The LDPJ has rarely been described as a conservative liberal in the 21st century. All of the English sources cited were from the '70s. Mureungdowon (talk) 09:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no consensus on removing the party from the list. A new consensus is needed to remove it. Please seek it, instead of edit warring. --Checco (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The arguments are similar for both articles, but having the LDP on both lists creates a problem. Is it a conservative liberal or liberal conservative party? This is a problem because when authors use either term in passing, they could mean a liberal form of conservatism or a conservative form of liberalism. The first may refer to conservatives who have accepted some liberal ideas, such as private property and equality before the law. The second may refer to liberals who reject attempts to incorporate egalitarian measures such as an enhanced welfare state and equality legislation. Or they can mean vice versa. We need to clearly distinguish the two. TFD (talk) 06:43, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many political ideologies have partial overlap; social democracy and social liberalism are arguably similar in various respects despite being distinct ideologies from different overarching ‘families’.— Autospark (talk) 07:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What's your point? Of course there is overlap in policies among parties. All major parties in the the UK for example think that English should be the main language of government. That doesn't mean that political scientists have a hard time classifying them. Please provide me with any books or papers that clearly define the topics of these articles and explain which parties belong to them. TFD (talk) 07:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A party can contain both conservative (including liberal-conservative) factions and liberal (including conservative-liberal) ones. --Checco (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The LDPJ is not a liberal because it is not moderate nationalist, but an ultranationalist Mureungdowon (talk) 20:15, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Again, factions of the LDP are conservative-liberal. --Checco (talk) 07:43, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Of course they can. But you seem unable to say which of the factions of the LDP is conservative liberal or liberal conservative. TFD (talk) 03:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is why we have sources supporting that. --Checco (talk) 07:43, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neoconservative?

[edit]

I’ve found Peter Lawler quotation talks about responsible liberal, not conservative liberal. Are they the same? If not, this section need to be removed. 199.7.159.87 (talk) 15:45, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with this article is that it begins with the well-sourced claim that there is a left-right spectrum with-in liberalism, then relies on editors to list examples of liberalism that fall to the right of that spectrum. Since the fact that U.S conservatism falls along the right of the spectrum is established in the lead, neo-conservatism could be seen as a form of conservative liberalism. Of course that's OR, but so is the inclusion of most of the content in the article. TFD (talk) 16:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the source for this? Rand advocated either minarchism or anarcho-capitalism; her views on "social and ethical issues" are profoundly un-traditional. FirstPrimeOfApophis (talk) 10:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayn Rand is an objectivist, which aligns more with liberatrianism. Conservative Liberalism is more conservative on social issues, lgbt+, family values, imigration, borders, while libertarianism is more "let it be". Laddmeister (talk) 15:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hungary

[edit]

"List of conservative-liberal parties or parties with conservative-liberal factions" lists Fidesz as the conservative liberal party of Hungary, although it should actually be Tisza. ~2026-22751-51 (talk) 07:48, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]