disproportionately influenced by Scottish and Welsh figures such as
Keir Hardie, David Lloyd George, Ramsay MacDonald, James Maxton,
Aneurin Bevan, Roy Jenkins, Neil Kinnock and John Smith but the
contribution of English radicals is also of major significance and
the focus of this chapter is on the contribution of the English
left, particularly in the twentiethcentury
of the older liberal humanist tradition, and with a few
flashes of fervour and invention (Freeden, 1986).
The ideationally powerful social liberalism, in many ways still the innovative
progressive voice of twentieth-century Britain from today’s vantage point,
Progressive dilemmas: the historical long view
increasingly came to be lodged at the heart of a broader social democratic tradition,
long before a group of dissatisfied Labour and Liberal Party members attached
that sobriquet to the short-lived Social Democratic Party (the least liberally
inclined of the
from other groups.
Arab liberalism in comparative perspective
Any study of the post-1967 era would be incomplete without a comparative analysis of Arab liberal discourse that looks closely at the evolution of its human quotient, geographical span, media and civic institutions, ideological themes, and intellectual standing.
Formative liberalism in the late nineteenth and early twentiethcenturies was the purview of educated professionals—mainly lawyers, journalists, newspaper editors, and scholars. Most Arab liberals were from elite
seeking to address these questions this book has two principal objectives. First, it rehabilitates and re-examines the historical record of the NILP, an understudied and poorly understood phenomenon in Irish political studies. Second, it challenges the orthodox narrative of that party’s political fortunes throughout the twentiethcentury, by arguing that the NILP has suffered from an unfair critique in the scholarly literature. What this book does not attempt to do is to ‘wish away’ the deep-rooted antagonism that has been shown to exist between Protestants and
Nationalism is perhaps the most powerful ideology of the last couple
of centuries. We attempt here to distinguish a number of varieties of
nationalism – liberal, reactionary and radical. There follows a
brief history of nationalism from the pre-Renaissance period to the
twentiethcentury, after which we consider whether nationalism as an
ideology serves particular political
actions to the people at the next election and, between elections, to the people’s representatives in the House of Commons. There is one body – the party in government – that is responsible for public policy. The principle of collective responsibility ensures that government faces Parliament, and electors, as a united entity and relies for its continuation in office on the confidence of the House of Commons. There is a clear line of accountability to the House and to the electors.
By the twentiethcentury, the UK had a constitution that was both stable and well
Autobiographical Education, 1945 –1975’, in Plurality and Individuality.
Autobiographical Cultures in Europe (ed. Christa Hammerle), IFK
Internationales Forschungzentrum, Kulturwissenschaften, Vienna, 1995,
11 C. Waters, ‘Disorders of the Mind, Disorders of the Body Social: Peter
Wildeblood and the Making of the Modern Homosexual’, in B. Conekin,
F. Mort and C. Waters (eds), Moments of Modernity: Reconstructing Britain
1945 –1964 (London: Rivers Oram Press, 1999), p. 150.
12 M. Thomson, Psychological Subjects: Identity, Culture and Health in
Switzerland and argued that the people were as good judges as anyone of the main object of the law. 3 The speech was a lone one and appears to have made no impression on the House.
What brought the issue on to the political agenda was the intense conflict over Irish home rule that dominated British politics in the late nineteenth and early twentiethcenturies. Opponents saw a referendum as a means of preventing home rule being implemented through legislation. The principal proponent of the referendum was none other than A. V. Dicey. 4 He saw it as a ‘people’s veto
K eith L aybourn and John Shepherd
For more than four decades, Professor Christopher Wrigley, affectionately
known as Chris, has been a leading authority on British labour and trade
union history, and nineteenth- and twentieth-century British history more
generally, with much of his writing in the form of biography. Chris is one
of the most influential British historians to have emerged since the Second
World War and his ubiquity has earned him the reputation of being almost
a Renaissance-like figure in the range and depth of his historical study
Andrew Denham, Andrew S. Roe-Crines and Peter Dorey
circumstances and personalities involved. As one of Macmillan’s biographers observes, the phrase implies ‘precedents when none in fact existed. The leadership contests of 1911, 1923, 1940 … were all sui generis’ (Thorpe, 2013 : 27).
The only feature that was common to all Conservative leadership selections or appointments during the first half of the twentiethcentury was the absence of a formal role for Conservative MPs in their choice or preference. Instead, those most closely involved in choosing a new party leader were a few senior Conservative Party parliamentarians