One of the shibboleths of contemporary American politics is that cities and conservatives don’t mix. Decades of widening cultural and electoral divides between cities and their suburban and rural counterparts have contributed to an increasingly widespread belief that cities are intrinsically inhospitable to conventional morality, individual responsibility, and a thriving civil society. But as the history of the past four decades bears out, the injection of ideas and policies from the right—such as proactive policing, fiscal responsibility, and work over welfare—can revitalize cities.
The opportunities unlocked by density, moreover, can foster robust civic engagement and resilient, multigenerational communities, providing an antidote to record-high levels of reported loneliness and isolation. Conservative urbanism therefore holds promise, both to resist idealistic progressivism and the entrenched political forces that impede accountability and efficiency, and as a disposition within urban communities that appreciates the need for both preservation and change, in the continuous and communitarian spirit of Edmund Burke.
Conservatives since Burke have appreciated the uniqueness, complexity, and fragility of society. The immense coordination and cooperation necessary for any metropolis to thrive imply vulnerability to the consequences that result from any one thing going wrong. An outage on a single subway line, say, can disrupt life across the city. Combatting this law of urban entropy requires continuous effort, calling for a know-how that can quickly respond to challenges as they arise.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member