Talk:Conservatism

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Conservatism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 3 months

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, use the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

More information Associated task forces: ...

Sociology High‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Social and political High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy

Politics Top‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Top‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Close

To-do list for Conservatism: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2026-01-09

Priority 1 (top)

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

So why does the history section start with modern conservatism?

Doesn't history suggest, a whole history? 101.115.131.93 (talk) 07:05, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes history breaks when you try to stretch it back too far. It makes no sense to speak of conservatism and tenuous pre-modern analogies as if they are the same thing. That would do a great disservice to all involved. Remsense ‥ 论 07:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Inaccurate source mentioning "progressive conservatism" in Canada

There is a source in the intro talking about the distinction between progressive and reactionary conservatisms that specifically focuses on Canada and the name of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and claims its name was chosen to distance itself from reactionary conservatism. That is not why it was renamed in 1942. Its name was was chosen when John Bracken who had formerly been part of the Progressive Party of Manitoba insisted on the Conservative Party adding the name "Progressive" to its name, it does not have any significance to a division between progressive and reactionary conservatisms and this source claiming this is wrong. BlueberryA96 (talk) 01:21, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Long list of national examples of conservatism is unnecessary

There is a long list of national examples of conservatism that is unnecessary and bloats the article with specific examples. I have seen this phenomenon of national lists of examples of ideologies on multiple Wikipedia articles, typically they are not helpful at all. For instance the list currently includes a section describing conservatism in the city-state of Singapore, I don't mean to be rude but seriously does the history of conservatism of Singapore have any widespread significance to the history of conservatism as a whole? Also people will say "Why isn't this country's conservatism on the list?" and hypothetically you could end up having to show every single national example to address people complaining about national variants not being mentioned and that is ridiculous. If specific national examples are significant to the history of conservatism as a whole then they can be addressed in a section on the history of conservatism as a whole.

I believe the list of national examples should be removed completely and that focus on the history of conservatism as a whole can address those highly influential national examples that have influenced conservatism as a whole. BlueberryA96 (talk) 01:32, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Sourced sentence: Encyclopædia Britannica

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi

Dudek edit

This edit purports to add material but the main thing I see it doing is removing two statements about conservative parties in Poland cited to an academic. Please explain why. Simonm223 (talk) 15:06, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

This was the paragraph before the edit:

PiS has taken a populist and statist approach to economics, maintaining regulations while in office (although being divided on that topic and sometimes supporting moderate deregulation), state control over industries and media, greatly expanding social welfare and applying Keynesian-esque "anti-crisis shields", differentiating itself from previous conservative political parties and movements like AWS or Endecja which believed in economic liberalism. Another difference to AWS is PiS' euroscepticism. Though not opposing European Union membership, PiS pursues an assertive policy of conflict with the European Commission, which, in reaction, took a hostile stance against PiS. In the European Parliament, PiS belongs to the European Conservatives and Reformists group. Liberal media in Poland is vehemently biased against PiS and opposed to its rule, often calling it authoritarian. Liberal scholar Antoni Dudek rejects giving PiS the authoritarian label, suggesting that PiS rejects the ideals of liberal democracy and instead embraces a "national democratic" or illiberal democratic form of governance.

This is the paragraph after:

PiS has taken a populist and statist approach to economics, expanding state control over industries and media, greatly expanding social welfare and applying Keynesian-esque "anti-crisis shields", differentiating itself from previous conservative political parties and movements like AWS or Endecja which believed in economic liberalism. The party would "regulate the market strongly via the active role of the state", pursuing greater regulations against banks, large enterprises and the stock market; at the same time, it also attempted to implement deregulation for small businesses and enterprises. Another difference to AWS is PiS' euroscepticism. Though not opposing European Union membership, PiS pursues an assertive policy of conflict with the European Commission, which, in reaction, took a hostile stance against PiS. In the European Parliament, PiS belongs to the European Conservatives and Reformists group. Liberal media in Poland is vehemently biased against PiS and opposed to its rule, often calling it authoritarian. Liberal scholar Antoni Dudek rejects giving PiS the authoritarian label, suggesting that PiS rejects the ideals of liberal democracy and instead embraces a "national democratic" or illiberal democratic form of governance.

You seem to have been confused by the revision screen - it marks Dudek's reference as removed (in orange) but then marks it at the end of the as (re-)added (in blue). Brat Forelli🦊 15:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, I guess my coffee hasn't kicked in yet. Simonm223 (talk) 15:34, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Happens to all of us! Brat Forelli🦊 15:45, 25 February 2026 (UTC)