A2 edexcel - political ideologies - Unit 3 - 13th June

Reply 60

arsenal111

OP

9

Original post by EdColeman4

So that is 6 essay titles! If you feel like typing up the plans and putting them on here, that would be brilliant?

just done a plan on

socialism is defined by its rejection of capitalism, discuss. will pm it to u

Reply 61

EdColeman4

Thank you, that'd be great!

Reply 62

AGM

10

Original post by Super_Steven

Has anyone done the question:

'the similarities between classical liberalism and modern liberalism are greater than differences' ?

Im trying to do an essay on it, so if anyone could help me structure it, then I can put it on here

Well, break it up into core themes and then perhaps application of core themes if you have the time.

The similarities:

Toleration - use J.S Mill to link 'You can not be sure the opinion you endeavour to silence is the wrong opinion.

Rationalism - Use Emmanuel Kant to link 'Enlightenment is man's release from his own self inflicted immaturity.'

Equality(and here is pivot point) -

Foundational and formal are both cool with both strands.
However, Modern Liberals go one step further and advocate limited equality of outcome to restrict the excesses of outcome. Think Rawl's difference principle. Classical liberals only advocate opportunity, so think pure meritocracy, chuck in a bit of Sumner if you like - The drunk in the gutter is exactly where he deserves to be.

At this point slide into what the state would look like because of this belief in equality - Classical: Small and minimal - and a bit of John Locke 'Life, liberty and property' if you like and the economy would be economic liberalism(Adam Smith's invisible hand) And modern - enabling state to so welfare can exist to restrict the excesses of capitalism. But justice is important to both

Launch into inidivudalism - egotistical(C.B McPherson 'No one owes anything to anyone) vs. Developmental. However, the individual is important to both.

Freedom - Negative vs. positive. Discuss difference, but remember freedom is still important to both.

And into the conclusion.

Individual: different, but important to both.
Rationalism: The same
Freedom: different, but important to both.
Justice: here is the biggest difference, but again both want equality between people of some sorts.
Toleration: The same.

So in basically... the similarities are great, and even where they disagree they still think the principle is important.

And that is a definite TL : DR

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 63

arsenal111

OP

9

Original post by AGM

Well, break it up into core themes and then perhaps application of core themes if you have the time.

The similarities:

Toleration - use J.S Mill to link 'You can not be sure the opinion you endeavour to silence is the wrong opinion.

Rationalism - Use Emmanuel Kant to link 'Enlightenment is man's release from his own self inflicted immaturity.'

Equality(and here is pivot point) -

Foundational and formal are both cool with both strands.
However, Modern Liberals go one step further and advocate limited equality of outcome to restrict the excesses of outcome. Think Rawl's difference principle. Classical liberals only advocate opportunity, so think pure meritocracy, chuck in a bit of Sumner if you like - The drunk in the gutter is exactly where he deserves to be.

At this point slide into what the state would look like because of this belief in equality - Classical: Small and minimal - and a bit of John Locke 'Life, liberty and property' if you like and the economy would be economic liberalism(Adam Smith's invisible hand) And modern - enabling state to so welfare can exist to restrict the excesses of capitalism. But justice is important to both

Launch into inidivudalism - egotistical(C.B McPherson 'No one owes anything to anyone) vs. Developmental. However, the individual is important to both.

Freedom - Negative vs. positive. Discuss difference, but remember freedom is still important to both.

And into the conclusion.

Individual: different, but important to both.
Rationalism: The same
Freedom: different, but important to both.
Justice: here is the biggest difference, but again both want equality between people of some sorts.
Toleration: The same.

So in basically... the similarities are great, and even where they disagree they still think the principle is important.

And that is a definite TL : DR

will be using that plan for a practice essay tomorrow so thanks.

just wondering what tl:dr means?

Reply 64

HanaKimi

1

I did the aqa ideologies unit in Jan and I would recommend this website

http://www.earlhamsociologypages.co.uk/a2govpolteaching.htm

It helped me a lot during my exam

good luck to you all :smile:

Reply 65

AGM

10

Original post by arsenal111

will be using that plan for a practice essay tomorrow so thanks.

just wondering what tl:dr means?

Thanks

And too long: didn't read!

Reply 66

WHERE DID NEW GO

Classical liberals only advocate opportunity, so think pure meritocracy

This is where i don't understand it, classical liberals surely reject equality of opportunity on the grounds that it could only be brought about by a state offering that opportunity. Surely modern liberals favour a meritocracy whilst classical liberals just favour equality before the law?

how can classical liberals therefore reconcile equality of opportunity with negative freedom? the quote about the drunk in the gutter would surely come from a modern liberal 'we've given him education, a safety net yet he's failed so he deserves to be there'.

Also, what is the liberal view on human nature? the texts i've read have claimed individuals are reason-guided creatures capable of enlightenment, yet at the same time they claim a state is necessary because in a state of nature there would be nothing but violence and chaos, reflecting true human nature.

