Why it is mistaken to consider conservatism pessimistic in its view of human nature.

Conservatism has always had a mystical quality that has made a definitive statement of its outlook elusive. It has been described as complex, contradictory or misunderstood. Yet one of the few tenets of conservatism allegedly certified is that conservatism holds a pessimistic outlook on human nature. Indeed in some cases, conservative thinkers have said as much. Leo Strauss depressingly stated: ‘Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed.' However, negative sentiments such as Strauss' are not representative of conservatism and its general approach to human nature. Whilst there are contradictory accounts within the conservative tradition, the central perspective of human nature held by conservatism is a realistic, and generally positive one inherited from classical liberalism. This realism and the acceptance of events of evil which is commonly misconstrued as pessimism. Modern conservatism's realist approach to human nature has come to underpin the ideology in its anti-statism, anti-communism and limited economic intervention.

Ronald Reagan wisely observed that ‘The classic liberal used to be the man who believed the individual was, and should be forever, the master of his destiny. That is now the conservative position.' Modern conservatism and its belief in limited government stems from classical liberalism and its belief that the state should only be responsible for the protection of its citizens, amongst other basic functions. This is based upon the goodness and trustworthiness of individuals, whilst accepting the need to protect against the potential for evil in society, or in individual actions. It is because the potential for evil is recognised that it is focussed upon by conservatism, as this provides purpose for the state. The following excerpts are typical of classical liberalism and its realist stance upon human nature, favouring individualism and limited government:

Wilhelm von Humboldt: ‘Individuality springs naturally from freedom of action, and the greatest diversity in the agents, it tends to directly produce them…. The highest ideal, therefore, of the co-existence of human beings, seems to me to consist in a union in which each strives to develop himself from his own inmost nature, and for his own sake.'

John Locke: ‘The great and chief end, therefore, of men's uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property.'

James Mill: ‘The very principle of human nature upon which the necessity of Government is founded, the propensity of one man to possess himself of the objects of desire at the cost of another…'

John Stuart Mill: ‘The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people.'

Thomas Paine: ‘Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness, the former promotes positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices.'

These statements are typical of classical liberalism. From von Humboldt's praise of freedom of action, to Paine's reasoning for limited government, classical liberalism is realistic in its outlook. It is not wholly optimistic, but not wholly pessimistic. It is realistic. Holistically appraised, they champion individualism as central to society, but accept that individuality creates the potential for a minority of evil, requiring the introduction of order through limited government. J. S. Mill's ‘harm principle' was effectively based upon this belief and provided the raison d'être for the existence of government. Such thought has been adopted by conservatism. Michael Oakeshott has observed that it is human pursuit of moral perfection and subsequent disagreement that causes society as whole, but not the individuals, to be considered evil.

The reason for negative aspects of human nature being focussed upon is that it is these minor flaws in human nature that give justification for limited government and its scope. Failure to recognise the individual as entirely positive and occasionally capable of evil is focussed upon because it is of such importance to political philosophy. Accepting that human nature was entirely good would not justify the state and would justify anarchism. The acceptance of minimal government maximises individual freedom, whilst retaining suitable security. The freedom that necessarily emanates from limited government and limited economic intervention inevitably places faith in people to be generally good, though the basic controls exist to confront evil.

The realist stance on human nature held by conservatism is undoubtedly derived from classical liberalism, accepting that the majority of individuals and their actions are good, whilst empowering the state to prevent, or punish, evil. By accepting the potential for evil, conservatism accepts the need for limited government in the same manner as classical liberalism. Unfortunately, this focus upon evil aspects of human nature has led to the incorrect conclusion that conservatism is pessimistic in its outlook. Rather, it is a realist approach which is forced to account for the worst in people, as well as the best. Limited government provides the balance between maximising individual freedom and protecting people from evil. Ronald Reagan, at the dedication of his Presidential Library stated: ‘I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph. And there's purpose and worth to each and every life.' The quote, like so many of Reagan's, encapsulates conservatism and its realistic outlook regarding the majority of individuals and their actions are good, but recognising that evil exists, outnumbered though it may be.