In fact Conservatism has often been described as chameleon like, in that it changes its appearance according to the dominant political environment at a given time. In the 19th century, when liberalism was its main opponent, conservatism adopted an organic vision of society, seeing it as a living entity and expecting people to demonstrate a sense of responsibility towards each other. When socialism came to the forefront, conservative changed course and began to emphasise the virtues of free markets and individualism to combat collectivist ideas. Such an adaptable movement cannot be described as ideological in nature. It is common to view conservatives as two strands of government the ‘wets’ and the ‘dry’s’, wets are seen to be more collectivist and believe in a greater role of government, such as planning or intervention, whereas dry’s are more neo-liberal,
This essay plans to analyse and explain the extension of the franchise from 1830 and to asses whether Britain was fully democratic by 1918. Some historians believe that because of different anomalies in democracy such as plural votes and the power of the House of Lords made Britain fundamentally undemocratic even up to the 20th century, however other opinions are that Britain, having had changed so much, was almost fully democratic by this time. In order to judge how democratic Britain became, this essay will explain the changes in the different hallmarks of democracy and judge how democratic they became and will also analyse the vestiges of the past which held Britain back from achieving a full democratic system. Arguably, the most important trait of a democracy is the right to vote. Without this hallmark, ordinary people do not have a say in the way the country is run.
How democratic was Britain by 1928? Democracy is a System of government “of the people, by the people, for the people” (Abraham Lincoln). In 1851, Britain was not a very democratic country since the vast majority of its adult population were disenfranchised. However, a number of reforms were passed which gradually helped Britain meet the 7 “hallmarks” of democracy. These include the franchise, a fair voting system, accountability, a choice of party, access to information, a national party system and participation – the right to stand for election to parliament.
The Age of democracy is a response or answer to the Age of Absolutism by the new ideas that spread throughout the world. Although democracy and absolutism had advantages and disadvantages, democracy was a more effective type of government for it limited royal power and protected the rights of the people socially, politically, and economically. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, tension arose between the two different types of governments, the democracy and absolute monarchs. During the Age of Absolutism there were many different views on how to run a monarchy. There were so many different monarchs at the time; they all had different ways of running their perspective courts.
One of the ways direct democracy is implemented in the UK is through the use of referendums. A referendum is called by the government to allow people to vote directly on an issue. One example of a recent referendum was the 2010 referendum to decide whether the UK should switch from the First past the post vote system to the AV system. The result was a 67.9% majority against changing the system. This shows hope the people can directly influence the way in which their democracy works and so is hence very democratic.
People believe this is down to the party’s history; the Labour Party originated from the trade union movement at the turn of the 20th century and originally had a chairman of the Labour MPs in the House of Commons, but no leader. A bad experience of excessive leadership power in 1931 made the party members reluctant to recognise the supremacy of the leader over the labour movement. Labour has always wanted to ensure that the leader is accountable which has led to restrictions on the power of the leader after the 1918 constitution. For example, when in opposition, leaders must work with a shadow cabinet and the membership of which has to have been elected by MPs. This argument shows that the leader of the Labour Party may have restrictions on his or her powers when in opposition as they are made to work with a shadow cabinet hence delegating power.
Arguments supporting the idea that the second chamber should be fully elected include the idea that it would be more democratic to have an elected legislature which is relevant as the United Kingdom is a democratic country. In 1999, when Tony Blair was in office- the House of Lords act was pass which removed all but 92 hereditary peers from sitting and voting in the House of Lords. This was mainly triggered by the fact that when Thatcher wanted to pass the poll tax, the Lords were threating to not pass the bill, so the government decided to persuade hereditary peers who would not normally vote to vote for the poll tax which caused the legislation to pass. When Gordon Brown was in power from 2007-2010, he was unable to complete the reform of the upper house as he did not have the time due to the economic crisis, however- when the coalition came to office in 2010, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats were both committed to reforming the second chamber by having it completely elected by using proportional representation. There have Proportional representation would make the second chamber more representative as it would allow smaller parties to have a
The messages sent from the famous jumps of Sam Patch were the beginning of a new of democracy, and a fulfillment to the true meaning of the word equality. In the early 1800s there was already a change being made to American politics. Soon after the war of 1812 it was made a point to put some restrictions on presidency because the president had too much power (Pettengill). Distributing the power evenly amongst the other branches of government paved the way to a more independent American government, and created early ideas of a two party system. These early ideas made it possible for the different views of the rich and working class to have their own set representation as needed when capitalism, or free market enterprise, and common wealth made its way into American economy.
AP US History Articles of Confederation vs. Federal Constitution Throughout the United States’ history, it has had two different written constitutions. Directly after the Revolutionary War, the Articles of Confederation came to fruition. This Constitution was basically a weak, central government that allowed each state to maintain its own sovereignty and all rights to govern, whereas the Federal Constitution created a strong, central government. Americans strived to be an independent country and be free from Britain, but also wanted to avoid tyrannical governments which were all reasons for the Revolutionary War. After examining the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution, the Constitution better represents the reasons that the Revolutionary War was fought by unifying the states, avoiding a monarchy, and also simply solving any major crisis that rose.
Bill of Rights 1689 laid out basic rights but mainly recognised the shift of power from the King to Parliament. No taxation, army etc. without Parliament. Great Reform Act 1832 important step in redistribution of seats and the grant of the right to vote. Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 imposed limitations on the powers of the House of Lords.