Peter Hitchens: 'Real conservatives are in favour of all kinds of unelected power and authority.'

Real conservatives are in favour of all kinds of unelected power and authority.

In his thought-provoking quote, "Real conservatives are in favour of all kinds of unelected power and authority," Peter Hitchens presents an intriguing perspective on the role of power and authority in the conservative ideology. At first glance, this statement may seem counterintuitive, as the concept of unelected power often contradicts the principles of democracy and individual freedom. However, by delving deeper into Hitchens' words, we can uncover a hidden philosophical concept that sheds new light on the subject.To begin with, let us examine the straightforward meaning and importance of this quote. Hitchens suggests that true conservatives support various forms of non-elected power and authority. This notion challenges the commonly held belief that conservatives prioritize limited government and individual liberty. Instead, Hitchens seems to assert that conservativism encompasses a broader understanding of power, recognizing the importance of institutions and structures that operate independently from democratic processes.While this notion may initially seem contradictory to the principles of democracy, it raises an important question about the role of authority in society. Are democratically elected officials the sole source of legitimate power, or can there be other forms of authority that contribute to the functioning of a healthy society? To explore this question, we can turn to a philosophical concept known as "epistocracy."Epistocracy is a political theory that advocates for the rule of the knowledgeable. In this system, political power is vested in those who possess a certain level of expertise or knowledge in specific domains. Proponents argue that by entrusting power to those who are best equipped to make informed decisions, the overall well-being of the society can be optimized, regardless of whether these individuals are elected or not.Drawing a parallel between epistocracy and Hitchens' claim, we can see the potential convergence in their underlying principles. Both ideas challenge the notion that power should rest solely in the hands of elected representatives, suggesting that unelected individuals or institutions can contribute positively to governance. However, it is important to note that while epistocracy emphasizes knowledge and expertise, Hitchens' statement is broader in scope, encompassing various aspects of unelected power and authority.One could argue that Hitchens' assertion aligns with the conservative belief in the importance of tradition, hierarchy, and stability. Conservatives often value institutions that have stood the test of time, deeming them as repositories of accumulated wisdom and authority. These institutions, such as the monarchy, religious bodies, or unelected judiciary, can provide a check on the potentially fleeting whims of popular opinion and ensure continuity, even in times of societal transformation.Furthermore, embracing unelected power and authority may serve as a counterbalance to the excesses of democratic populism. While democratic processes are undoubtedly essential for ensuring accountability and giving individuals a voice, there is a risk of succumbing to the tyranny of the majority. By incorporating unelected entities, conservatives argue that the decision-making process can be buffered from short-term political pressures, fostering long-term stability and resilience.On the other hand, critics may contend that undemocratic forms of power can lead to abuses and the consolidation of authority by entrenched elites. The absence of a democratic mandate may undermine the principles of representation and compromise, eroding the legitimacy of governance. Additionally, unelected authority figures may lack accountability mechanisms and be less responsive to the concerns and needs of the wider population.In conclusion, Peter Hitchens' quote opens up a fascinating discussion about the role of power and authority in conservative ideology. By suggesting that conservatives support various forms of unelected power and authority, he challenges our conventional understanding of democracy and prompts us to consider the importance of stability, tradition, and expertise in governance. While this idea may invite philosophical exploration, it also sparks debates about the potential risks and benefits associated with non-elected sources of authority. Ultimately, the balance between democratic processes and unelected power remains a critical aspect to consider when shaping the future of governance.