Talk:National conservatism

Does this category exist?
Is there really an umbrella big enough for both the Likud and the Kuomintang? Yakuman 21:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

1) I've never heard this term 'National Conservatism used before, and the only evidence of such usage within the article is an unsupported claim that it is widely used 'in Europe'. This need a reference. Is the claim that the term is widely used in Britain or Ireland, ie in the English language? If so, I'm surprised never to have come across it. Or is the claim that an equivelant of the term is used in some other European language? If so, a reference would be useful for that. I'm slightly suspicious that this is a made-up term that doesn't deserve a Wikipedia entry at all, though I'm willing to be convinced otherwise.

2) In any case, the definition provided doesn't fit the UK Independence Party. Eurosceptic, certainly, but the party isn't socially onservative (it is in many respects libertarian), and it isn't 'strongly' against immigration (it doesn't call for a ban on new immigration, only that control over immigration policy should be returned to Westminster from Brussels, and that numbers allowed in per year should roughly match the numbers emigrating from Britain each year.) As UKIP doesn't fit the description provided, I have deleted it from the list of parties in this article. Twilde 25/11/06

I partly agree with you, that may-be there shouldn't be such an article. Though I'm not sure if the "don't deserve" part is right. What I see more prolematic is the fact that connecting "nationalism" and "conservatism" produces so many different results, that it might not be worth trying to write a good article about it. There is at least one party in Estonia that defines itself through "national conservatism" and "christian democracy". This might just justify the existence of an article about "national conservatism" - even though it does not mean that it is a widely used term. I was just thinking whether or not an article of Estonian equivalent to "national conservatism" should be created and so I ended up here. But I have not come across the term in English a lot. May-be we could agree, that the article deserves to exist, but should be more accurate about actual usage of the term and where does the concept as a political idea exist? Another thing about the party in Estonia is that it is absolutely not "eurosceptic", and probably not "VERY" opposed to immigration. Nevertheless, leaving out the "national" part when describing the party would be a loss. So defining is definitely not as simple as it is in the current article.


 * I'm pretty suspicious of the category. It seemed to have arisen as a term out of the alt-right with a whole bunch of other "national- ", "national anarchism" (An absolutely barking mad and largely dead "movement" that tried to import anarchist language into neo-nazi praxis) , "national bolshevism" ("Nazbols" tried to emulate, national bolshevism is an equally whacky creed that came out of russia with the likes of Aleksander Dugin and the chaotic Eduard Liminov" An attempt at dressing neo-naziism in communist clothing. These had some traction in Russia early 2000s but you dont hear much of it no more). At some point fascist groups kinda got the message that they where not going to succeed in entryism against their traditional foes, and switched attention to slightly more plausible right wing entryism (Where arguably the nativist bent in paleoconservatism is already half way to fashy), first with the the "Alt Right", and later with other attempts at coopting the conservative movement. This whole "national conservative" thing seems to me like a ploy to try and adopt a bunch of existing conservative groups and say "Hey look at us, we're not cryptofascists we're mainstream mom and pop conservatives). To be blunt, I'm not convinced at all .Duckmonster (talk) 13:57, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Merge with Social conservatism?

