The Conservative Movement Analysis

People’s views on a wide range of issues are influenced or determined by the kind of foundational belief systems they hold. Therefore, the difference in the nature of opinions among individuals or groups of people alludes to the existence of distinct belief systems. In the course of history, the distinction between Liberalism and Conservatism has become more vivid particularly in the political arena where various players have expressed opposing points of view regarding the nation’s future. It is indeed undisputable that the foundational beliefs of Liberalism are diametrically opposed to those of Conservatism. This essay will give a definition of each term and describe how the two oppose each other.

The 1980 presidential election of the United States featured three primary candidates, Republican Ronald Reagan, Democrat Jimmy Carter and liberal Republican John Anderson. Ronald Reagan was the governor of California before he decided to run for the presidency. John Anderson was a representative in Illinois and Carter was the incumbent. The lengthy Iran hostage crisis sharpened public opinions by the beginning of the election season. In the 1970s, the United States were experiencing a straining episode of low economic growth, high price increases and interest rates and an irregular energy crisis. The sense of discomfort in both domestic and foreign affairs in the nation were heading downward, this added to the downward spiral that was already going on. Between Carter, Anderson and Reagan, the general election campaign of the 1980s seemed more concerned with shadowboxing around political issues rather than a serious discussion of the issues that concerned voters.

The New Right has significantly revised the relationship between conservatism and tradition, however. The New Right attempts to fuse economic libertarianism with state and social authoritarianism. As such, it is a blend of radical, reactionary and traditional features. Its radicalism is evident in its robust efforts to dismantle or ‘roll back’ interventionist government and liberal social values. This radicalism is clearest in relation to the liberal New Right, which draws on rational theories and abstract principles, and so dismisses tradition. New Right radicalism is nevertheless reactionary in that both the liberal and conservative New Right hark back to a 19th century ‘golden age’ of supposed economic prosperity and moral fortitude. However, the conservative New Right also makes an appeal to tradition, particularly through its emphasis on so-called ‘traditional values’.

Millennials, backed by the rising Generation Z, have proved themselves to be the most secular demographic that the United States has ever borne witness to. On the political spectrum, too, there has been an increase in support from these generations for leftist viewpoints and alignments. This palpable change within the nation’s politics has raised concerns about the communion between religious people and the far left. Matthew Sitman’s article, “Against Moral Austerity: How Religion Can Revitalize the Left,” emphasizes a need for the conjoined forces of faith and liberalism to inspire political change. Written from the biased perspective of a devout Catholic, Sitman struggles to appeal to the secular end of the spectrum through a valid argument but provides enough supportive detail behind his ideas to create, at the very least, an acceptable

Context: 2014- This is during a time of great political and social divide in American culture. The clear rift in political thought and hard-lined party divisions described as “left” and “right” are becoming more

Barry Goldwater is considered the biggest loser in American history. In his presidential run, his opponent, Lyndon B. Johnson, won more of the popular vote than any man before. But Goldwater’s run sparked a great movement through America; the rise of conservatism. Goldwater was considered an extremist conservative, even dubbed Mr. Conservative, as he believed the true western ideals of individualism. He was a fair and strong political competitor, but his views were not totally agreed with at the time of his presidential race. Yet he was such a convincing man, that his ideas took root within the young people of the country. Throughout Barry Goldwater’s presidential run, conservatism became more popular and a rightward shift began to take place, but both parties grew stronger and more people became interested in politics due to his his time invested in politics.

The United States developed over time as a strong power throughout the world. The States constantly battled with foreign policy and waged war to help their allies but the major struggle that the States faced was the transition that occurred between the Old Left New Left and Old Right New Right. The Democratic Party and Republican Party were once a single group of people fighting to deal with the same issues. Over time more issues arose causing a divide to occur and the creation of two separate parties were created. The Democratic Party dominated American politics between 1828 and 1860 and once again during 1932 and 2000. During the time of the Democratic Party the views of the party changed from president to president because of the obstacles

In the 1970s and 1980s there was a consensus that the importance of political parties was in decline, that the shared conservative ideology of the American electorate was reflected in the similar ideology and policy of the Democratic and Republican party. Now, however, the parties are seemingly taking on renewed importance as the population of

The 1964 election, which concluded in a victory for Lyndon B. Johnson, had far more deeper effects on the Republican Party than what is seen on the surface. This was the first Presidential election in which states considered Democratic strongholds, particularly in the south, went to Republican challenger Barry Goldwater. An explanation for this enigma was the growing presence of a new form of conservatism developing during this period. This new form of conservatism combined several schools of thought, ranging from libertarianism to social conservatism. Since it was Barry Goldwater that brought this new form of conservatism into the mainstream, both those on the left and on the right have called Barry Goldwater

In the absence of an existential external threat, conservatives must look for domestic antagonists, of which there are many. Abortion rights, LGBTQ rights, climate-focused environmental policy, gun control and stem cell research are equally promising targets. Though the presence of such common antagonists might strengthen the conservative coalition, they may prove to be fragile ground on which to build a new conservative solidarity. Rather than seeking common enemies, the Conservative movement must work on uniting itself from within. It should focus on narrowing the internal divisions and reconciling its disparate identities. If conservatism is to remain a prominent political force in the future, it is more likely to succeed by standing for something identifiable and compelling, rather than standing against anything that tends to liberalism.

