This leads on to another cause that led to the Chartism movement, the disappointment of the 1832 Reform Act. Leading up to the act, working classes had given massive support to the middle class led campaign for the act, with the hope of legislation to help them. Although it was passed by the Whigs, the working class were dissatisfied because it did not enfranchise them and they were still left without the vote. Whigs regarded the act as the final change in the electoral system, but Chartists labelled it just the beginning. Although we’ve only listed two causes in detail there were many more that led to the Chartist
Sir Robert Peel’s Obituary Sir Robert Peel was the chief secretary for Ireland from 1812-18. This provided him with a real insight into the Irish problems, which was to help him in the future. Sir Robert Peel was appointed as Home Secretary in the new ‘enlightened’ Tory Cabinet formed by Prime Minister Lord Liverpool in 1822. As Home secretary he introduced a number of new reforms and improvements, including the creation of the Metropolitan Police Force in 1829 that soon gained the nickname of ‘bobbies’ and ‘peelers’. The act was passed because the inadequacy of the current system was obvious, especially as the industrial revolution had hit Britain and towns were growing rapidly, leading to an increase in crime rate.
They realised that in order to gain voters support, they would have to leave the core socialistic values of 'old' Labour behind. This is because left-wing ideals at this time were hugely unpopular with the electorate. To achieve this electability, New Labour was less dogmatic than the old, socialist core of the Party. Many policies were toned down, especially economic ones. This general shift to the centre ground gained voters back, who had previously been Labour, but had voted Conservative recently.
In fact, pre-plague England was more politically and socially stable than it had been for a considerable length of time. With this in mind, the content of source 4 appears to support the interpretation’s claims that the Black Death was responsible for the sudden change to radical behaviour. The chronicler of the source speaks of the ‘selfish and lofty wishes of the workers,’ also acknowledging that those wanting to hire the workers ‘[would have to] give them what they desired.’ Authored by an individual of an ecclesiastical body, it is clear that the disapproval with which the matter is reported is due to the recognition of significant and harmful change. In turn, this supports the idea that the Black Death was a catalyst for the worst fears of the nobility and church figureheads. However, the long term effects of these demands saw the peasantry facing strict legislation to ensure that they couldn’t take advantage of their position, seen in the Ordinance of Labourers extract in source 3.
Effectively the act benefited the middle classes, who were now given an electoral voice in parliament, while the working classes were largely ignored, causing widespread anger and resentment for the act, and all those it benefited. The huge number of working classes wanted to be represented, and the act was yet more salt in the wound. If you were to gather up dates for the most widespread Chartist appreciation in Britain and put this on a graph alongside the economies peaks and troughs, the results would no doubt roughly mirror each other. For Chartism excelled during times of economic disturbance, particularly the late 30’s. This ran alongside the blossoming industrialisation of Britain, areas such as Stockport and Cheshire undergoing radical change were often the strongest supports of Chartism.
I agree to an extent, that Bloody Sunday was the most important cause of the 1905 revolution because it acted as a trigger for the revolution, however there are other factors to be taken into account, as Bloody Sunday was also caused by economic factors, political factors, social factors and other short-term events, such as the Russo-Japanese war. Economic factors played a key role in causing the 1905 Revolution. One economic factor that helped cause Bloody Sunday was Witte’s economic reforms; he placed extra taxation on the peasantry and encouraged the rapid growth of towns and cities. The extra taxation led to great resentment from the peasantry who began to support radicals such as the SRs, who played a part in the 1905 Revolution. These taxations also led to strikes and demonstrations becoming commonplace so could have caused Bloody Sunday itself.
Furthermore, with the help of R.A Butler and Heath, Macmillan quickly took control of the party and began the recovery process for the problems caused by Suez. It could also be argued that the events of the Suez crisis cause more damage to the labour party, than the fortunes of the tories, as seen in source 5 “there was no internal split in the conservative party”. However source 6 suggests Labour suffered “widespread disgust” and became far more unpopular. This was due to Labour opposing the war which caused the party to be seen by many working-class
William Carr states ‘ A revolutionary situation did exist in 1918 as long as the people were no longer prepared to obey the old rulers’ This highlights the disruption amongst the people, an awareness that there was a shift of power but whether this new awareness constitutes a revolution can be questioned. The end of the Kaiser rule was significant as the lifelong belief the German people once had in their Kaiser and his Authoritarian rule was shattered; a significant change in mentality that allowed the possibility of a new democratic republic. This was such drastic change and for the first time meant Germans in theory
But on the other hand it put them under the poverty line and destroyed their economy. One of the main impacts that the British control brought that was positive was that it gave the Indians the greatest human blessing… peace. Also introduced them to western education, plus kept them in modern lifestyles. Many people see the positive impact as being more significant because Britain brought infrastructure and technology to the Indian people. Romest Dutt an Indian adapted an excerpt from, The Economic History of India Under Early British Rule stated: “They have built an administration that is strong and efficient… and
It is believed that the Second World War was actually the cause of many social reforms that were later formed, and the constituting of a welfare state. It was also due to the war that Labour was voted into power with a landslide victory, as the population believed that ‘post-war had to be better than pre-war,’ which caused people to vote for Labour in hope that they would deliver the peaceful revolution that they envisioned. However, some historians believe that the reason that Labour was so successful during their time in power is due to the achievements of the Liberals from 1906-1914. After the El Alamein battle in 1942, many people believed that Britain had a chance at winning the war and the government started to plan for a post-war social reconstruction. The most important plan made was the Beveridge Report in 1942.