Edexcel A2 6GP03 June 2015 Topic B: Introducing Political Ideologies

Original post by xxvine

Wow thanks

this has helped so much...you know your stuff!

So basically from the heywood book just compare the strands from classical liberlism with modern liberlism?

Would you bring social darwinism up?

yeah, keep reading and highlighting your textbook, note the differences and put them in your plans as beginnings of paragraphs. You could also put social darwinism as justification for negative freedom if thats what you mean - I think Locke was inspired by the work of Darwin so believed in humans going through an evolutionary process. You may put Samuel Smiles - "Heaven helps those who help themselves" to back up social darwinism and individualism for the classics bit.
No worries! was doing a conservatism essay so doung a liberalism plan was extremeleyyyy refreshing for my brain.

Reply 282

Original post by xxvine

Those are exactly what I am doing

If the 45 marker is classical liberalism vs modern liberalism what would you include?

Think of it this way:
How do Modern/Classical Liberals view the economy?( They both agree in letting the individual having complete freedom with minimal govt interference)
How they view the state?
How they view human nature?
How they view equality?
How they view a metiorcatic society?
How they view freedom?

Modern Liberals view the state can do better for people.
Classical Liberals view the state as an necessary evil for it can infringe on the individual's rights and only must be there to protect the three basic rights; life, liberty and property.

Meriotacratic society
Liberals believe that there should be some economic justice in helping the poor, taken justice to imply social equality as John Rawls argued that economic inequality is beneficial. Classcial Liberals endorse a strict meriotcratic society, stress on heavy incentives, and that individuals must be granted fair trails by not being treated unequally, Economic/Moral Grounds..

Modern Liberals do endorse economic social intervention to strengthen the market through Keynesian economics. (Nick Clegg, Coalition)

How they do they view power or Govt

Instantly it boils down to:
State, nature, equality, freedom, economy, meritocratic society, human nature, individualism, negative and positive freedom, economic and social liberalism. Democracy (likely) and similarities/ideas/nature of the Liberalism aspect.

These issues are vital for any Liberal question - remember that if asks about democracy - you give reasons such as its educative and serves a purpose in informing the public. However it can lead to tyranny of the majority and can lead to authoritarian rule, thus allowing mob rule to elect anybody that they like,.

If a question pops up on Liberalism - instantly think of these things - you can also compare where they agree and disagree.

Usually for a 45 mark question - you need to present many different perspectives.

In terms of a good intro have a look at this:

Socialists have disagreed with each other from the beginning of Socialism. From the aims of achieving socialism, to the aims of overthrowing the bourgeois system, to cooperating with capitalism in order to achieve a Socialist state. Socialists have differed over this, and also have differed on what the nature of socialism itself.

If you're doing a Socialism question, you can think of this issues:

Role of the State @( Marx - temporary dictatorship of the proletariat. Revisionist Socialists - believe socialism can develop out of capitalism, Evolutionary Socialists - believe capitalism has worked and can respond to crisis -Anthony Crossland, use state managed socialism to help people through a welfare system.
third Way Socialists - believe capitalism and socialism can co-operate together, and that wealth tends to be distributed unequally in society. State can do wonders for the people)
Distribution of wealth (Marx believed that it was being unequal in its distribution of wealth in society - exploiting workers for low paid wages - advocated a communist society where there was redistribution of wealth and property)
Class ( How do Socalists view Class? What do Social Democrats, Fundamentalist or Revisionist view it as?)
Gradualism (The belief that socialism would slowly develop in a liberal capitalistic society, as due to the extension of franchise to the largest majority at the time, the working class would vote in the Socialist parties via the box, then Socialist Governments would implement social polices such asl justice and increased expenditure on social welfare)
Fabians (~ these people created the Labour party)
Social Democracy
New Labour vs Old Labour( if that ever comes up)
Marxism - features of the communist state and society
Capitalism ( How have socialists viewed it? Marx - rejects, Crossland and Bernstein - like capitalism, Third Way or Social Democrats - like capitalism because of its potential for business opportunities - under Milliband it was a mixed reaction, crony capitalism, but under the new current leader that will be elected, there will be a certain change of policy. Still, it would be good to reference to Ed Milliband - one of his quotes will do).
Collectivism, equality of outcome, reward, social equality, Roads to Socalism, Keynesian economic management - Under Revisionist Socialists.

