An Unhappy Marriage: Social Conservatives and Fiscal Conservatives
No coalition in politics is more contradictory or asymmetrical than the one that exists between social and fiscal conservatives.
It is often said that opposites attract, and no clearer sign best illustrates this adage as the dynamic within the conservative coalition.
Throughout most of the developed world, the political Right is not a united bloc, it is a patchwork of different tribes and camps, hastily stitched together by their shared revulsion of the Left and broader liberal values. Above the surface, conservative political parties present a united front. But this is merely a facade, an illusion. Underneath, far below the sleek, pristine image projected for the cameras, simmers a far more febrile debate between two conflicting wings of thought - social conservatism and economic conservatism. While similar divisions exist within left-wing circles, none of them are as polarizing or contradictory.
For the uninitiated, it might be worth a brief recap. Fiscal conservatism is the economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt. The principles of capitalism, limited government, and laissez-faire economics form its ideological foundation. Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher originate from this discipline. Social conservatism, on the other hand, is a political ideology focused on the preservation of traditional values and beliefs. It focuses on a concern with moral and social values, which proponents of the ideology see as having been degraded in modern society by liberalism.
Because of the group’s shared animosity towards liberal movements, the two schools of thought have been entwined together in an uneasy marriage for decades, especially in the Anglo-centric world, where the political voting systems of FPTP disincentivizes third parties, encouraging them to merge into singular voting blocs.
This marriage between social conservatives and economic conservatives, however, is an inherently contradictory one. The dichotomy that exists between their competing aims is ultimately irreconcilable and prone to schisms. While social conservatives advocate for the cultural and social homogeneity of a community, economic conservatives will instead flirt with lax border controls to feed the economic system they’re so enamored with, flooding the country with an endless stream of cheap, expendable labour that ultimately dilutes the social makeup of the community. This was recently illustrated by Liz Truss’ government, which, against the wishes of her ardently Brexit, low-immigration party members, advocated for a simplified visa regime to attract foreign workers. Though brief in tenure, her administration lifted the cap on seasonal agricultural workers and broadband engineers, and made other amendments to the shortage occupations list, allowing key sectors to recruit more overseas staff. According to senior officials familiar with the negotiations, there were also proposals to introduce a new visa for workers who had graduated from one of the top 50 or top 100 global universities.
Immigration isn’t the only dividing line between the two factions. In accordance with their belief that social hierarchies are an inherent good that structures societies, social conservatives will often defend the necessity of families, particularly the nuclear family, as one of the key building blocks of modern society; however, the economic orthodoxy perpetuated by economic conservatives prevents any new families from emerging and thriving; instead, burdening them with high rent, low and stagnant wages and a work-life balance that forces many to forfeit the possibility of having children altogether. Forty years of neo-liberal/neo-conservative economic policies have seen the fertility rates in most European states fall far below 2.0 per woman - considered the natural replacement rate - as new families struggle to adapt to a regime of chronic underpay.
One other area that social conservatives profess to be infatuated with is the defence of the arts and culture, something which they have identified as being the adhesive to a community, a belief that heritage can validate the experiences of the past and provide a framework for future generations to strive towards. However, since culture and heritage holds no intrinsic economic value, under a laissez-faire economic system, preserving and protecting it becomes a secondary concern. Fiscal hawks, increasingly concerned about bringing excessive spending under control in a bid to curtail rising debt levels, eventually turn to austerity, gutting the arts and entertainment industry. In the last year alone, combined local authority funding for arts, theatres and museums across the UK is predicted to have fallen by 6.3%, a real terms drop of £60m. And now, after these immense cuts to funding, arts classes in state schools are in serious jeopardy. In 2022, The Guardian reported that each year just £9.40 is allocated per student for all music, arts, and cultural programmes. For 2023-2024, the overall amount funded to schools on a per-pupil basis was £7,460. Without an adequate array of resources, combined with many schools now only scheduling a single lesson of art a week (sometimes even only an hour), has resulted in what many critics sees as children not taking “pride” in their work. Creativity is, in fact, devaluing alongside the decrease in funding.
By all available metrics, only economically interventionist polices - like free, universal childcare, higher minimum wages, more state home building programs, etc. - can mitigate these underlying structural weaknesses, not the free market, which remains indifferent to the concerns of the social conservatives. At the present moment, it seems as if social conservatives are more than willing to betray their core values to maintain this uneasy alliance with fiscal conservatives. But without adopting policies that are more permissible to some role of state involvement in the economy, social conservatives will struggle to realise their vision of a strong, functioning community. Instead, the principle of profit maximization will dictate all, weakening the beliefs and traditions social conservatives claim to vehemently cherish.