Right Wing No More: Calling For the Reformation of Conservatism

By Cristina C. Giancchini

Do we still have a Right Wing today? A left-leaning friend of mine recently told me there's no longer a Left Wing, in a sense that it no longer upholds the spirit of solidarity, of social concerns, having thus grown into a corrupt, self-serving, entity. His words made me wonder whether the Right Wing – or even the Conservative ideology – is still what we think it is or if it has also mutated into something else.

Right Wing vs Conservatism

The concept of right and left goes back to the Athenian Democracy (as one of our readers pointed out [please read the comment section]) but it gained more contemporary contours during the French Revolution, to describe both aisles of the parliament, where on the left sat the revolutionaries and the on the right sat the monarchists, the defenders of the old regime. Therefore, being a right winger equalled to be a defender of traditions, of the old order of things.

Right Wing politics opposes socialism – plus its extremist form, communism. It defends economic, social and political liberalism – basically, free markets; freedom of speech, thought, of association, of religion; and a small, non-intrusive, government. This political ideology more often than not is prone to include people who share the same political views but refuse to have any religious belief.

Conservatism shares many traits with the Right Wing but it stresses its preference for tradition (religious beliefs, cultural and national customs) and its extreme criticism of radical changes to society.

Do We Still Have a Right Wing?

Today, right wingers blend quite well with socialists, inasmuch as they fear being called 'reactionaries' or in extremis 'fascists' – it's truly a shame that today's right wingers are ignorant for there are fascists in both sides of the political spectrum, so right wingers should not be bothered by the left's intellectual impotence to the point of annulling themselves and assimilating the opposition's ideology. In the name of reaching a consensus, right wingers came up with an interesting expression called 'social democracy' to express economic liberalism with social concerns – as a way of gaining socialist support, to pass a myriad of bills in the house of representatives.

It is not necessary to corrupt oneself in order to make deals with the other side – in fact, this is what brought us to the chaotic period we are experiencing now [some states began annulling themselves for economic interests, other states took advantage of it, multiculturalism was born and now we face a clash of civilisations – whether one believes it or not]. A strong right wing can still compromise with socialists on social issues but never on economic and political ones, for without a strong economy – achieved through ethico-liberal economic policies – and without strong values, based on spirituality, or even religion, and patriotism; social problems will only tragically intensify.

In sum, the right wing is dead.

Where Should Conservatism Head To? 

Conservatism is excellent in the way that it protects tradition, it upholds customs plus basic yet imperative values that help keeping the natural order of things. However, it must go with the times. Evolution does not have to mean erosion, for instance:

• Respecting the rights of Gay people as the human beings they in fact are does not clash with conservative views – we focus on their contribution to society, not their sex life [though Gay people also need to understand that criticising their 'on your face' stance does not make a conservative individual homophobic – but this sort of verbal assault lies in the category of intellectual impotence].
• A National Healthcare System is imperative for any national economy [though the funding of such a system must be creative – financiers can help governments finding a solution, one that does not imperil the capital. People's health cannot be subjected to the whims of stockholders; in fact, People's Healthcare is of national interest] and it does not clash with conservative views at all, when in truth it agrees with the religious aspect of charity and taking care of one another.
• Complementing State and Church to combat loss of values. The Church must not temper with politics, but the State must not shun Religious identity from public life either. Those interacting with us must be sure of our religious and traditional ID – in other words, the true strength of any state. 
• Holding Religious views is not an anti-thesis of modernity [saying otherwise is yet another expression of intellectual impotence].
• Ethical Capitalism is what any conservative must aspire to. Business social responsibility doesn't mean redistribution of wealth but seeking profit with the welfare of the community and of the country in mind. Let's face it, 'redistribution of wealth' is just a fancy concept to conceal widespread state corruption
• Small Government is our goal. The State is not to be the main job provider, it is not to steal from the people [through excessively high taxes] and it is not to over-legislate [as it is a way of limiting people's freedom] – the role of the government is to enforce the law, keep the order, guarantee minimum services [health, education, utilities, state insurance and banking for those who cannot have access to private ones], secure society and defend the nation's borders. 
• In international Relations, mutual respect is capital. To that end, there must not be disequilibriums in relations [i.e. there must be no pick and cherry when it comes to criticism, and the sense of superiority must be purged – which makes things much more interesting and intelligent].

In sum, we have a confused conservatism that is obsessed with the past; so we need an official and unified Neo-Conservatism that abides by basic conservative principles and adjusts to modern life (without yielding to Utopia, DoubleThink and NewSpeak).

“Dwell in the past and you'll lose one eye, Forget the past and you'll lose both eyes” - Russian Proverb

(Image: The Houses of Parliament, London - Claude Monet)

[The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dissecting Society]