In terms of what you want to add from different perspectives:

Fundamentalist Socialists (Marx-Hengles - totally against Capitalism, agents of the bourgeoisie - proletariat vs the bourgeoisie - overthrow)
Revisionist Socialists (Bernstein - impressed with Capitalism, Fabians saw the need for Socialism to develop with Capitalism. Labour Party creation in 1881)
Evolutionary Socialists( Crossland, state managed socialism, managerial system, believes Capitalism is no longer manipulative, allowed the working class to become a middle class, form TUs and bargain with govt. Welfare state.)
Third Way Socialist (Blair, Brown, New Labour, Ed Milliband, The Labour Party, Labour Manifesto, 2015, Redistribution of wealth, Social Democrats.

That's pretty much all you need for Socialism regarding a 45/15 mark should it come up.

Now the Conservatism topic - easy to learn - difficult to write down answers too in my opinion.
covering religion-basedarguments, pragmatic arguments that take tradition to be the most reliable guide to presentaction, and arguments that portray tradition as a source of identity and security.
linked the conservative stress on tradition to the idea ofintellectual imperfection (we rely on tradition because reason is destined to fail us)
So an easy guide:

Tories believe in:
Tradition - natural law, accumulate wisdom of the pass, stability.
Human imperfection - limited, dependent, security seeking creatures - implications for tradition, authority, moral imperfections.
Property - right to buy - provides security in an insecure/unstable world, because it is the exterioisation of individual personalty - breeds positive social values - respect for law, property traditionally viewed as a duty to preserve for future generations.

Organic Society - whole a collection of individual parts, and breathing organism that adapts to whatever is thrown in it. Duty and obligation as Social cement, a natural hierarchy as defined by Burke, those on the top rule down the lower - helps to cement's one standing in society. Importance of shared values, nationalism, common culture.

Big society (this may be useful to take down.)

One Nation Tradition - Neo feudalism, tradition, hierarchy, organism, reform preferable to revolution, pragmatic, enlightened, self interest, qualified class for welfare, Nobelse Obilige, duty at the price of privilege, middle way stance, pragmatic rejection of the free market and state control, cautious social democracy ( Macmillian and Anthony Eden, both had mixed economy with privatization and nationalization)

Now the New Right is a damn right difficult topic but you only have to remember this:

The Liberal New Right:

Classical Liberal roots, (think of Adam Smith advocating complete freedom in the market for individual) There should be a natural dynamism of the market, monetarism(controlling money supply) rejection of Keynesian ism, privatization. Thatcher and Hayek - keen neo liiberals - deregulation, tax cuts, supply side economics - believes the economy can sort it self. Rolling back the state - they want to role it.
Strong emphasis on the family, tradition and marriage.
Very Individualistic - Thatcher took took 2 million people out of income tax altogether.
Property rights.
Anti -welfare - remove welfare.
Also, Adam smith argued that economy is all about supply and demand. (Even Nigel Farage said this in the leaders debate, it is no doubt that most parties are neo-liberals in this extent.)

The Conservative New Right:
Strong emphasis on the family, tradition and marriage.
Restoration of order and authority.
Roots in pe-Diseralian conservationism.
Social authoritarianism, punishment.
Anti-permissiveness, new puritanism.
Christian values
Resurgent nationalism
Source of security stability.

Remember that this is what they agree on:

Neo-Liberals and Neo Conservatives(that is the liberal new right and the con new right) agree on reducing welfare.
Home ownership.
Free market economy.
Reducing the power of the Trade Unions.

What they do not agree on:
Society and Tradition - differing views on how it should be run. North of England, strikes.
liberal New Right's critique of tradition with realinsight, emphasising that the source of the New Right's radicalism is that its faith in reason,theory and principle undermines its reliance on tradition

There's not a lot of disagreement, but you can use Thatcher's policies and argue how neo cons either supported or disagreed.
of 'extent' by considering conservative ideas or beliefs that departfrom traditionalism.
Remember that for any cons question, the New Right has to be added in.