Reply 67

Holz<3

I have no idea where to begin with the UNIT i ad the worse teacher dont even know what previous questions llook like
I'm doing LIBERALISM CONSERVATISM & SOCIALISM

if anyone has any notes work eassys & will be kind enough to help a sister out =]

try tutor2u.com

In January the question came up, 'Distinguish between neo-conservatism and neo-liberalism', what would people put as a good answer to that?

Reply 70

AGM

10

Original post by Holz<3

I have no idea where to begin with the UNIT i ad the worse teacher dont even know what previous questions llook like
I'm doing LIBERALISM CONSERVATISM & SOCIALISM

if anyone has any notes work eassys & will be kind enough to help a sister out =]

Well the whole course is effectively structured around:

1. Origins
2. Core Themes
3. Strands
4. Relationships between ideologies

Most questions will be:

1. View on human nature and consequence for the state/society.
2. Why has an ideology supported a core theme?
3. The relationships between strands.

So, a quick run through of the bare minimum for each of the three ideologies you mention.

Liberalism:

Origins:

The enlightenment and french revolution.

Core themes:

Individualism - the individual is the most important unit in society.
Rational - All individuals are rational and so can make their own decisions regarding life.
Freedom - How we can allow individuals who are rational to make their decisions.
Justice - This is just their view on equality which is how liberalism treats each individual the same.
Toleration - As each individual is different, you are going to have many different views and actions taking place, therefore we must be tolerant of others for the liberal society to work.

Strands:

Classical Liberalism key points -
Egotistical Individualism - Individuals are self-interested and egotistical.
Negative freedom - Absence from restraint and pursuit of self interest.
Justice - Foundation, formal and opportunity; i.e meritocracy, each individual must have an equal chance to rise and fall.
Consequence for the state: Small state which only exists so self interested individuals do not abuse each others freedom. A small welfare net to prevent death, as foundational equality says that we all have the right to life.

Modern Liberalism key points -
Developmental individualism - Individuals are self interested, but are also capable of altruism.
Positive freedom - freedom concentrated on flourishment and potential reaching rather than pursuit of self interest.
Justice - Foundational, formal, opportunity and limited outcome(to address the excesses of capitalism).
Consequence for the state: An enabling state which exists to regulate the system and actively intervenes where it sees unfairness in outcome. A more comprehensive welfare system due to belief in positive freedom and limited outcome to address unfairness of capitalism.

Socialism

Origins:
A response to perceived unfairness and class division that occurred as capitalism and industrialism developed.

Core Themes
Community - We do better living together than apart(collectivisation). There are no unencumbered selves.
Co-operation - When we work together, we do better. Also, helping each other is a natural impulse and we can be motivated by moral incentives.
Equality - Everyone is born equal and that should remain so. Capitalism is morally incapable of distributing wealth and ownership fairly.
Common Ownership - Everything should be owned and used by everyone for the greater benefit of humans as a community, rather than just for an individual's benefit.
Class Politics - Capitalism naturally causes class division that needs to be reconciled.

Strands

In Socialism, you have two, maybe 3 strands, but 4 main revisions of socialist philosophy.

You have:

1. Marxism
2. Bernstein's Social Democracy
3. Croslands Social Democracy
4. Blair/Clinton&co's Third Way

Marxism:

Philosophy:
Historical materialism - the society we live is reflects the mode of production and the abundance of resources available(so capitalism - consumerism is the ideology). All change in history is as a result of class conflict(capitalism - Bourgeoisie and proletariat). Each time period, Marx called an epoch and each epoch passed because of internal class contradictions and the saturation of that mode of production in productivity. So, eventually capitalism will end because of the class contradictions it creates and the fact that the factories will be inefficient in production in comparison to the communist factories.

Politics:
Revolutionary: A revolution will occur when objection and subjective conditions are reached. I.E Capitalism reaches its peak in production efficiency and a moment of class consciousness will occur where the bourgeoisie will say enough is enough and there will be a mass revolution overthrowing capitalism and replacing it with communism. Marx believed that this was inevitable. He also said there had to be a brief 'dictatorship of the proletariat' while class tensions receded and after that the state would wither away. The end point will be a classless, stateless society where wealth is owned in common(communism)

Economics:
- Marx said that Capitalism exploits people in that it doesn't pay people fairly for their labour.
- Marx said that Capitalism alienates people from their selves, their labour, others and the product they are making.
- Marx said that under Capitalism, there is always a tendency for a cycle of recession and boom. In the times of recession, companies will want to keep their profits up, so they will cut wages and this will happen until people are paid less than it costs to get to work. At this point, there will be a revolution against capitalism.

There is also a slight offshot from Marxism(Orthodox Marxism) which is Stalin and Lenins take on it, but it isn't core.

Ok, so that was Marxism, and then we moved onto Bernsteins revision of Socialism.

Social Democrats say:

1. Historical Materialism was wrong.
2. Capitalism has proved to be flexible
3. Capitalism is the most efficient way at generation wealth.
4. Capitalism is morally redundant at distributing wealth.
5. The state is not bias towards the bourgeoisie and it is a good way at regulating capitalism, so they also reject revolutionary politics in favour of evolutionary politics and gradualism(piecemeal changes towards socialism over time)

So, communism is rejected. Instead, you have a system of nationalisation of the main industries to regulate the economy as a whole and comprehensive cradle to the grave welfare system. So you have a lot of top-down state intervention(Keynesian economics) going on .

