Conservatism and liberalism have misguidedly promoted the idea that liberalism is all about an activist government where conservatism is not. But the truth is that from history of conservatism, governments acts are all to interest of the aristocrats. A distinct feature about liberalism is that it should promote the acts of the government that are to the interests of the majority. However, it has also been corrupted to and instead supports the interests of the rich, neglecting the poor.
On the other hand, a democratic government not only supports the system of the majority, but rather the one intuitional expression of a democratic type of culture that is still being invented. Conservatism and liberalism should promote freedom. Conservatives should advocate for freedom for being oppressed by the aristocrats I the society, while liberalism supports the people’s right to live freely and to do what they will. However, these two have failed to attain the purpose. Aristocrats will always be there, no matter what criticisms they get.
Our society will always have the inferior people who will always be dominated by the rich. Alternatively, the freedom that the liberalists campaign for has already resulted to social evils. These have been as a result of people having the freedom to do whatever they wish, and many of them end up doing what will hurt others. Another similarity between the three is that they are all connected with support for equality in the society, regardless of ones race, gender, sexuality or nationality.
Socialism aims at bringing all the resources together, so that every person in the community benefits. It is hoped that by doing this, there will be reduced inequality bin the society by ensuring an equal distribution of wealth. Liberalism ensures equality in that it preaches that all people should have equal opportunities. Examples of such opportunities are equal job opportunities, equal rights to worship, to be educated and to get good health care. Finally, conservatism is about social classes, where there are the rich, who are at a higher social class and who rule the poor.
Then there are the people in the lower class, who must admit that there are in a worse social class, mostly with no hope of ever moving to a higher class. Conclusion In conclusion, I would say that the society has a lot to do concerning these three ideologies. We need to do away with the negative aspects of conservatism, which have resulted to differences in people, hence the existing social classes. The fallacy that changes in conservatism can only be accepted if they are gradual should be done away with to facilitate the process of introducing change.
There are good values that concern liberalism, but have not been followed. It is important to oversee that there is equality, which will help to eliminate the social classes. Equal opportunities and rights also need to be given to all people, without considering their races, gender or nationality. Finally, socialism, although may seem impossible in today’s world may be a good way to end the differences in wealth distribution. The government should also make sure that quality services are given to both the poor and the rich.
References 1) Philip E. Agre, August 2004, “What Is Conservatism and what is wrong with it? ” retrieved on 2/12/2009 from http://polaris. gseis. ucla. edu/pagre/conservatism. html 2) Robert L. Simon, 2002, “The Blackwell Guide to Social and Political Philosophy,” California, Blackwell Publishing. 3) Smith . G. W, 2002, Liberalism: Critical Concepts in Political Theory, New York, Taylor & Francis 4) Wilde Oscar, 2004, “The Soul of Man under Socialism”, Chicago, Kessinger Publishing