So in terms of perspectives:

One Nation Conseratives
Liberal and Con New Right
Organic Society
New Right as a whole.
Modern Cons party(just in case.)
Capitalism - free market economy - Neo Liberals.

Questions came come on the following:
Society, welfare. traditional, one national, new right, coherence of New Right, property, authority, hierarchy, human imperfection, human nature, rival organic, society, one nation, capitalism, free market.

You must note then when writing about the new right, you can refer to all three, or just one. But make sure that when you refer, you are using their viewpoint on whether they disagree or agree with the premise of the question.

Also with a 45 mark - you need 5-6 points. 3 for against, 2 for agree, or 3 vs 3 if you have the time.

Make sure not to repeat your ideas!!!!

Also, Molly's post is brilliant! I've already done a plan, and I'll use some of her points if she doesn't mind? I can't think of the last one. Molly, how many points have you included in your essay? Do you have any more eassy plans that you can share?

That is a lot - but wow, I thought I was weak on other stuff. Seems like I know a good bit now. But hopes this helps.

Reply 283

Original post by The Marshall

Think of it this way:
How do Modern/Classical Liberals view the economy?( They both agree in letting the individual having complete freedom with minimal govt interference)
How they view the state?
How they view human nature?
How they view equality?
How they view a metiorcatic society?
How they view freedom?

Modern Liberals view the state can do better for people.
Classical Liberals view the state as an necessary evil for it can infringe on the individual's rights and only must be there to protect the three basic rights; life, liberty and property.

Meriotacratic society
Liberals believe that there should be some economic justice in helping the poor, taken justice to imply social equality as John Rawls argued that economic inequality is beneficial. Classcial Liberals endorse a strict meriotcratic society, stress on heavy incentives, and that individuals must be granted fair trails by not being treated unequally, Economic/Moral Grounds..

Modern Liberals do endorse economic social intervention to strengthen the market through Keynesian economics. (Nick Clegg, Coalition)

How they do they view power or Govt

Instantly it boils down to:
State, nature, equality, freedom, economy, meritocratic society, human nature, individualism, negative and positive freedom, economic and social liberalism. Democracy (likely) and similarities/ideas/nature of the Liberalism aspect.

These issues are vital for any Liberal question - remember that if asks about democracy - you give reasons such as its educative and serves a purpose in informing the public. However it can lead to tyranny of the majority and can lead to authoritarian rule, thus allowing mob rule to elect anybody that they like,.

If a question pops up on Liberalism - instantly think of these things - you can also compare where they agree and disagree.

Usually for a 45 mark question - you need to present many different perspectives.

In terms of a good intro have a look at this:

Socialists have disagreed with each other from the beginning of Socialism. From the aims of achieving socialism, to the aims of overthrowing the bourgeois system, to cooperating with capitalism in order to achieve a Socialist state. Socialists have differed over this, and also have differed on what the nature of socialism itself.

If you're doing a Socialism question, you can think of this issues:

Role of the State @( Marx - temporary dictatorship of the proletariat. Revisionist Socialists - believe socialism can develop out of capitalism, Evolutionary Socialists - believe capitalism has worked and can respond to crisis -Anthony Crossland, use state managed socialism to help people through a welfare system.
third Way Socialists - believe capitalism and socialism can co-operate together, and that wealth tends to be distributed unequally in society. State can do wonders for the people)
Distribution of wealth (Marx believed that it was being unequal in its distribution of wealth in society - exploiting workers for low paid wages - advocated a communist society where there was redistribution of wealth and property)
Class ( How do Socalists view Class? What do Social Democrats, Fundamentalist or Revisionist view it as?)
Gradualism (The belief that socialism would slowly develop in a liberal capitalistic society, as due to the extension of franchise to the largest majority at the time, the working class would vote in the Socialist parties via the box, then Socialist Governments would implement social polices such asl justice and increased expenditure on social welfare)
Fabians (~ these people created the Labour party)
Social Democracy
New Labour vs Old Labour( if that ever comes up)
Marxism - features of the communist state and society
Capitalism ( How have socialists viewed it? Marx - rejects, Crossland and Bernstein - like capitalism, Third Way or Social Democrats - like capitalism because of its potential for business opportunities - under Milliband it was a mixed reaction, crony capitalism, but under the new current leader that will be elected, there will be a certain change of policy. Still, it would be good to reference to Ed Milliband - one of his quotes will do).
Collectivism, equality of outcome, reward, social equality, Roads to Socalism, Keynesian economic management - Under Revisionist Socialists.

