Understanding human nature is a fundamental starting point for anyone attempting to build a coherent political philosophy.

Generally speaking, there are two views: Human nature is either fixed or malleable. Traditionally, conservatives, libertarians, and classical liberals fall into the camp that believes human nature is fixed but with tendencies toward both good and evil. Progressives, liberals, socialists, Marxists, and others view human nature as malleable, that is, it can be changed. Many conservatives adopt an essentially pessimistic view of human nature which is seen as in several respects flawed, imperfect and corruptible. This overall view may derive in some cases from a religious belief in original sin and in others from more secular beliefs in human frailty. In the conservative view human beings may be seen as driven not by reason but by basic emotions, impulses and self-interest and their activities can be explained more in terms of their individual human frailty than in terms of the social disadvantages of poverty and inequality which are given greater emphasis by socialists as is seen by the differences in conservative and socialist approaches to the explanation of crime, poverty and educational achievement. Conservatives argue that social reality is extremely complex and that human beings lack the intellectual capacity to understand fully the social forces affecting the development of human societies. For this reason they argue that grand programs for social change such as those favored by new liberals and socialists should be avoided and that social change should proceed only gradually in accordance with changing circumstances. However given the limitations of human nature conservatives reject the individualism of classic liberals and follow Thomas Hobbes in arguing that some government of the individual is clearly necessary in order to promote social order. Conservatives emphasize also that individuals vary considerably in their talents and abilities and they are therefore supporters of elite government in which the responsibilities of government are allocated to those with the appropriate talents and abilities. In the C18th and C19th many conservatives continued to support government by a landed aristocratic elite but in the course of the C20th have come to accept that elite government will be acceptable to the people only if it is chosen on a relatively democratic and meritocratic basis. However modern conservatives are no great supporters of popular sovereignty believing that political decisions should be taken by government elites best able to take such decisions effectively. In actual practice socialist and liberal leader seem to share this view. "So it is that Conservatism, throughout history, has regarded man neither as a potential pawn of other men, nor as a part of a general collectivity in which the sacredness and the separate identity of individual human beings are ignored. Throughout history, true Conservatism

has been at war equally with autocrats and with 'democratic' Jacobins. The true Conservative was sympathetic with the plight of the hapless peasant under the tyranny of the French monarchy. And he was equally revolted at the attempt to solve that problem by a mob tyranny that paraded under the banner of egalitarianism. The conscience of the Conservative is pricked by anyone who would debase the dignity of the individual human being. Today, therefore, he is at odds with dictators who rule by terror, and equally with those gentler collectivists who ask our permission to play God with the human race. With this view of the nature of man, it is understandable that the Conservative looks upon politics as the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. The Conservative is the first to understand that the practice of freedom requires the establishment of order: it is impossible for one man to be free if another is able to deny him the exercise of his freedom. But the Conservative also recognizes that the political power on which order is based is a self-aggrandizing force; that its appetite grows with eating. He knows that the utmost vigilance and care are required to keep political power within its proper bounds."
Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of a Conservative , 1960

Conservatives believe that as the result of either natural (i.e. biological and cultural evolution) or supernatural forces (i.e. God), there is such a thing as human nature, which is composed of certain permanent and universal features. Given these features, there exist rules of social behavior and moral conduct that have endured through time because they have been readily ascertained by all societies in all time periods. Second, from the conservative perspective, humans are neither naturally good nor evil. Man has a dual nature, capable of both good and bad, and hence he requires social influences such as those from family, religion, and community to provide moral education and guidance. Therefore, society, and by extension government, is natural and necessary. However, family, religion, and community should be the preferred sources of social influence rather than the coercive power of the state. Third, the conservative maintains that the full development of each person's capacities and morals do not only require social influence, but most crucially liberty. No person can reach his or her full potential when having to persist under oppressive or tyrannical conditions. Thus, the purpose of lawful government in a well-functioning society is the protection of individual rights, especially of freedom of conscience, freedom of association, private property, free trade, and equal protection under the law.

Fourth, the conservative view stresses the fact that despite the universal features in human nature, there exist important individual differences among humans. Apart from obvious physical and sex differences, people have different talents, skills, and interests. Protecting liberty means respecting these differences, thus allowing their benefits to the individual and society come to the fore. Indeed, equality of outcome is an illusory and dangerous quest, often pursued at the expense of equality before the law. Fifth, the conservative believes that we should be hesitant about change. Pursuing progress for its own sake, we run the risk of dismantling those social, political, and legal institutions that have enabled society to flourish; once abandoned, it is almost impossible to rebuild them. Finally, the conservative warns that human nature is not infinitely malleable and perfectible, as some philosophers have claimed. A deliberate attempt to design and create social order in order to achieve certain desired social outcomes without regard to the limitations in man's nature is futile and even destructive. As proof one need only consider the atrocities committed under communist, socialist, and fascist regimes.