When passing the first Reform Act, were the Whigs genuinely and ideologically in favour, or were they ceding to pressures by the masses?
When Gladstone's Liberal Party passed the act on elementary education, and when later Llyod George championed the People's Budget, introducing some sort of welfare, were they convinced this was ideologically just or was it a concession to appease the lower classes?
Ultimately, the question is whether they intimately believed in expanding the franchise (i.e had a democratic vocation) and introducing forms of welfare or did it merely to avoid a revolution. People like Mill were ideological about it, but was the political-historical truth different?
Obviously, it may be an unimportant distinction, firstly because they supported it (why they did so doesn't necessarily matter), secondarily because, if Marx was right, ideological positions may always be the result of underlying material causes (avoiding a revolution which would damage them financially).Spoiler:Show
@Mods I'd be grateful if you moved this in the appropriate section
Was the Liberal Party coerced into reform or genuine? Watch
- Thread Starter
- 08-10-2017 18:46
- Community Assistant
- Political Ambassador
- Welcome Squad
- 11-10-2017 02:07
This has been moved to the relevant section.