In terms of what you want to add from different perspectives:

Fundamentalist Socialists (Marx-Hengles - totally against Capitalism, agents of the bourgeoisie - proletariat vs the bourgeoisie - overthrow)
Revisionist Socialists (Bernstein - impressed with Capitalism, Fabians saw the need for Socialism to develop with Capitalism. Labour Party creation in 1881)
Evolutionary Socialists( Crossland, state managed socialism, managerial system, believes Capitalism is no longer manipulative, allowed the working class to become a middle class, form TUs and bargain with govt. Welfare state.)
Third Way Socialist (Blair, Brown, New Labour, Ed Milliband, The Labour Party, Labour Manifesto, 2015, Redistribution of wealth, Social Democrats.

That's pretty much all you need for Socialism regarding a 45/15 mark should it come up.

Now the Conservatism topic - easy to learn - difficult to write down answers too in my opinion.
covering religion-basedarguments, pragmatic arguments that take tradition to be the most reliable guide to presentaction, and arguments that portray tradition as a source of identity and security.
linked the conservative stress on tradition to the idea ofintellectual imperfection (we rely on tradition because reason is destined to fail us)
So an easy guide:

Tories believe in:
Tradition - natural law, accumulate wisdom of the pass, stability.
Human imperfection - limited, dependent, security seeking creatures - implications for tradition, authority, moral imperfections.
Property - right to buy - provides security in an insecure/unstable world, because it is the exterioisation of individual personalty - breeds positive social values - respect for law, property traditionally viewed as a duty to preserve for future generations.

Organic Society - whole a collection of individual parts, and breathing organism that adapts to whatever is thrown in it. Duty and obligation as Social cement, a natural hierarchy as defined by Burke, those on the top rule down the lower - helps to cement's one standing in society. Importance of shared values, nationalism, common culture.

Big society (this may be useful to take down.)

One Nation Tradition - Neo feudalism, tradition, hierarchy, organism, reform preferable to revolution, pragmatic, enlightened, self interest, qualified class for welfare, Nobelse Obilige, duty at the price of privilege, middle way stance, pragmatic rejection of the free market and state control, cautious social democracy ( Macmillian and Anthony Eden, both had mixed economy with privatization and nationalization)

Now the New Right is a damn right difficult topic but you only have to remember this:

The Liberal New Right:

Classical Liberal roots, (think of Adam Smith advocating complete freedom in the market for individual) There should be a natural dynamism of the market, monetarism(controlling money supply) rejection of Keynesian ism, privatization. Thatcher and Hayek - keen neo liiberals - deregulation, tax cuts, supply side economics - believes the economy can sort it self. Rolling back the state - they want to role it.
Strong emphasis on the family, tradition and marriage.
Very Individualistic - Thatcher took took 2 million people out of income tax altogether.
Property rights.
Anti -welfare - remove welfare.
Also, Adam smith argued that economy is all about supply and demand. (Even Nigel Farage said this in the leaders debate, it is no doubt that most parties are neo-liberals in this extent.)

The Conservative New Right:
Strong emphasis on the family, tradition and marriage.
Restoration of order and authority.
Roots in pe-Diseralian conservationism.
Social authoritarianism, punishment.
Anti-permissiveness, new puritanism.
Christian values
Resurgent nationalism
Source of security stability.

Remember that this is what they agree on:

Neo-Liberals and Neo Conservatives(that is the liberal new right and the con new right) agree on reducing welfare.
Home ownership.
Free market economy.
Reducing the power of the Trade Unions.