 * I strongly oppose the merge of this article with Social conservatism. They're two completely different concepts. Some national conservatives may be also social conservatives (and viceversa), but this doesn't mean that they are synonims. --Checco 00:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Strongly oppose. National conservatism is a far-right current, present for instance in the French National Front, while social conservatism is a characteristic of right-wing movement in general. As an aside, in the French context at least, "national conservatism" is opposed to "revolutionary nationalism" (see fr:nationalisme révolutionnaire), another far-right tendency closer to Third Position and national bolshevism ideologies. Tazmaniacs 03:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with you on that, but I don't think that national conservatism is necessarily far-right. --Checco 13:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The entry should probably be redefined precisely, and explain varieties of national conservatism. On the cited parties, the League of Polish Families, the National Alliance, the Movement for France and the National Front, and the Swiss People's Party are all usually considered as far-right. The Likud is not, and I gather that the Democratic Unionist Party is not either. Tazmaniacs 15:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, yes. — Nightstallion 16:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The Swiss People's Party is not far-right, as National Alliance undoubtely is not: it is a moderate-conservative parties, with both social-conservative and liberal stances. It is definitely part of the Italian political mainstream, exactly as Forza Italia. --Checco 16:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Third positionist fascism strikes again with more bullshit. Heres how it works. Pick a political position, any position, and tack the word "national" in front of it. Mush in white supremacist nonsense and you have a new fake political movement to recruit people into the neo-nazi actual movement. Witness the abominations! National Bolshevism (This actually exists). National Anarchism (This philosophical absurdity also exists. Aparently the anarchists like the beat the hell out of the 'national anarchists'). I'm sure some dim-wit has invented "National Capitalism", "National liberalism" "National Nationalism", "National Zionism" (Why not , lets get really absurd) , and so on. Suggest: Delete 124.178.179.115 (talk) 16:35, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the National Football League, and National Parks are all a part of the vast third position conspiracy. Thanks for your contribution, you're a integral part of our organization. --Anthonysenn (talk) 00:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Your arguing in bad faith and you know full well what he means. Why even reply if your not going to take it seriously? Duckmonster (talk) 13:58, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Fianna Fail
Neither nationalist nor conservative by any metric, do not belong here. Socially and economically left wing. Arguably we only have very minor parties(with no elected candidates) that are national conservative. see https://www.theburkean.ie/articles/2020/01/02/the-post-national-fianna-fail-politician on Brexit and nationalism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akkPu-FJyiA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.104.131 (talk) 22:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

UKIP
Shouldn't UKIP be on the list here? -Chumchum7 (talk) 12:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * For that matter, shouldn't One Nation Conservatism also be mentioned? TallNapoleon (talk) 07:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

"As such, national conservatives can be distinguished from economic conservatives, for whom free market economic policies, deregulation and fiscal conservatism are the main priorities."

UKIP are strongly supportive of free market economic policies, deregulation and fiscal conservatism, should they really be listed here? In the UK the largest party of this type would be the British National Party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.111.11 (talk) 02:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Aren't BNP an ultranationalist party rather than national conservative?

Parties and Elections in Europe
I have taken this source to RSN. TFD (talk) 09:51, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

A list of US national conservatives
Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt come to mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.87.100.86 (talk • contribs) 07:31, 22 June 2011


 * You could even extend that to Charles Lindenburgh and Henry Ford. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.104.107 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 18 March 2012‎

The PVV
Shouldn't the Party for Freedom (Netherlands) be listed?

Under their Wikipida article it even stands that they're national conservative — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.166.254.106 (talk) 15:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Sources do not support that description. TFD (talk) 17:11, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It should be. 109.243.69.71 (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Non-valid source
This article takes the definition of "national conservatism" from the "Dictionary of Public Administration".

However, the article about "national conservative" in that book, published in 2007, is almost exactly identical to... this wikipedia article in 2006, meaning that the book (at least, in the "national consevative" entry) is a copy of wikipedia.

Then, I think that these book should not be accepted as a "source" - if we use as a source a book that is a copy of the wikipedia article, these mean that, in the end, the article is the "source" of itself.--MiguelMadeira (talk) 22:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I understand your concern, but I think that the 2007 book validates what Wikipedia contained before. Moreover, the content you removed from the article is correct in any case: even without a source, it can stay there with a "citation needed" tag. This is no more the case, anyway. --Checco (talk) 06:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Forum voor Democratie
In the Netherlands we have a new party, forum for democracy, since the last elections. They're also national conservative, should we add them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.106.237.74 (talk) 14:43, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Some suggestions
I propose some changes to the list of parties. First, Austria has 3 parties listed. This is too much. I don't think Austrian People's Party should be there. The FPÖ has already appropriated the national conservative niche and the ÖVP is more liberal conservative (and also christian democratic). Second, Jobbik in Hungary does not seem to suit. Again, Fidesz has appropriated the national conservative niche and Jobbik is more of an openly far-right, ultranationalist party.Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 13:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree on Austria, especially as ÖVP's Wikipedia page does not list this. Jobbik is described as a national conservative party on its Wikipedia page. It has shifted its political position in recent years to the point where many reports describe Fidesz as to the right of it.--Jay942942 (talk) 20:16, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It's only there in the infobox because sympathetic editors prevent its removal. There's no essential difference between Rodina and Jobbik.Miacek (talk) 11:17, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * This conversation is futile unless we can find a reliably sourced definition for the topic. TFD (talk) 01:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Needs to be updated to include American national conservatism
Last month, there was a large conference on "National Conservatism" in Washington DC, attended by a number of politicians and intellectuals broadly aligned with this idea, many aligned with the Trump administration.

