emiliakukielka
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
Can someone please review my essay and give their opinion on it!!
Thanks

To what extent are the views of One Nation Conservatives on the economy consistent with those of the New Right? (24 marks)

One nation conservatism is a reaction for the demand of greater democracy, and its solution is by embracing the class differences through unity and nationalism. The strong belief of nationalism is what makes them wearily about free-market economy as its hard to control and protect the countries against foreign products. In contrast, New Right Conservatism is a combination of neoconservatism and neoliberalism which makes it take an liberal approach on economy having a softer view of free-market economies as they promote capitalism and destroy socialism as well as enabling the state to focus on its purpose of order and security.

One nation conservationists are fearful of the effects it can have on the nation as it can fuel support for socialism as well as fear that globalisation can threaten the nations market which can end the the patriotic idea of national identity and nations’ culture. Michael Oakeshott believes that free market economies are volatile and unpredictable which makes them a danger to the state, this may require pragmatic modernization by the state as he argued that the state exists to ‘prevent the bad rather that create the good’. This suggests that the state should help prevent the loss of identity rather than encourage it with a free-market economy. He believes if the state is allow a free market economy to exist, the state had to ensure the protection of its people through protectionism and the installment of tariffs on imports, to ensure the security of the country’s national identity. Supporting the laissez-faire captalism requires an optimistic view of market forces, which one-nation don’t have, being weary of the market went left alone by the governments. However, they are for: the adoption of the idea of Keynesian economics and the idea of a managed market, which ensures the protection of the people and security of the nation due to the promotion of captalism within the state.

New Right Conservatives believe that a free market economy, will allow the country to focus on the greater public spending on like the armed forces and police forces, which would be vital to the defence of conservatism against socialism, protecting its people. For example Edmund Burke believes that trade should involve the ‘organic’ growth of free markets and laissez-faire captalism which means that the economy can grow naturally making the ruling class a natural cause of society, suggesting that the change of the economy to become free market will have an obligation to the interest’s off all, as the change will be gradual and inevitable. This can be seen through the New Right government of Margaret Thatcher who aimed to free the economy through the privatisation of formerly owned industries. Ayn Rand,a ‘proud libertarian’, also argued that free market economies would renew the negative liberty through the philosophical justification of ‘rolling back the frontiers of the state’ projects such as cutting back taxes and privatisation of industries, as she claimed that they needed ‘parameters of a small state’ which would control the economy and and ensure it’s purpose of order and security.

In conclusion, both New Right and One Nation Conservatism believe that despite the risks of change, they adopt the liberal view of free market economies being good for the nation as a whole. One nation is fearful of the change of the economy but with state management: it is for free markets, as they promote capitalism and destroy the threat of socialism, whilst creating an image of a unified nation. New Right conservatism is relaxed about the idea of free-market economies as they are a result of natural change and allow conservatism to focus on other needs like the armed forces against any threats of socialism arising in the future.
0
reply
Trust Orang
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
No offence, but you've packed so much information into such little paragraphs it's hard to see where your argument is threaded. Could you reshuffle it to have your points more clearly delineated? You've done all of one nation conservatism and all of the new right in two paragraphs. It'd be easier to compare them if you used something like - the role of the state in the economy, the nature of the free market, global market economics vs protectionism, competitiveness vs stewardship. That way you could compare them on key issues and link back to your argument.

At the moment, I can see what you think, but you don't have an argument. In your intro, state your argument "This essay shall use an exploration the topics X, Y and Z, to argue that (in this case) the views of one nation conservatives on the economy differ somewhat to the new right economic philosophy. This is due to One nation conservatives' belief that X, in contrast to the New-Right belief in Y. However, both philosophies emphasise the importance of Z". This way you can get marks for linking everything back to the question if you refer to this comparison at the end of your paragraphs.

I'm too drowsy to write any more, but you catch my drift?
3
reply
emiliakukielka
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#3
Yes thanks for the advice much appreciated, i will make it clearer! That helped a lot more than my teachers comments!
0
reply
Trust Orang
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
(Original post by emiliakukielka)
Yes thanks for the advice much appreciated, i will make it clearer! That helped a lot more than my teachers comments!
You're welcome. You obviously have the factual information down, but during the essay the facts only exist to support your argument. If the question is "To what extent can anarchism be defined by individualism?" I can quote Max verbatim, but unless I'm using him to show that he is an exception to some of the other anarchist thinkers, I won't get any points for analysis even though my knowledge is good.

If you work on making a template for your essays, you'll have a much cleaner way of getting an argument across persuasively. If I read your essay, I would figure that you know all the texts and you'd done all the reading, but analysis demonstrates you understand the ideas well enough to use them in your own way. There's so much raw information I can't be sure if you understand it, or if you're regurgitating the lessons.

If you like, I could see if I have a model essay to send so you can see how structured argumentation makes your writing a lot easier?
0
reply
emiliakukielka
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#5
Thanks so much for the advice, that makes a lot more sense, i understand where your coming from about my struture when i read the essay back. If you can find your model essay i think that would help a lot, since i find structuring 24 markers much harder than 30, especially with having to answer ideologies questions which makes it more difficult.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (675)
33.62%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (856)
42.63%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (386)
19.22%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (91)
4.53%

Watched Threads

View All