What they do not agree on:
Society and Tradition - differing views on how it should be run. North of England, strikes.
liberal New Right's critique of tradition with realinsight, emphasising that the source of the New Right's radicalism is that its faith in reason,theory and principle undermines its reliance on tradition

There's not a lot of disagreement, but you can use Thatcher's policies and argue how neo cons either supported or disagreed.
of 'extent' by considering conservative ideas or beliefs that departfrom traditionalism.
Remember that for any cons question, the New Right has to be added in.

So in terms of perspectives:

One Nation Conseratives
Liberal and Con New Right
Organic Society
New Right as a whole.
Modern Cons party(just in case.)
Capitalism - free market economy - Neo Liberals.

Questions came come on the following:
Society, welfare. traditional, one national, new right, coherence of New Right, property, authority, hierarchy, human imperfection, human nature, rival organic, society, one nation, capitalism, free market.

You must note then when writing about the new right, you can refer to all three, or just one. But make sure that when you refer, you are using their viewpoint on whether they disagree or agree with the premise of the question.

Also with a 45 mark - you need 5-6 points. 3 for against, 2 for agree, or 3 vs 3 if you have the time.

Make sure not to repeat your ideas!!!!

Also, Molly's post is brilliant! I've already done a plan, and I'll use some of her points if she doesn't mind? I can't think of the last one. Molly, how many points have you included in your essay? Do you have any more eassy plans that you can share?

That is a lot - but wow, I thought I was weak on other stuff. Seems like I know a good bit now. But hopes this helps.

Wow this stuff is great! Thanks for all the advice :smile:

With the liberalism essay those are all the points I have off the top of my head, also of course you can include my points. works out 3 v 2.
Unfortunately I don't have any more plans like that, I usually work from the indicative content and make up paragraphs from those, but if there's a question you want me to try and plan I'd be more than happy too. preferably on conism, libism or anarchism.

Reply 284

Original post by molly49

Wow this stuff is great! Thanks for all the advice :smile:

With the liberalism essay those are all the points I have off the top of my head, also of course you can include my points. works out 3 v 2.
Unfortunately I don't have any more plans like that, I usually work from the indicative content and make up paragraphs from those, but if there's a question you want me to try and plan I'd be more than happy too. preferably on conism, libism or anarchism.

Not a problem, tbh I thought I didn't know much of this, I can confidently say now I am at around 80% ready.

3 vs 2 I think is generally the way to go. But it also depends on the wording of the questions. Thanks!

Ah, shame that there's not enough Socalists around here..........

Anyway, I see, I do it a different way - read the indicative content, read through notes, read on internet, mark scheme and then write the plan down(obviously won't have time, but I also look at the model answers and bullet point them down.) But its all done in the name of revision. Sure I'll send you a PM about some questions which I am really struggling on tomorrow. Preferably three questions will be what I send.

There's an interesting question however, and this is a 45 marker:

6 To what extent do conservatives support tradition and continuity?

Lets see what you can come up with, but plz do it in your own time.

But thanks for your help!

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 285

Original post by The Marshall

Not a problem, tbh I thought I didn't know much of this, I can confidently say now I am at around 80% ready.

3 vs 2 I think is generally the way to go. But it also depends on the wording of the questions. Thanks!

Ah, shame that there's not enough Socalists around here..........

Anyway, I see, I do it a different way - read the indicative content, read through notes, read on internet, mark scheme and then write the plan down(obviously won't have time, but I also look at the model answers and bullet point them down.) But its all done in the name of revision. Sure I'll send you a PM about some questions which I am really struggling on tomorrow. Preferably three questions will be what I send.

There's an interesting question however, and this is a 45 marker:

6 To what extent do conservatives support tradition and continuity?

Lets see what you can come up with.

But thanks for your help!

