IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prg/jnlelg/v2015y2015i1id410p15-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conservatism vs. Neoconservatism: A Philosophical Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jack Kerwick

Abstract

In the world of contemporary American politics, the "conservative movement" continues to figure prominently as a force that is, for all practical purposes, inseparable from the Republican Party. As the 2016 presidential election cycle gets under way, well over a dozen Republican contenders are laboring tirelessly to establish their "conservative" bona fides. In truth, however, neither the "conservative" movement nor most "conservative" politicians are conservative at all. Rather, they are neoconservative, and between neoconservatism and traditional or classical conservatism there is all of the difference, a difference in kind. In this paper, I cite both scholarly and popular representatives of both traditions of thought to show that each depends upon epistemological, ontological, and ethical-political suppositions that are not only fundamentally distinct from, but radically at odds with, those of the other.

Suggested Citation

  • Jack Kerwick, 2015. "Conservatism vs. Neoconservatism: A Philosophical Analysis," E-LOGOS, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(1), pages 15-27.
    • Handle: RePEc:prg:jnlelg:v:2015:y:2015:i:1:id:410:p:15-27
    DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://elogos.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.e-logos.410.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://elogos.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.e-logos.410.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18267/j.e-logos.410?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prg:jnlelg:v:2015:y:2015:i:1:id:410:p:15-27. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Stanislav Vojir (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/uevsecz.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.