Burkean stewardship is an approach to government based on maintaining or improving living conditions for everyone's benefit.
Many conservatives believe that there is something of value in the current way of life, which should be conserved and should be handed to the next generation in at least as good a condition as it is in now. It is a viewpoint that is sometimes referred to as ‘traditionalist’ or ‘Burkean’ – after Edmund Burke’s eloquent depiction of the British political system in the late 18th century, in his letter Reflections on the Revolution in France:
“By a constitutional policy, working after the pattern of nature, we receive, we hold, we transmit our government and our privileges, in the same manner in which we enjoy and transmit our property and our lives. The institutions of policy, the goods of fortune, the gifts of providence, are handed down to us, and from us, in the same course and order. Our political system is placed in a just correspondence and symmetry with the order of the world, and with the mode of existence decreed to a permanent body composed of transitory parts; wherein, by the disposition of a stupendous wisdom, moulding together the great mysterious incorporation of the human race, the whole, at one time, is never old, or middle-aged, or young, but, in a condition of unchangeable constancy, moves on through the varied tenor of perpetual decay, fall, renovation, and progression. Thus, by preserving the method of nature in the conduct of the state, in what we improve, we are never wholly new; in what we retain, we are never wholly obsolete.” [para. 275]
Burke’s description emphasised gradual evolution within a framework of continuity, building upon the foundations of accumulated wisdom. It is “mysterious” because no-one can completely understand or explain how it developed.
Burkean stewardship has to be considered as an approach to government, rather than as an ideology, because its starting point is the status quo. This varies according to time and place – having different sets of values in France, the Netherlands, and the US for example – as described in an Economist article: Future of the right.
It has been argued that the British Conservative party, for example, owes its survival to its lack of ideology and pragmatic adaptation to what people want – as described in a New Statesman article, Why the Tories Keep Winning – although Boris Johnson recently expelled ‘one nation’ conservatives from the party, thereby abandoning pragmatism and causing Malcolm Rifkind to argue that “the Tory Party urgently needs to rediscover the principles that made it so dominant in the first place”.
The traditional form of conservatism is based on experience, so it is unlikely to lead to chaos. It is less risky than pursuit of ideals such as liberty, justice or equality and it has the advantage of conforming to people's expectations – but it can also be seen as clinging to power, as described in the next sub-section (6.2.4.2).
Although stewardship can allow for gradual evolution, it might fail to adapt sufficiently quickly to change. Nowadays, with improved communications, people quickly become aware of what is happening elsewhere and can mobilise support for change in their own countries. Stability depends on people being patient and obedient to their leaders, but this is an increasingly unrealistic assumption.
(This is an archive of a page intended to form part of Edition 4 of the Patterns of Power series of books. The latest versions are at book contents).