Croslands revision:

He subscribed to mangerialism. He said that ownership of production was now divorced from wealth as anyone can now buy shares and be a manager and so on. As such, he reframed socialism as an ideology of social justice(redistribution of wealth) and actively encouraged profits as we can redistribute them to the poor.

Then in the 80's you have the crisis of social democracy caused by:

1. Globalisation - you can't use Keynesian economics anymore, because your economy is integrated into the world economy and it has little effect because of this.
2. Economic crisis - Unemployment + Inflation + No Growth = Stagflation. Can't use Keynesian economics to grow the economy as that will cause more inflation.
3. Collapse of the USSR - damaged Social Democratic parties by association.
4. Social changes - de-industrialisation meant a shrinking of the working class which was the socialist parties core vote.

These four factors meant that another change was needed... so along came Mr Blair and friends and the 'third way', a so called compromise between capitalism(the new right) and Social Democracy(socialism).

Five things you need to know about the Third Way:

1. Smallish State - top down state intervention is dead so allow a competitive free market to evolve.
2. Emphasis on community - communitarian doctrine.
3. Consensus society - community brings us together and makes us stronger.
4. Equality of opportunity - everyone must have a fair chance and be included. There is still a comprehensive welfare system, but is a 'hand up, not a hand out'.
5. The states role isn't to regulate everything, but to make us competitive, and this is done by investing heavily in education and core public services so we can compete on a global scale.

Just think:
Core themes and what is the consequence of the core themes on the state and society.
Strands the relationships(differences and similarities) between strands.

That's liberalism and socialism bare bones... I really can not be bothered to write out conservatism, being lazy :smile:

But hopefully if you even read this you'll get the idea! At least I had a good revision time typing this out even if no-one reads it.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 71

russ haggar

Original post by Holz<3

I have no idea where to begin with the UNIT i ad the worse teacher dont even know what previous questions llook like
I'm doing LIBERALISM CONSERVATISM & SOCIALISM

if anyone has any notes work eassys & will be kind enough to help a sister out =]

see 6th June post by Hanakimi...recommended website

Reply 72

chloeee!

10

I've got a question about Unit 4 (I don't know if there's a thread for it yet): can someone basically summarise eco-anarchism/social ecology (are they the same thing?!) for me because I've read a few books and none of them make it clear.

Reply 73

AGM

10

Original post by chloeee!

I've got a question about Unit 4 (I don't know if there's a thread for it yet): can someone basically summarise eco-anarchism/social ecology (are they the same thing?!) for me because I've read a few books and none of them make it clear.

Social Ecology is the belief that ecological destruction is linked to the social structures we lived in.

The term was coined by eco-anarchist Bookchin which is probably where the confusion arises. Social Ecology can refer to any of Eco-Socialism, Right-Wing Ecologism, Eco-Anarchism, Eco-Feminism.

Eco-Anarchists believe:

1. The state is at the centre of ecological destruction.
2. Order can arise naturally and harmoniously without the state much in the same way deep ecologists believe this happens in an ecosystem.
3. Decentralisation and living close to nature.

Reply 74

chloeee!

10

Original post by AGM

Social Ecology is the belief that ecological destruction is linked to the social structures we lived in.

The term was coined by eco-anarchist Bookchin which is probably where the confusion arises. Social Ecology can refer to any of Eco-Socialism, Right-Wing Ecologism, Eco-Anarchism, Eco-Feminism.

Eco-Anarchists believe:

1. The state is at the centre of ecological destruction.
2. Order can arise naturally and harmoniously without the state much in the same way deep ecologists believe this happens in an ecosystem.
3. Decentralisation and living close to nature.

Oh okay, thanks. Why do they stress the importance of decentralisation though?

Reply 75

AGM

10

Original post by chloeee!

Oh okay, thanks. Why do they stress the importance of decentralisation though?

Because if you live in small self-sufficient communities, you rely on nature and gain an understand of the environment and treat it better because of that.

Reply 76

chloeee!

10

Original post by AGM

Because if you live in small self-sufficient communities, you rely on nature and gain an understand of the environment and treat it better because of that.

Okay and I'm really sorry to be a pest but why do they think the state is at the centre of ecological destruction? I'm not revising anarchy and don't remember much about it so this is like the hardest topic for me!

Reply 77

AGM

10

Original post by chloeee!

Okay and I'm really sorry to be a pest but why do they think the state is at the centre of ecological destruction? I'm not revising anarchy and don't remember much about it so this is like the hardest topic for me!

Well I suppose an anarchist might say:

1. The state isn't natural in itself.
2. The state corrupts us and makes us bad people. Anarchism urges us to actually think about what we are doing.
3. The state treats nature merely as a resource to further its own domination.

Reply 78

jamontoast

In this exam are we supposed to compare and contrast the UK government with say the US government? I'm doing C. I'm supposed to be teaching myself this A Level and I don't have a clue :frown: