Skip to content

A battle for the meaning of British Conservatism

What rescues Conservatives from internecine conflict like that of the Labour Party? Oakeshott claimed that the conservative does not have a creed or doctrine, but rather a ‘disposition’.

Published:
lead
lead

Save Brixton Arches mural. Flickr/Mikey. Some rights reserved.British politics, like politics in general, is awash with uncertainty. Withdrawal from the EU has brought about a Conservative government promising a new direction for the country. Having been in power for six years and with the potential to dominate government for the foreseeable future, the party is in a powerful position. Yet the challenges it faces are daunting. Divisions over the issue of Europe are long-standing. Doubts about the viability of a society with open borders and markets as a core principle are also growing. Understanding the fissures and dynamics of the party and the thinking of conservatives (of both a little and a large ‘c’) could not be more important as we move into a period of potentially momentous change for the country overall.

In July 2016, new Prime Minister Theresa May set out a fresh agenda for her premiership. Immigration clearly will be very important, having been a central issue in the referendum. However on taking office she pledged very directly to fight the ‘burning injustices’ caused by the many forms of inequality present in society. She promised to lead a government dedicated to the interests of those suffering from them.

On the one hand this could be a cynical attempt to steal ground electorally, adopting a centre-left agenda in order to mount pressure on an already woefully divided and inward-looking Labour Party. On the other, it may conform with a long strain of conservative thought which believes that ruling elites should govern in the interests of the whole of society, known alternately as ‘compassionate conservatism’, ‘One Nation Toryism’, or ‘noblesse oblige’. In this, not only is there a moral ‘duty on the part of the rich to the poor and needy’, as Boris Johnson once characteristically phrased it, but that without concern for the welfare of the greater masses of the population, the risk of social instability will grow.