DEFINITION OF TERMS

Conservatism is a political and social philosophy that says that traditional institutions work best and society should avoid radical change. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were. The first established use of the term in a political context was by François-René de Chateaubriand in 1819, following the French Revolution. The term has since been used to describe a wide range of views. R. J. White wrote: "To put conservatism in a bottle with a label is like trying to liquify the atmosphere… The difficulty arises from the nature of the thing. For conservatism is less a political doctrine than a habit of mind, a mode of feeling, a way of living."
Political science often credits British politician Edmund Burke with many of the ideas that we now call conservative

Fiscal Conservative -a government does not have the right to run up large debts and then throw the burden on the taxpayer; the taxpayers' right not to be taxed oppressively takes precedence even over paying back debts a government may have imprudently undertaken.

Republicanism is the value system of governance that has been a major part of American civic thought since the American Revolution. It stresses liberty and rights as central values, makes the people as a whole sovereign, rejects inherited political power, expects citizens to be independent in their performance of civic duties, and vilifies corruption. American republicanism was founded and first practiced by the Founding Fathers in the 18th century. This system was based on early Roman and English models and ideas. It formed the basis for the American Revolution and the consequential Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Constitution (1787), as well as the Gettysburg Address. It is not the same as democracy, for republicanism asserts that people have inalienable rights that cannot be voted away by a majority of voters.[1] In a government made up as a constitutional republic, the Rule of Law and clearly defined constitutional principles dictate the actual administration of government.
Two major parties were explicitly named after the idea—the Republican party of Thomas Jefferson (founded in 1793, and often called the "Democratic-Republican party" by historians), and the current Republican party (founded in 1854).

Conservative Libertarianism (and sometimes called right-libertarianism),A Conservative Libertarian in the United States is a person that adheres to the constitution as a libertarian does, but will do so in a conservative manner. Conservative Libertarians are conservative in political nature, such as foreign policy, homeland security, and economics while strictly interpreting the constitution as it states. They believe in free rights, liberty, and the opportunity for everyone to make it to the top. Conservative Libertarians leave it up to the individual to determine what is right and wrong for themselves, and leave it up to the states to deal with murder and unjustified actions. Conservative Libertarianism is also a political position that deals with morality and ethical beliefs, based that all men and women are created equal. It is also a political party that does not allow religious beliefs to get in the way of allowing all people (regardless of their background, ethical standpoints, religious standpoints, or sexuality) the promises of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Ronald Reagan often is quoted as saying: "I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."

STATISTS  want government to have a great deal of power over the economy and individual behavior. They frequently doubt whether economic liberty and individual freedom are practical options in today's world. Statists tend to distrust the free market, support high taxes and centralized planning of the economy, oppose diverse lifestyles, and question the importance of civil liberties.

Progressivism
In the United States there have been several periods where progressive political parties have developed. The first of these was around the turn of the 20th century. This period notably included the emergence of the Progressive Party, founded in 1912 by President Theodore Roosevelt. This progressive party was the most successful third party in modern American history.
The Progressive Party founded in 1924 and the Progressive Party founded in 1948 were less successful than the 1912 version. There are also two notable state progressive parties: the Wisconsin Progressive Party and the Vermont Progressive Party. The latter is still in operation and currently has several high ranking positionsin state government.Today, most progressive politicians in the United States associate with the Democratic Party or the Green Party US. In the US Congress there exists the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is often in opposition to the more conservative Democrats, who form the Blue Dogs caucus.Some of the more notable progressive members of Congress have included, Dennis Kucinich,
Bernie Sanders, John Lewis, and Paul Wellstone.

Social Justice The liberal political philosopher John Rawls draws on the utilitarian insights of Bentham and Mill, the social contract ideas of John Locke, and the categorical imperative ideas of Kant. His first statement of principle was made in A Theory of Justice (1971) where he proposed that, "Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others.". A deontological proposition that echoes Kant in framing the moral good of justice in absolutist terms. His views are definitively restated in Political Liberalism (1993), where society is seen, "as a fair system of co-operation over time, from one generation to the next.".

All societies have a basic structure of social, economic, and political institutions, both formal and informal. In testing how well these elements fit and
work together, Rawls based a key test of legitimacy on the theories of social contract. To determine whether any particular system of collectively enforced social arrangements is legitimate, he argued that one must look for agreement by the people who are subject to it, but not necessarily to an objective notion of justice based on coherent ideological grounding. Obviously, not every citizen can be asked to participate in a poll to determine his or her consent to every proposal in which some degree of coercion is involved, so one has to assume that all citizens are reasonable. Rawls constructed an argument for a two-stage process to determine a citizen's hypothetical agreement:

* the citizen agrees to be represented by X for certain purposes; to that extent, X holds these powers as a trustee for the citizen;
* X agrees that a use of enforcement in a particular social context is legitimate; the citizen, therefore, is bound by this decision because it is the function of the trustee to represent the citizen in this way.

This applies to one person representing a small group (e.g. to the organiser of a social event setting a dress code) as equally as it does to national governments which are the ultimate trustees, holding representative powers for the benefit of all citizens within their territorial boundaries, and if those governments fail to provide for the welfare of their citizens according to the principles of justice, they are not legitimate. To emphasise the general principle that justice should rise from the people and not be dictated by the law-making powers of governments, Rawls asserted that, "There is . . . a general presumption against imposing legal and other restrictions on conduct without sufficient reason. But this presumption creates no special priority for any particular liberty." This is support for an unranked set of liberties that reasonable citizens in all states should respect and uphold — to some extent, the list proposed by Rawls matches the normative human rights that have international recognition and direct enforcement in some nation states where the citizens need encouragement to act in a way that fixes a greater degree of equality of outcome.