Is a reactionary simply a conservative who refuses to let go of the past?
While conservatives seek to preserve the current social order, reactionaries aim for something more radical: a total restoration of a previous era. From the French Revolution to 20th-century politics, this ideology seeks to reverse the clock to reclaim lost stability, hierarchy, and tradition.
The distinction between conservatism and reactionism lies in their relationship with the present. A conservative aims to maintain the existing socio-encoded structure and order. In contrast, a reactionary favors the restoration of a previous state of society, believing it possessed positive characteristics that are currently absent. In the 19th century, this often manifested as an idealization of feudalism and the pre-modern era, specifically the period before the Industrial and French Revolutions.
The term's origins are rooted in the late 18th-century French Revolution. The English word 'reactionary' first appeared in 1799 in a translation of Lazare Carnot's writings. Historically, the movement was defined by a desire to return to a 'status quo ante.' For example, during the Bourbon Restoration in France, certain factions sought to revert laws to the conditions of the absolute monarchy of Louis XIV, specifically aiming to restore the peak power of the Second Estate.
The label has frequently been used as a political weapon. In the 20th century, Marxists used 'reactionary' as a pejorative to describe those whose ideas contained elements of feudalism or capitalism. Conversely, some thinkers have embraced the title. Writers like Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn and John Lukacs have adopted the 'political reactionary' identity. Interestingly, the movement is not strictly limited to the right; Soviet leader Joseph Stalin implemented reactionary social policies, such as restricting abortion and re-criminalizing homosexuality, within a left-wing government.
Source: Reactionary
