However, David Cameronâs alterations are aiming to move the Tories away from their typical right wing stance and into the centre of politics. This has led to Cameron promoting moderation in terms of modern Liberalism and Conservatism in order to adapt to the constant changing society, where a parties policies need to modernise to allow them to stay in power. The only way of measuring the success of this is to look at state of the Conservatives partyâs policies, regarding major issues (eg. Economy etc), from previous years in comparison to now. The Conservatives have not abandoned Thatcherism, with regard to the economy.
However, other reasons also played a part. Concern over national security also played a part in persuading the Government that reforms were needed. It could be argued that British politics almost revolved around national efficiency and responding to the industrial and economical threat of Germany and America consequently leading to the reforms. The new Labour party promised social reforms and the Liberals were worried about losing votes. The Liberals knew they had to find a way of keeping the working class votes.
Two pieces of legislation were passed in 1884/1885. Who benefitted from the acts and how? In 1884 Gladstone decided to introduce the great reform act, he was a Prime Minister at that time, and his main opponent was Salisbury, leader of the conservatives. William Gladstone believed that his Liberal party would benefit from the act, as it would extend the vote to the counties – farmers and miners. Immediately we can see he his motives of trying to introduce The Great Reform Act as great number of Liberal voters consisted of working class (famers and miners).
They represented two sides of the same coin, which is betterment of American society. They simply differ on which path will lead to greater prosperity for our nation. The modern conservatives and liberals have continued to embody opposing philosophies of how our nation should moves forward. So what are these differences exactly? Conservatives have strong core values based on a fundamentalist interpretation of the Constitutional role of the Federal Government whereas liberals have strong core values based on a progressive interpretation of the Constitutional role of the Federal Government.
In actual fact the Labour party wasn’t a political force to be reckoned with at this time. John. A. Kerr states ‘the labour party was happy to support the non-contributory old age pensions scheme started in 1908, the party was less keen on the social reforms of the liberals.’ The liberals had effectively brought the Labour party on side with something called the lib/lab deal. This meant that a labour party wouldn’t take away voters from liberal in a contest with the conservatives in an election campaign. The Labour party in the 1920’s because a force to be reckoned with.
Therefore this large influence was causing the SPD’s to grow considerably in the Reichstag, consuming the majority of seats in the parliament. Therefore the Reichstag was in left-wing position. This posed a threat to the right-wing position that the government was currently in. Therefore this implies political parties were becoming more influential in the parliament as the Kaiser could not overlook such a dominant party in the Reichstag. However it could be argued that Wilhelm II’s aims to crush socialism in response to Caprivi’s tolerance for Socialism in his years as chancellor disagree with this view as it suggests he is aiming for more of an autocratic state where he holds state control.
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.
Thatcherites were extremely traditional in their view of the constitution and political system. Modern conservatives now accept that constitutional reform is essential and that the political system needs a good deal of democratic renewal. Although tax cuts are part of the ‘Cameron agenda’ in the long run, the modern party accepts that tax cutting should not be part of a dogmatic ideology, but instead should only be undertaken when the economic conditions are favourable. In general Cameron’s Conservative party is more adaptable and pragmatic, whereas Thatcherism was a more fixed, dogma with fixed principles. The following points could be seen as ways in which the modern Conservative Party retains Thatcherite ideas.
This general shift to the centre ground gained voters back, who had previously been Labour, but had voted Conservative recently. These reformers were not against socialism however and previously, many were socialists, yet they saw the need for voters, rather than ideology. Further, New Labour was a lot less socialistic when it came to economic policy. In fact, New Labour adopted a Keynesian approach to the economy, much like the New Right. The Third Way has been enthusiastic when it comes to capitalism.
Noam Chomsky on NAFTA One of Noam Chomsky’s major issues about President Clinton’s administration is that his biggest concern lies in supporting the wealthy with the use of government force to support big business corporations. Part of his achievement with NAFTA and other government agreements in the past are just enforced to benefit a small sector of the elite groups and increase their decision-making power. One of his major criticisms with this is that all the wealth goes to only this small sector of the wealthy. Therefore, economic integration is separating the gap in society to an even larger group of low growth and low income and a small sector of the wealthy and powerful. There were many issue and concerns that were brought up by the callers.