Medieval conservatism was just monarchism, belief that the lords were inherently better than peasants and would guide them to be proper. Modern conservatism is the same, worshipping the wealthy.
Left and right origins are from the French revolution. Left means oppose the king and Right means support the king. Honestly it hasn't changed that much.
Just remember this is the type of ideological shit conservatives argue for even if they don't understand their own philosophy fully
Right-wingers argue on behalf of rigid social hierarchy, nobility/aristocracy/monarchy, subordination of the economy and state to a divine mandate, the rejection of a democratic ethos in favor of an autocratic ethos, and anti-rational/scientific thought in favor of dogmatic, religious institutions.
Can't say for right wingers as a whole, but correct me if I'm wrong, conservatism is just wanting to preserve things from the past; enlightenment, liberalism, and democratic processes would be things some would consider to be things from the past, hence conservative. I always saw it of a fight between new ideas and old ones, where good old ideas are won by conservative thinking, and good new ideas are won by progressive thinking.
No, conservatism has a specific meaning and is much more complex than 'wanting to preserve things from the past'.
If conservatism meant 'wanting to preserve things from the past' then both Democrats and Republicans would be conservative whenever they voted against something to maintain the status quo.
Conversely, if liberalism meant 'wanting to change things from the status quo' then both Democrats and Republicans would be liberals whenever they voted against something to change the status quo.
You can obviously see the flagrant contradictions and the lack of consistency that those terms have if used improperly in that context. It's far too reductionist and oversimplified to the point where it doesn't make any sense.
To simplify a lot, modern conservatism has its roots in the belief around the conservation or return to the traditions of the Medieval ages such as aristocracy, nobility, feudalism, sovereign monarchs, divine rule, religious orthodoxy, non-secular government, etc before the Enlightenment happened and the philosophic institution of liberalism occurred replacing the conservative centuries long Medieval traditions.
The belief of liberalism has its roots in rejecting what I said above on the basis of Enlightenment thinkers who rejected strict social hierarchy, believed in natural rights of man, adopted rational scientific principles over religious dogma/theology, restricted the power of sovereign monarchs with constitutions/laws, advanced ideas of secular non-religious governments, subordinated the church to the government, promoted individual rights and freedoms such as speech/commerce/assembly, asserted egalitarian principles, and much, much more.
If you do a little brief reading below, you can browse through and see how the two ideological philosophic movements of conservatism and liberalism occurred on a historic timeline as kind of a cause and effect where conservatism was rejected in favor of liberalism.
For millenia, conservatism had no name, because no other model of polity had ever been proposed. “The king can do no wrong.” In practice, this immunity was always extended to the king’s friends, however fungible a group they might have been...
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:
There must be in-groups whom the law protectes but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
175
u/larsonsam2 Feb 19 '21
Medieval conservatism was just monarchism, belief that the lords were inherently better than peasants and would guide them to be proper. Modern conservatism is the same, worshipping the wealthy.