What do conservatives stand for?

The words left and right are closely associated with differing “wings” of the political spectrum.

But how did liberal politics become associated with the word left, anyways? And why are conservatives labelled as right?

When we discuss the origins of words, we often warn against origin stories that sound too good to be true. Well, in this case, the history of the terms left and right in the context of politics turns out to be a fascinating exception.

In this article, we’ll discuss the modern meanings of each term and then delve into the quite literal origins of how words for opposite directions came to be associated with opposing political views. We’ll cross the aisle to cover it all—right, left, and center.

What does left mean?

In politics, the word left is applied to people and groups that have liberal views. That generally means they support progressive reforms, especially those seeking greater social and economic equality.

The term far left is often used to refer to those who are considered to have more extreme, revolutionary views, such as those who espouse communism and socialism. Collectively, people and groups, as well as the positions they hold, are referred to as the Left or the left wing.

What does right mean?

The word right, in contrast, refers to people or groups that have conservative views. That generally means they are disposed to preserving existing conditions and institutions. Or, they want to restore traditional ones and limit change.

The term far right is often used for more extreme, nationalistic viewpoints, including fascism and some oppressive ideologies. People and groups, as well as their positions, are collectively referred to as the Right or the right wing.

The origin of left and right in politics

The origin of the political left and right do actually have to with the physical directions, left and right. Time for a history lesson.

Left and right originally referred to seating positions in the 1789 French National Assembly, the parliament France formed after the French Revolution.

Relative to the viewpoint of the speaker (chair) of this assembly, to the right were seated nobility and more high-ranking religious leaders. To the left were seated commoners and less powerful clergy. The right-hand side (called le côté droit in French) became associated with more reactionary views (more pro-aristocracy) and the left-hand side (le côté gauche) with more radical views (more pro-middle class).

Left and right, as political adjectives, are recorded in English in the 1790s.

Seating positions closer to the center of the 1789 French National Assembly likewise became associated with moderate positions, which is what the word center now conveys in the context of politics.

In other word, people who consider themselves in the center favor moderate positions—those not too far toward either end of the spectrum. People holding these views are often called moderates. Political independents often fall at the center of the political spectrum. Center-left refers to people, groups, or views that are just to the left of the political center in a country. Center-right refers to being a little bit to the right of center. Of course, these labels and their interpretations are subjective and vary from person to person and place to place.

In the US, people often use left as a shorthand for the Democratic Party and right as a shorthand for the Republican Party. But keep in mind that politics is always far more complicated than the labels we give to it—and each other.

Do you know why Democrats and Republicans are donkeys and elephants? After you read this, you will!

The word is invoked to refer to a number of surprisingly diverse worldviews—and politicians take advantage of that.

The word is invoked to refer to a number of surprisingly diverse worldviews—and politicians take advantage of that.

What do conservatives stand for?

Roughly two-fifths of Americans call themselves “conservative.” What do they mean by the word? It depends. And during a Republican primary, that can be problematic. Every candidate is vying to be the standard-bearer for conservatism, and exploiting the fact that its meaning is variable.

Thus the need for this exercise.

What follows is an attempt to tease out the many different worldviews Americans are referring to when they invoke the word conservative—and then to figure out which of these worldviews best describe Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul, the choices before Republicans. Bear in mind that what follows aren’t my definitions of conservatism, but what various Americans mean when they use the word.

  1. An aversion to rapid change; a belief that tradition and prevailing social norms often contain within them handed-down wisdom; and mistrust of attempts to remake society so that it conforms to an abstract account of what would be just or efficient.  
  2. A desire to preserve the political philosophy and rules of government articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.
  3. A belief that it is imperative to preserve traditional morality, as it is articulated in the Bible, through cultural norms.
  4. A belief that it is imperative to preserve traditional morality, as it is articulated in the Bible, using cultural norms and the power of the state.
  5. An embrace of free-market capitalism, and a belief in the legitimacy of market outcomes.
  6. A belief that America is an exceptional nation, a shining city on a hill, whose rightful role is leader of the free world.
  7. A belief that America should export its brand of democracy through force of arms.
  8. The conviction that government should undertake, on behalf of the American polity, grand projects that advance our “national greatness” and ennoble our characters.
  9. An embrace of localism, community and family ties, human scale, and a responsibility to the future.
  10. A belief that America shouldn’t intervene in the affairs of other nations except to defend ourselves from aggression and enforce contracts and treaties.
  11. A desire to return to the way things once were.
  12. Affinity for, identification with, or embrace of Red America’s various cultural cues. (For example, gun ownership, a preference for single-family homes oriented around highways rather than urban enclaves organized around public transit, embrace of country music, disdain for arugula and fancy mustard, etc.)
  13. Disdain for American liberalism, multiculturalism, identity politics, affirmative action, welfare, European-style social policies, and the left and its ideas generally.
  14. A desire to be left alone by government, often coupled with a belief that being left alone is a natural right.
  15. A principled belief in federalism.
  16. The belief that taxes should be lower and government smaller.
  17. The belief that the national debt and deficits put America in peril.
  18. The belief that whenever possible, government budgets should be balanced.
  19. Consciousness of the fallibility of man, and an awareness of the values of skepticism, doubt, and humility.
  20. Realism in foreign policy.
  21. Non-interventionism in foreign policy.

Granting that any list of this kind is imperfect, I contend the foregoing is sufficient for our purposes. So where do the presidential candidates I’ve mentioned fall?

As best I can tell, Mitt Romney definitely shares the attitudes in 2, 3, 5, 6, 16, and 17. There is controversy about whether he in fact believes in 4 or 13. And he may well believe in 15, but if so it isn’t a defining part of his worldview.

Newt Gingrich definitely subscribes to 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, and 13. He inconsistently invokes 15 and 16, taking actions contrary to them on many occasions.

Rick Santorum is a believer in 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 17, and 19. He claims to believe in 16 but has been inconsistent.

Ron Paul subscribes to 2, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 21.

Unwieldy as this approach to grappling with the candidates is, it complicates the conversation about who is “most conservative” in a way that increases rather than detracts from clarity. And for that reason, I hope this is the beginning of a conversation, for I’m sure my imperfect product can be improved upon, especially by folks who actually self-identify as conservatives. Are there any significant strains I’ve missed? Are distinct ways of thinking conflated in a single item? Are the beliefs of the candidates accurately summed up? Is there a more concise way to lay all this out? I’ll be checking comments, reading email, and surveying the blogosphere to see how this might be improved.

Flickr user Betancourt