Explanatory Concepts in Political Science Essay

Since 1979 there thrust been dramatic transforms in twain(prenominal) the structure and organization of the bear on pop outy. In part, this was in response to their failure to win a general pick amidst 1979 and 1997. However, the change goes much further than that and domiciliate be perceived as a reflection of the continued debate between ideologies of different factions within the fellowship. This essay will original move to establish what nonagenarian infrataking was and what it stood for. Then, scrutinising saucily comminute, this essay will disk if, how and why the savvy Party changed and identify the key differences between senescent and rising churn.The tire out Party was initially established as a company to represent the newly enfranchised operative class in Parliament. Growing out of the Labour Representation Committee (LRC), the party owed its beingness to various trade union and collective organisations. Consequently, right from its inauguratio n, the partys primary purpose was to elect MPs that would represent the interests of the unions. Although patently non a committed collectivized party, by 1918, the party had include Clause 4 in its election manifesto, the principle of man possession which committed the party to nationalising land, coal mining, the electricity industry and the railways as considerably as declaring their intention to make rates of taxation steeply reformist to fund a major indication of education and social service.1 Labour soon overtook the Liberals in popularity and rose to be the principle immunity for the Conservatives, forming tierce governments between 1926 and 1945.Post-war Labour fundamentally recognised the relationship between secernate and association in Britain and introduced a scrap of reforms in education, social auspices and public assistance in an attempt to lay the foundations for a new, more pity social club. The post-war Atlee government sent Labour on a trajectory towards communism with commitments to frugal purposening in an attempt to reduce unemployment, a obscure public and private sector miserliness and a comprehensive welf atomic number 18 system which was endorsed by successive Labour and Conservative governments until 1979 when Thatcherism ideology took over. During this snip Labour was widely perceived as being orientated towards a socialist perspective as the government took responsibility for unemployment, healthcare and ho exploitation.after Labours defeat by the Conservatives in the elections of 1979, the party went through and through a period of considerable internal turmoil that ultimately essenceed in extensive reform of the structure and organisation of the Labour Party. Since 1979, there submit been ternary distinct phases of change as senile Labour became virgin. These can be defined as The Bennite challenge, Modernisation and impertinently Labour.The first phase of this, the Bennite challenge led by Tony Be nn attempted to redress the equalizer of power within the party. Aided by the leaders of some major trade unions at a special party conference in 1981, the partys left wing activists succeeded in forcing through a number of internal organizational reforms that enhanced the power of grass-roots activists and trade unions in the selection of parliamentary candidates and party leaders. This change meant that the party would now be committed to bringing about a fundamental and irreversible transmutation of power and wealth towards working people and their families2. In response, a number of leading parliamentarians and supporters seceded from Labour and founded the Social Democratic Party in 1981. Labour presented a radical manifesto that proposed extensive nationalization of industry, economic planning, slanted nuclear disarmament, and the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Economic Community.The result was Labours worst national electoral defeat in more than 50 year s. It was after this defeat that modernisation took place under the new leader of the Labour Party, Neil Kinnock, a politician who, despite his left-wing credentials set about re-establishing Labour as a believable national electoral force. Kinnocks modernisation demonstrate towards the beginnings of a parvenu Labour contri scarceed to Labours electoral revival after the damage of 1983. As well as explicitly rule ining nationalisation as a tool or goal of economic insurance policy, Kinnock set out to slop the revolutionary left by launching a series of expulsions of supporters of the private-enterprise(a) Tendency3 but it was not sufficient to deprive the Conservatives of their governing majorities in the general elections of 1987 and 1992.By the time that Blair took the Labour Party leadership in 1994, the leadership had reasserted its authority having introduced significant organisational reforms which broadened and centralised the decision making process within the party as well as removing all delimit of links with Marxist socialist ideology. Traditionally, there had been a strong socialist link with the Labour Party through Clause 4. Despite opposition from many of the Old Labour leaders, the rank and file of the party was exigent on exerting its Socialist roots right up to the 1990s. In inexorable contrast to the rest of Europe, which by 1980 had largely rejected a beaty-fledged socialist ideology, Labour maintained Clause 4 that sought to maintain its ideology of fabianism and nationalisation.Clause 4 of the Labour Partys organization was an integral part of the partys philosophy and ideology as it marked the party as ardently socialist. Clause 4 is as follows To Secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable dispersion thereof that may be possible up the basis of the common monomania of the path of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular admi nistration and control of severally industry or service.4 The clause is clearly anti- capitalist and commits to replacing capitalism with a system of social ownership, justice and planning where more control is given to the workers. Dearlove and Saunders propose that in practise, Old Labour was happy to accept a capitalist economic order although they sought limited social ownership through nationalisation, limited redistribution or wealth and income through taxation and welfare and limited planning through national agencies. In practise then, Dearlove and Saunders give notice that Labour should have been considered as a social democratic party rather than actively pursuing its formal socialist objectives.Following the election of Tony Blair in 1994 as leader of the Labour party, the party saw a series of programmatic and organisational changes the party systematically reviewed its policies so as to re-embrace the mixed parsimony in the tradition of the revisionists of the 195 0s. Labour had consistently struggled to fully implement communism, and reject the capitalist system because of what many critics believed to be a lack of a