Ah conism is always a tricky one isnt it.
I think thematically answering the question like i did for liberalism isnt going to cut it because its so focused on a particular part of conservatism.
Introduction:
It has been argued that conservatism has been an ideology crafted around the contunity of tradition. However, due to the development of the 'new-right', embracing classical liberal values has changed conservatism for 'radical' change in favour for change in economics and emphasis on individualism.
Para 1:
State what a traditional conservative would think about tradition. "if it aint broke dont fix it", stood the test against time. Put in something undemocratic such as the H.O.L and thinkers who would advocate traditional institutions and hierarchies like Burke 'Natural hierarchy. Reflections on the revolution in France when Burke disagreed with the revolution because it went against tradition.
Para 2:
tradition is something which gives the security seeking human stability and security which reflects a conservatives view on the capacity of a human to endanger a historically established society. Could talk about Hobbes and the state of nature to emphasise the potentiality of human imperfection "state of nature" in 'leviathan'
Para 3:
Even new right has strands of tradition within it. tradition is something which has carried on even until new right establishes (1979)ish. Thatcher promoted tarditional family unit, didnt like single parent families. Sold off all the council houses for social cohesion and to give people a sense of belonging.
para 4:
The new right individual elements of classical liberalism show that conservatism dosent always favour tradition because it has the capability of endorsing liberal values such as atomism. "Kant - "ends in themselves", Thatcher "No such thing as society".
Para 5:
Economically, new right changed the economy immensely to free market economics. a form of reactionary radicalism. Proves that conservatism had changed its trail of thought. Paternalists within the cabinet: Pym etc etc argued against her radical changes in the economy. Macmillan "you're selling off the family silver" in regards to privatisation. Came from thinkers such as Hayek and spread to the USA with Reagan.
Conclusion:
traditional conservatives would support the idea of contunity, stood test of time, human imperfection, New right neo-con elements. BUT think about neo-liberal individualism and radical economic policies. Thatcher slashed higher band of tax cuts from 83p - 40p. cray woman.

Hope that helps, if you think of anything to add let me know. :smile:

Reply 286

[QUOTE="molly49;56310465"]Ah conism is always a tricky one isnt it.
I think thematically answering the question like i did for liberalism isnt going to cut it because its so focused on a particular part of conservatism.
Introduction:
It has been argued that conservatism has been an ideology crafted around the contunity of tradition. However, due to the development of the 'new-right', embracing classical liberal values has changed conservatism for 'radical' change in favour for change in economics and emphasis on individualism.
Para 1:
State what a traditional conservative would think about tradition. "if it aint broke dont fix it", stood the test against time. Put in something undemocratic such as the H.O.L and thinkers who would advocate traditional institutions and hierarchies like Burke 'Natural hierarchy. Reflections on the revolution in France when Burke disagreed with the revolution because it went against tradition.
Para 2:
tradition is something which gives the security seeking human stability and security which reflects a conservatives view on the capacity of a human to endanger a historically established society. Could talk about Hobbes and the state of nature to emphasise the potentiality of human imperfection "state of nature" in 'leviathan'
Para 3:
Even new right has strands of tradition within it. tradition is something which has carried on even until new right establishes (1979)ish. Thatcher promoted tarditional family unit, didnt like single parent families. Sold off all the council houses for social cohesion and to give people a sense of belonging.
para 4:
The new right individual elements of classical liberalism show that conservatism dosent always favour tradition because it has the capability of endorsing liberal values such as atomism. "Kant - "ends in themselves", Thatcher "No such thing as society".
Para 5:
Economically, new right changed the economy immensely to free market economics. a form of reactionary radicalism. Proves that conservatism had changed its trail of thought. Paternalists within the cabinet: Pym etc etc argued against her radical changes in the economy. Macmillan "you're selling off the family silver" in regards to privatisation. Came from thinkers such as Hayek and spread to the USA with Reagan.
Conclusion:
traditional conservatives would support the idea of contunity, stood test of time, human imperfection, New right neo-con elements. BUT think about neo-liberal individualism and radical economic policies. Thatcher slashed higher band of tax cuts from 83p - 40p. cray woman.

Hope that helps, if you think of anything to add let me know. :smile:

[/QUOTE

Some really good stuff Molly, I like the idea of adding the Neo Liberal aspect, and I like how you've focused on the tradition aspect as I find it hard to argue from Cons only defend tradition....I can't think of anything else beyond that!

