To what extent do conservatives agree on the importance of paternalism? 24
marks
Teacher Feedback:
Overall: A good and well-argued essay with a well substantiated argument and clear
judgement.
Areas for improvement to get full marks:
Counterargument could be made stronger with clearer reasons why the
dispute in Neo liberalism cannot be used to justify your argument that
conservatives value paternalism. You could also use more sophisticated
language to further improve the quality of the argument and how it is
delivered.
More recent examples could also be used (as done with Johnson in 2020) to
further justify your argument and show political awareness, all which pleases
the examiner!
Conservatives agree on the importance of paternalism to a great extent. Traditional and one
nation conservatives fundamentally agree on paternalism and endorse it completely in
society on the basis that it is the moral duty of those with wealth in society to aid those less
fortunate. In addition to this, they would further agree on paternalism because they believe
the elite are the most capable in providing aid to those in financial difficulty. Whilst neo
liberals such as Rand and Nozick would fundamentally oppose paternalism on the basis that
it creates an ‘artificial’ sense of obligation towards others, ultimately this cannot be used to
justify the notion that conservatives do not agree on paternalism in society because the
majority of them do agree. Neo liberalism is also a distinct element of conservatism with
differing views and thus cannot be used to justify that conservatives do not agree on the
importance of conservatism.
Firstly, both traditional and one nation conservatives fundamentally endorse paternalism in
society and its importance. They do so on the basis that those elite in society should have a
moral obligation to do so. For example, Burke maintained that the elite were the ‘natural
aristocracy’ and should morally aid those in financial difficulty. The Cecil family for example
is an example of elite conservative rulers which aided the poor in their hardships. One nation
conservative would completely agree with this notion of aiding the poor on the basis that the
gap between the rich and the poor needs to be mitigated and lessened in order to ensure, as
R.A Butler claimed bring the two nations ‘into one single entity’. Disraeli for example passed
legislation such as the Artisan’s dwelling Act which allowed local elites to buy council homes
in slum areas and provide cleaner ones for work for the working classes. More importantly,
this notion of lessening the gap between the rich and poor can be seen in Boris Johnson’s
policy in 2020 to provide financial assistance to those suffering from the pandemic. Both
conservatives value the importance of aiding the poor and as such agree on the importance
of paternalism.
Furthermore, both one nation and traditional conservatives further agree on the importance
of paternalism as they maintain that the elite are the only suitable individuals to do so.
Cameron called this type of conservatism to be ‘compassionate conservatism and thinkers
such as Oakeshott fundamentally endorse paternalism as it creates a stronger sense of
community. Both conservatives value the importance of a structured and harmonious society
as the only alternative was a ‘war of every man against every man’ as argued by Hobbes in
his canonical work ‘Leviathan’. For this harmonious society, both conservatives agree on the
marks
Teacher Feedback:
Overall: A good and well-argued essay with a well substantiated argument and clear
judgement.
Areas for improvement to get full marks:
Counterargument could be made stronger with clearer reasons why the
dispute in Neo liberalism cannot be used to justify your argument that
conservatives value paternalism. You could also use more sophisticated
language to further improve the quality of the argument and how it is
delivered.
More recent examples could also be used (as done with Johnson in 2020) to
further justify your argument and show political awareness, all which pleases
the examiner!
Conservatives agree on the importance of paternalism to a great extent. Traditional and one
nation conservatives fundamentally agree on paternalism and endorse it completely in
society on the basis that it is the moral duty of those with wealth in society to aid those less
fortunate. In addition to this, they would further agree on paternalism because they believe
the elite are the most capable in providing aid to those in financial difficulty. Whilst neo
liberals such as Rand and Nozick would fundamentally oppose paternalism on the basis that
it creates an ‘artificial’ sense of obligation towards others, ultimately this cannot be used to
justify the notion that conservatives do not agree on paternalism in society because the
majority of them do agree. Neo liberalism is also a distinct element of conservatism with
differing views and thus cannot be used to justify that conservatives do not agree on the
importance of conservatism.
Firstly, both traditional and one nation conservatives fundamentally endorse paternalism in
society and its importance. They do so on the basis that those elite in society should have a
moral obligation to do so. For example, Burke maintained that the elite were the ‘natural
aristocracy’ and should morally aid those in financial difficulty. The Cecil family for example
is an example of elite conservative rulers which aided the poor in their hardships. One nation
conservative would completely agree with this notion of aiding the poor on the basis that the
gap between the rich and the poor needs to be mitigated and lessened in order to ensure, as
R.A Butler claimed bring the two nations ‘into one single entity’. Disraeli for example passed
legislation such as the Artisan’s dwelling Act which allowed local elites to buy council homes
in slum areas and provide cleaner ones for work for the working classes. More importantly,
this notion of lessening the gap between the rich and poor can be seen in Boris Johnson’s
policy in 2020 to provide financial assistance to those suffering from the pandemic. Both
conservatives value the importance of aiding the poor and as such agree on the importance
of paternalism.
Furthermore, both one nation and traditional conservatives further agree on the importance
of paternalism as they maintain that the elite are the only suitable individuals to do so.
Cameron called this type of conservatism to be ‘compassionate conservatism and thinkers
such as Oakeshott fundamentally endorse paternalism as it creates a stronger sense of
community. Both conservatives value the importance of a structured and harmonious society
as the only alternative was a ‘war of every man against every man’ as argued by Hobbes in
his canonical work ‘Leviathan’. For this harmonious society, both conservatives agree on the
