American Conservatism: Veneration Of Historical Utilitarianism
The work of Jerry Muller provides a reader with a deeper understanding of positional conservatism through it’s enrichment of the factors that distinguish conservative social and political thought from it’s alternatives. Muller does this through his presentation of conservatism as a stand alone ideology and then by contrasting it with counterparts, in the forms of orthodoxy, and utilitarianism. The aspects of conservative ideology presented can easily be applied to both Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Earth’s Holocaust, and the tale of Rip Van Winkle by Washington Irving. Such application reinforces the ideas presented by Muller, and although both works are clearly fiction it is easy to see how Hawthorne and Irving use central themes of the ideology to critique the society of their times.
Muller begins by first stating that the best way to begin to describe conservatism involves an examination of what conservatives have looked to conserve. He concludes that conservatism is vastly different depending on when and where we choose to examine. Contradictions in ‘conservative’ values are common. He proposes analysis on the subject by Samuel Huntington stating that conservatism in itself is better understood as a positional ideology than as a constant political theory. Huntington states as follows on the subject, “When the foundations of society are threatened, the conservative ideology reminds men of the necessity of some institutions, and the desirability of existing ones”. As opposed to a more traditional opinion of conservative thinking being ‘set on old ways, ’ Muller emphasizes the idea that there exists anxiety on behalf of the true conservative that change can lead to a ruining of established institutions. Conservatism as an ideology exists as a response, which explains its diversity in differing times and places. However, it is important to identify the enduring aspects of the ideology in order to understand how it differs from it’s alternatives.
The most important differentiators identified by Muller within the text come in the forms of: Human imperfection, epistemological modesty, historicism, and habit/tradition. Whereas the orthodoxy defense of institutions tends to involve some ‘ultimate truth, ’ typical conservatism focuses more on practicality. This makes sense in accordance with the theme of ‘the utility religion’ within the ideology. Traditionally religion lends itself to conservatism much like all other institutions. “. . . their very existence creates a presumption that they have served some useful function, because eliminating them may lead to harmful, unintended consequences, or because the veneration attached to existing institutions that have existed over time makes them potentially usable for new purposes”. When broken down in this way it’s easy to see how rational conservatism presents itself. Muller goes on to say that a deciding factor for a conservative argument over an orthodoxy one is a “Critique of liberal or progressive arguments takes place on the enlightened grounds of the search for human happiness, based on the use of reason”. This helps build an understanding that paints conservatism to be more utilitarian than orthodoxy, in that rather than accepting ideas for their ‘divinity, ’ there is practical application involved. The comparisons don’t stop there however, as another main differentiating factor involves how conservative and orthodox ideologies view rules and guidelines. According to orthodoxy ideologies rules must be set by those in power as a duty to allow for a public to have guidelines set so that following them will result in making it into heaven.
Conservatism remains much more grounded in this sense too as decision making by those in power finds its basis around worldly utility. According to the Jeremy Bentham, “The best species of Government. . . is capable of producing the greatest possible sum of happiness and strength, for the greatest possible number of men, during the longest possible time”.
The use of religion by conservatives focuses mainly on the powers of religion to help with the endorsements of individual morality and social cohesion. With such proposition it becomes essential that there is also differing factors presented that separate conservatism and utilitarianism. In order to do so it is essential to examine the theme of epistemological modesty. This focuses on the cognitive aspect of human imperfection. Primarily this means that often models that attempt to explain society do not do a good enough job accounting for the limits of human knowledge. Put simply, utilitarianism does not account for social complexity. Conservatism as an ideology aligns itself with the fact that social cohesion is complex and there is an understanding that humans are imperfect and therefore cannot approach social and political theory with the ‘cookie cutter’ approach that utilitarian seems to connotate.
Muller goes on to declare that the best way for describing conservatism is the happy medium between the two. “Historical Utilitarianism” approaches utilitarianism from a perspective that builds off of historical reference and evidence in order to maintain a healthy perspective of society as an organism. Conservatism seems to take the best aspects from each ideology but very importantly focuses on reason. This helps to make sure that conservative views stay grounded. When examining Hawthornes Earth’s Holocaust several very conservative themes are prevalent immediately. Primarily it’s easily to see a direct comparison to how Muller seems to view liberalism based how he describes and a quite liberal use of fire in the text. The basis of conservatism from the beginning, stemming from anxiety that change of established institutions will lead to devastation is perfectly exemplified in the text in a very literal devastation of aspects of the past. Another quite prevalent theme involves the idea, again, man is imperfect and that structure and order is essential to keep man from barbarism. Within Hawthorne’s work, an older official attempts to explain this to the mob as they destroy indicators of rank and title, “. . . people, what have you done? This fire is consuming all that marked your advance from barbarism, or that could have prevented your relapse thither”. As flames engulf everything deemed to be unfit, the story wraps up with an all encapsulating speech from a figure understood to be the devil himself, “What about the human heart itself?” said the dark-visaged stranger, with a portentous grin. “And, unless they hit upon some method of purifying that foul cavern, forth from it will reissue all the shapes of wrong and misery”. The quote not only drives home the point of human imperfection even further but helps to emphasize a major strength of conservatism in that radical change made on society does not change human nature. Hawthorne seems to be saying that his society often looks for radical answers to issues without addressing the root of problems.
One could argue that the tale of Rip Van Winkle by Washington Irving is a bit more grounded. Although the loss of twenty years is undoubtedly fantastical the story goes to emphasize some very real themes. Rip is a character who is undoubtedly very conservative in his comfortability with habit. The story seems to be a commentary on the evolution of Irvings society around him as well as holding true to be timeless in how as individuals get older it really is possible to lose track of time and pick your head up to realize the world around you has changed. Rip Van Winkle is a character that greatly exemplifies the sense of habit maintained by the conservative ideology in how he really does seem frozen in time in how he interacts with the world. The main differing factors between Rip Van Winkle and Earth’s Holocaust are that although both talk about change Earth’s Holocaust attempts to not only show the danger of aggressive change but exemplifies a futility not included in Rip Van Winkle.
In conclusion, the two fictional pieces as well as the anthology help provide for a greater understanding of the central themes of the conservative ideology. Muller compares and contrasts traditional conservative ideology with that of orthodoxy and utilitarianism in order to establish a basis for an understanding of historical utilitarianism. The centralized themes are easily applicable to Rip Van Winkle and Earth’s Holocaust in that both pieces deal with historicism, habit and tradition. Hawthornes piece gives us insight as to how conservative anxiety of change looks at its extreme while Irving exemplifies something closer to reality wherein one day everyone will wake up in a world growing in changing whether they’re ready for it to or not.