https://nationalconservatism.org/

It has gotten quite a bit of coverage and reaction, this being a sampling:


 * https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-rise-of-national-conservatism/2019/08/15/45f0628a-bec4-11e9-a8b0-7ed8a0d5dc5d_story.html
 * https://www.the-american-interest.com/2019/08/15/national-conservatism-a-guide-for-the-perplexed/
 * https://quillette.com/2019/07/31/national-conservatism-and-the-preference-for-state-control/
 * https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/a-big-government-nationalism-or-a-burkean-one/
 * https://www.vox.com/2019/7/17/20696543/national-conservatism-conference-2019-trump
 * https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/7/23/20679172/amy-wax-white-national-conservatism-yoram-hazony-racism

Considering the attention this has gotten as an emerging political ideology in the US, and the fact that this article mainly covers European and Asian national conservatism, it seems that this article is in need of updating to include proper coverage of American national conservatism. It might also be appropriate to list the Republican Party (United States) as a political party with a national conservative faction. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 20:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I totally agree with you on this, though it will not be an easy task to do so that it doesn’t end up as an “editing war” between different fractions. J. P. Fagerback (talk) 21:29, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Fascism
Hello,

It seems this page is promoting an euphemism fascists use to disguise themselves. This page should redirect to Fascism, or at least have a clear link established in the introduction. 159.134.255.230 (talk) 10:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

I did corrected the introduction. If this is cancelled I would consider adding a POV dispute to this article. 159.134.255.230 (talk) 10:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Do you have a source that spells this out? -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 12:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)


 * National conservatism per se has nothing to do with fascism and it is not necessarily a far-right ideology. --Checco (talk) 12:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Unsupported classification
I don't really do politics, but I jumped on this because I believe this article has gone wildly wrong on classifications, which are my thing. (I don't support or oppose the subject; I came this way because of the tussles in Brussels this week.) The concept 'National conservatism' is a newly minted one, self-defined by the Edmund Burke Foundation for a specified set of political parties joining a movement since 2019. Attributing the name retrospectively to political parties from the past is like describing Boudica as a 'Eurosceptic'. All those should be deleted. Furthermore, those chosen for that list of past 'national conservative' parties is bizarre: the Edmund Burke Foundation concept is of tradition and individualism in liberal democracy, but the list includes past parties which were the polar opposite; opposing tradition, individualism, liberalism and democracy. It is ludicrous. Hogweard (talk) 12:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I would not confuse "national conservatism" — the ideology — with "National Conservatisnm" — the conference. Also, Edmund Burke would not agree with the tenets of the "National Conservatism" conference, as he was more of a liberal-conservative and surely neither a nationalist nor a national-conservative. --Checco (talk) 13:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I would certainly agree that Edmund Burke was a liberal for his time. He gained a reputation as a champion of Tory ideas though he was a Whig. The philosophy of modern British Conservative and Unionist Party actually comes from the Liberal Unionists rather than the old Conservative Party: individualism and free enterprise - or maybe from American tradition. Eastern European conservatives were heavily influenced by Roger Scruton - socially conservative, with free trade and a small state. That makes it all the more bizarre that editors have tried to link a Burkean/Scrutonian movement with its exact opposite. Hogweard (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2024 (UTC)