Do classical approaches to class remain relevant to contemporary societies? Your answer should refer to the work of Marx and/or Weber. ‘The word class has been used to describe broad and diffuse groupings within a national population that are seen as forming a set of layers or strata in a hierarchy, as in the terms ‘upper’, ‘middle’ and ‘lower’ class’. (Crompton and Scott, 2000, pg.1) Class has been a key subject in sociological debate. Recently however the debate has shifted from the classical questions that Marx and Weber were asking over a century ago- How is class defined?
Analyse the view that the Labour and Conservative parties are dominated by their respective leaders. In recent years there has been much debate as to whether party leaders have too much power over their parties. Many do believe that the two main party leaders in the UK do not dominate their parties as the structure of their party does not allow them to do so, but many more believe that party leaders have great authority over their parties and are fully committed to driving their parties policy with little delegation or use of their cabinet ministers. Historically the Conservative Party leader has been more powerful than the Labour Party leader. 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.
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,
A government was established in which people were elected into upper house and lower house, however the governors rarely made an appearance. Their independance meant that they had a wider franchise so they could pass useful acts to benefit themselves. Lack of communication was a major issue between the two, as Britain was over 3000 miles away. This meant that it was extremely difficult for Britain to have any involvement with the colonies, which resulted to salutary neglect. It could be argued that salutary neglect weakened the relationship, however the colonist's may have enjoyed this freedom to do what they wanted and make there own decisions.
the Conservatives. However the relevance of this tradition right and left battle between Labour and the Conservatives has declined in recent years for many reason raising question about the similarity of the two parties and seeing as they are the biggest two parties in UK politics it reduces the choice of major parties to vote for, for the electorate. Traditionally, the left and right divide has been portrayed as a battle between Socialism and Conservatism. Socialism has been traditionally been viewed as the ideology of the Labour party and Conservatism has traditionally been seen as the ideology of the Conservative. These two parties have developed policies on the basis of a vision of how they believed society should be organised.
In the past, the ALP has been labelled Social Democrat or Democratic Socialist because being influenced by the labour movement. Supporters of the ALP can be split into two groups- the socialist left and labour right. Now, the ALP is regarded as a liberal democratic party. 4. The ALP supports a market capitalist economy under a liberal democratic government.
DBQ: 5 – Growth of political parties In present-day times, the American political system is most frequently associated with the ongoing issues between political parties. The two main political parties that strive for control of the American vote and carry an ongoing debate are the Democrats and the Republicans. But several years ago these political parties did not exist and many of the leaders were pleased they didn’t. Many of them feared that it would weaken the support of the Constitution as well as split the country. Even though many tried to oppose them the political parties began.
Progressivism achieved very little as a separate party but at one time, it seemed that it could achieve national support. It was very influential between 1890-1929, as a number of presidents were influenced by Progressive ideas, these included: Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft and Woodrow Wilson. Whilst they were in office, we can see some Progressive ideas in their policies.
Forty years ago, in an era of far more overt conflict between the generations than there is now, a slightly smaller share (74%) of the public said yes to the same question.2 What could explain the similarities in the two numbers in the face of such differences in the two eras? This latest survey appears to solve the mystery. Yes, there are big differences between young and old today in their values, attitudes and behaviors, but no, these differences haven’t created conflicts between the generations. To borrow a phrase, the generations appear to have found a way to disagree without being disagreeable. [pic]Moreover, where perceived generational differences exist today about moral values, work ethic and respect for others, today’s young adults — by heavy margins — believe that these differences have arisen because their generation hasn’t lived up to standards set by older adults.
TeaPartyUniversity at Gmail.Com The Tea Party Movement has been a major political force since its commencement in 2009, but even though the effects of the movement have been apparent to the informed citizen, the organizational methods, motivation, and rationale behind the Tea Party movement has tended to be debatable and ambiguous to many American citizens. Moreover, the independence of the Tea Party in terms of its hesitance to adjoin to one specific organization or idea has proved to be the primary strength of the movement. Many critics of the Tea Party Movement have asserted that the Tea Party Movement is merely a group of “conservative activists with a new identity funded by Republican business elites and reinforced by a network of