An interesting essay by Roger Scruton about the difference between conservatism and liberalism:

It is a tautology to say that a conservative is a person who wants to conserve things; the question is what things? To this I think we can give a simple one-word answer, namely: us. At the heart of every conservative endeavor is the effort to conserve a historically given community. In any conflict the conservative is the one who sides with "us" against "them"--not knowing, but trusting. He is the one who looks for the good in the institutions, customs and habits that he has inherited. He is the one who seeks to defend and perpetuate an instinctive sense of loyalty, and who is therefore suspicious of experiments and innovations that put loyalty at risk.


So defined, conservatism is less a philosophy than a temperament; but it is, I believe, a temperament that emerges naturally from the experience of society, and which is indeed necessary if societies are to endure. The conservative strives to diminish social entropy. The second law of thermodynamics implies that, in the long run, all conservatism must fail. But the same is true of life itself, and conservatism might equally be defined as the social organism's will to live.

This awareness of society's needs as well as one's own is what I find lacking in libertarian positions. Usually, conservatism and libertarianism overlap, since what Americans should want to conserve is freedom and individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution. However, individual rights and freedoms can only exist to the degree that the society itself is preserved. This calls for a balance between rights and duties. When we emphasize rights over duty and responsibility, we threaten the roots of those rights.


Of course, we differ in what we consider necessary to maintain a healthy society and even in how we define the term. My view, and I think, the view of most conservatives is that the traditional family is the source of good citizens and the place where values can be taught without interference from the state, and should be supported and fostered by society. I also believe that private charity is the appropriate way to deal with poverty, because government welfare programs create welfare rights, which are inimical to the ideal of citizenship, independence. Individuals who are independent, educated and aware of public issues make proper citizens. I fear that we have lost much of that ideal, and that the current welfare state will ultimately destroy rather than enhance freedom.