Anyway, it is a tricky topic to write down no doubt, but thanks a lot, and sure I'll add a few things when I reply next time if need be.

Thanks again!

Reply 287

Can somebody explain to me keynesianism in detail please

Reply 288

Shaqk

5

Original post by xxvine

Can somebody explain to me keynesianism in detail please

Wow you up early, I don't think you need to know what it for this exam do you?

Reply 289

Original post by Shaqk

Wow you up early, I don't think you need to know what it for this exam do you?

Haha yes off to the library
Yes you doooooo
Part of modern liberalism

Reply 290

Shaqk

5

Original post by xxvine

Haha yes off to the library
Yes you doooooo
Part of modern liberalism

Oh me too, and I'm doing economics in uni next year and I don't know what it is :erm:

Reply 291

isnt it just justifying government intervention when an economy goes into a downturn, so government increases spending deficit to get the economy going again. I dont think its something you need to know in detail, just outlining what he thought.

Reply 292

1.

Keynesian economics (/ˈkeɪnziən/ KAYN-zee-ən; or Keynesianism) is the view that in the short run, especially during recessions, economicoutput is strongly influenced by aggregate demand (total spending in the economy).

Reply 293

if the 45 marker was is conservatism a ruling class ideology how would you tackle that?

Reply 294

Everythingstupid

9

Original post by WanderingNomad

can you get away with only learning 3 ideologies? I know you can for the 45 marker, but can 3 or more 15 markers come on the same topic?

A 15 marker will come up for each ideology- so you're safe.

Reply 295

Everythingstupid

9

Original post by xxvine

if the 45 marker was is conservatism a ruling class ideology how would you tackle that?

Hierarchy+authority:

-Fixed social gradations- "natural hierarchy", thus social inequality is inevitable. Equality is undesirable.
-Authority- Paternalism. Doesn't arise from below. Rooted in all of society.
-Inevitable feature of an organic society- parts play different roles. Must be managers, must be workers.
-Leadership and social discipline- provides guidance, beneficial as inherently imperfect creatures require security, wish to know their place and what is expected of them. Counters "anomie" (Durkheim).
-You can say despite the justifications provided serves to oppress and and promotes a domination/subordination complex.

Organic society+ imperfection:
-Fixed roles in society. Reform=dangerous.
-Oakshott- the political world is "boundless and bottomless".
-Afraid of abstract ideas such as "rights" and "equality". Prefer to ground ideas in history and experience, adopting a moderate and pragmatic approach. Therefore- in the interests of the ruling class as traditionally they dominate society.

Neo-liberalism:
-On the one hand, strict meritocracy means that many people will suffer.
-Also, anti-welfarist. Economically- more public spending= high taxes, threatening enterprise. Welfare creates a "culture of dependency". Charles Murray- Welfare causes family breakdown. Robert Nozick- welfare is "legalized theft". Therefore, needs of working class ignored.
-On the other hand, primacy of the individual, negative freedom and economic dynamism is open to all individuals. Everyone has the same chance to improve their lives.
-Von Hayek and Friedman- gov is the cause of problems. "Natural rate of unemployment".

One-nation:
-Disraeli- "Coningsby and "Sybil"
-On the one hand, appeals to moral values. Organicism dictates that society is held together by an acceptance of duties and obligations. "Noblesse oblige".
-Obligation should be shown in terms of social reform.
-Disraeli in office- extended franchise to working class+ improved working conditions.
-On the other hand- inequality contains seed of revolution. Quashing this would be in the interests of the rich.
-One nation cons wish to consolidate hierarchy; wish to improve the conditions of the poor is limited to the desire that they do not pose a threat to the natural order.

Neo-conservatism:
-Strengthen authority at all levels. Social and state authoritarianism. Promotes idea that some people are better than others. Power is concentrated. Do what your told attitude.
-Free market as a form of social discipline. E.g. employers threaten workers with unemployment if they ask for wage increases. Oppresses working class?

Reply 296