proper plan of how to implement their socialist ideology and replace the capitalist system. Blair took the modernisation of the party to a new level, adopting the American psyche of rebranding the party as new. The slogan, raw Labour, bracing Britain was unveiled and stuck as the new party name. Blair believed that the Left had to modernise or die. 5 With the rejection of Clause 4, Blair and the modernisers showed little jimmy for Old Labours sacred cows conjure up ownership, economic planning, Keynesian demand management, full employment, tax-and-spend welfarism and close links with the trade unions6 and brought Labour back to win the next General election.New Labour is itself a contested term. There is much debate as to what exactly it means. Michael Freeden suggests that the ideologic map of New Labour is located somewh ere between the three great Western ideological traditions liberalism, conservatism and socialism though it is not equidistant from them all.7 Some suggest New Labour is zero point but a securities industrying ploy and product of Alistair Campbells PR fight for Labour in an attempt to win votes. During the 1997 election campaign, the Conservatives tried to win over voters that New Labour was simply Old Labour in conceal using the New Labour, New Danger slogan.Some political scientists, notably Driver and Martell assert that the political positioning of New Labour is nothing more than Liberal Conservatism. They would argue that New Labour is simply an extension of Thatcherism inasmuch as it is no different from Thatcherite attempts to blend traditional conservative and definitive liberal principles. Pointing to Conservative prescriptions regarding education, the family and welfare, they assert that New Labour is simply a progression of Thatcherism. Blair sees New Labour as a new means to an old end, believing that the party has the same values yet is using new ways to achieve these aims.Apart from the rejection of Clause 4, how then is New Labour different from Old Labour? Dearlove and Saunders regard New Labour to be Liberal Socialism. New Labour has rejected its classed establish socialism in exchange for what many believe to be ethical socialism which has been largely influenced by Blairs own Christian beliefs and the Labour tradition of self help and mutual aid. Dennis and Halsey have defined ethical socialism as a moral community in which freedom is gained for both member through the sharing of what they have, in equal mutual appreciate for the freedom of all. Where Thatcher sought to wit the free market various(prenominal)ization of neo-liberalism with an emphasis on traditional conservative values Blair has tried to temper the individualism of neo-liberalism with traditional ethical socialist values of equality, fraternity, self forwarding and moral rectitude, in an attempt to amalgamate neo-liberal economics and socialist ethics.Whereas Old Labour had been based on the big ideas of socialism and collectivism for the advancement of the working class, New Labour attempts to reconstruct the state with more nation and individual responsibility based on co-operative self-help and the idea of communitarianism whereby individuals have a responsibility to help themselves and those immediately around them in their community. There is a new emphasis on social cohesion and New Labours attempts to repair the social fabric of society. New Labour is attempting to maintain the dynamic, innovative and efficient aspects and advantages of a liberalised economy whilst trying to avoid the hostile and often inevitable social fragmentation. One aspect of this is the shift from the Old Labour stance on providing a large welfare state as a means of creating a more egalitarian society to New Labours smaller welfare state which is based on the principle of hand up, not hand-out and the idea that the community and the individual should exist for each others benefit.The Ethical Socialist ideals are further perpetuated with New Labours belief in stakeholder capitalism the idea that every citizen must be included in the society they live in by being made to feel they have a long term stake in it using the idea of the welfare state and universal provision of services such as healthcare and education.Unlike Old Labours focus on the interests and needs of the working classes, the trade unions and the poor, New Labour concerns itself with the interests of consumers, especially ticker Britain and a new deal for citizens. Anthony Giddens argues that this is largely in response to the feign of post-materialism. This idea asserts, after a certain level of prosperity has been reached, voters contract concerned less with economic issues than with the quality of their lives.8 In order to constrict the middle England vote, New Labour needed to accommodate for these voters. Giddens also suggests New Labours shift is a reflection of class dealignment and the counterbalance of the blue collar, working class which meant Labour could no longer imprecate on a consistent class bloc to vote for them.New Labour has largely rejected a Keynesian style economy using demand management style that had been characteristic of Old Labour. New Labour has also rejected its motive ideology of nationalised industry and public ownership replacing this with a much more free market approach and even privatisation of some former publicly owned services such as the London Underground.To argue that there are no discernable differences between Old and New Labour would be both nave and crass. Like most political parties, since its inception, Labour has evolved, changing both its organisation and ideology to reflect changes in society and voters needs. The gap between the Left and Right has significantly narrowed with New Labour pol icy and there are undeniable elements of Thatcherism in New Labour although it is sure not merely an extension of this. Perhaps the most significant change to New Labour, the amendment of Clause 4, can be attributed to class dealignment and the decline of the working class that has shifted Labour far away from its socialist and nationalising policies that used to issue the core of its ideology. New Labour no longer seeks to nationalise and plan but rather prefers equality of opportunity rather than outcome. New Labour is no longer the preserve of the socialist working class it has been change into a party for middle England as much as the workers.1 outhouse Dearlove and Peter Saunders Introduction to British Politics 3rd Edition, Polity 2000 p.394 2 ibid p.3973 washbowl Dearlove and Peter Saunders Introduction to British Politics 3rdEdition, Polity 2000 p.402 4 The former Clause 4 of the Labour Party constitution 5 Tony Blair, speech to the Part of European Socialists Congres s, Malmo, 6 June 1997 6 Stephen Driver and Luke Martell New Labour, Politics after Thatcherism 1998 Polity, p.12 7 Michael Freeden The ideology of New Labour Political Quarterly 70 (1999) p.48 8 Anthony Giddens The Third trend The Renewal of Democracy Polity p.19