Indeed, he was that conservative; however, it was not the time for a Goldwater conservative in America. Goldwater was seen as an unhinged maniac who would lead us into a nuclear apocalypse, as popularized by an infamous Johnson campaign commercial. Even Nixon (who was an actual unhinged maniac) and Ford (who wasn’t) would fail to claim leadership even as conservative Republicans began winning more and more. It would be a former actor by the name of Ronald Reagan who would ultimately become the conservative Godsend that Buckley and his ilk so desired. In his famous speech in support of Goldwater, A Time for Choosing, Reagan said “You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." "There is a point beyond which they must not advance." And this -- this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength." Winston Churchill said, "The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we're spirits -- not animals." And he said, "There's something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.” Using his skills as an excellent orator, Reagan would immediately become one of the most lauded conservative voices in America – although Goldwater would lose the election Johnson in a landslide, Reagan would use his speech to

It was starting to look as if politics were beginning to become more secular. As it is well known, after Kennedy’s assassination, Lyndon B. Johnson carried out the rest of Kennedy’s term, and then ran for reelection in 1964. Johnson, a left-leaning Democrat found himself up against Barry Goldwater from the right-minded Republican Party. Early on in the 20th century, many of Protestant denominations had adopted progressive, social reformist doctrines, that many people still value to this day. Despite being Protestant, Goldwater’s platform took a much more conservative approach. This ended up backfiring on him, however, as many Christian publications stated that they opposed Goldwater’s policies. He was further stigmatized by the religious publication The Christian Century as turning his patriotic rhetoric into “religious nationalism.” To make matters worse for Goldwater, in October of 1964, less than a month before the general election, 725 Episcopalian clergy and laymen from forty-one states signed a resolution accusing him of “a transparent exploitation of racialism.” Richard Nixon, a Republican and ex-Vice President at the time, claimed that these allegations were “the most vicious in political history.” As a result, Lyndon Johnson won the 1964 election in an unprecedented landslide victory, with Barry Goldwater only winning six states: his native Arizona, and five states in the heart of the Bible Belt (Kosmin 1993:174-5). While religious leaders in the end

In the article Living in the Eighties, the main focus is the rise of religion into politics. Conservative theology and politics came together in the 1980s due to the reformation of the social landscape. The evangelical Christians shunned the community and kept to themselves, until Billy Graham’s revival. In this revival, controversy was brought forth of the evangelist movement. These controversies included gay rights, public schools, and abortion. Later, the evangelist hopped onto the politic train. The evangelist supported Carter as well as his background. Although, he lost their vote when he refused to emit prayer into the practices of school. During the election, Christian evangelist latched onto Ronald Reagan. However when divorce, remarriage, and abortion became of the issue, Reagan supporters became confused. All in all, this article shows how quickly evangelist transformed to meet the demands of media and norms.

Libbrook is a small town in Kansas. Everyone in the town is depressed because Kansas is so boring, and it is so flat that you can see the whole state no matter where you stand. The entire town is made up of mostly older retired farmers and their wives, as well as some younger people simply living in town out of preference. There was a small grocery store owned by a man named Jim Smith, who proudly owned and worked at his store ever since 1982. He had a son who helped him out in the store, his son’s name was Jeremy. Jeremy was that one person in every town who left the small town in search of a better life. He sought after this better life by pursuing a degree from the California Institute of the Arts. Unfortunately, Jeremy was one of those idiots who pursued an obscure

Kristof addresses important ideas concerning the unity of America in his essay “Can Trump Help Us Bridge the ‘God Gulf’?”. In many situations, religious, racial, and geographical factors influence a person’s political stance and vote, leading to divides in society. This religious divide is especially evident in the Republican v.s. Democratic parties. While many liberals discard Christian beliefs, viewing them as archaic and invalid, Donald Trump has forced these religious conservatives to reconsider their beliefs creating common ground between the parties. I believe that this common ground has the potential to lead to discussions and respect between secular and nonsecular groups. This article clearly illustrates this possibility and encourages