This book provides a new and distinctive interpretation on the political strategy
of David Cameron as leader of the Conservative Party and Prime Minister. Rather
than offering a chronological overview of his leadership, or a policy-based
approach, the book assesses Cameronism via two themes – modernisation and
manipulation. In terms of the modernisation the book will examine the following.
First, how Cameron attempted to detoxify the negative image of the
Conservatives. Second, how Cameron sought to delegitimise Labour as a party of
government by deflecting the blame on austerity onto the legacy of Labour in
office. Third, how Cameron used the Big Society narrative as a means of reducing
the perceived responsibilities of the state. In terms of manipulation the book
will evaluate Cameronism in relation to coalition government, and the
exploitation of the Liberal Democrats will be examined, notably in relation to
austerity, tuition fees and electoral reform. Cameronism will also be examined
in relation the challenges to the existing political order by considering the
demands for Scottish independence, and the rise of UKIP and the case for a
referendum on continued European Union membership. Through this dual emphasis on
modernisation and manipulation the book will provide an exploration of the key
events and issues that defined the premiership of David Cameron, and a clear
overview of his successes and failures as leader of the Conservative Party and
Prime Minister. The book will be essential reading to those interested in
British party politics and prime ministerial leadership.
experience [time] seemed subject to arbitrary politicalmanipulation.’ 12
Being compelled to celebrate Easter on the wrong day – when
everyone knew it was the wrong day – had turned the English Easter
services of 1598 into a theater of the absurd. Imagine yourself a devout
Christian in an English Church on 16 April 1598 – reciting the
anthem ‘Christ is risen,’ hearing the Gospel’s tale of
consider Cameron in relation to manipulation, thus building on the ideas
first advanced in Heppell ( 2013a ). This second
part of the book is clearly influenced by the work of Riker and the
theory of heresthetics (see, for example, Riker, 1982 , 1984 , 1986 ;
see also McLean, 2001 , 2002 and Hay, 2009 for wider discussions
about heresthetics). Heresthetics is the art of politicalmanipulation.
The crisis in higher education is also simultaneously a crisis in constitutional democracies; and the two are intimately linked. The corruption of language that shapes managerialist discourse makes possible a corruption in the communications among citizens that are vital in any democracy. Democracy becomes recast first as an alleged ‘will of the people’, but a will whose semantic content is prone to political manipulation. In turn this opens the way to a validation of demagogic populism that masquerades as democracy when it is in fact the very thing that undermines democracy. When the University sector becomes complicit with this – as it is in our times – then it engages in a fundamental betrayal of the actual people in the society it claims to serve. Populism thrives on the celebration of anti-intellectual ignorance and the contempt for expertise, preferring instead the supposedly more ‘natural’ claims of instinctive faith over reason. Lurking within this is a form of class warfare that treats real and actual working-class life as contemptible.
Chapter 3 focuses on the politics of the winter of 1642–3, a phase of the civil war that is normally defined in terms of a “peace party” supremacy in the House of Commons and the ultimate failure of official peace negotiations between the Long Parliament and the king known as “The Treaty of Oxford.” This chapter looks instead at a quiet but crucially important diplomatic mission sent from Common Council to the king in late December 1642. The aftermath of this deputation, which unraveled from January 1643 until the late spring and included Charles I’s call for the arrest of seven leading Londoners, and in particular the civic leaders Isaac Pennington, John Venn, Randall Mainwaring, and John Fowke, radically rearticulated London’s relationship to parliament’s war effort. The political manipulation of “the attempt on the seven Londoners,” spearheaded by the accused and their allies in parliament, ushered in a period of unprecedented popular mobilization. This included the introduction of radical new propositions for an alliance between parliament and the City, the pursuit of coordinated iconoclasm, the introduction of radical metropolitan policing methods, the raising of auxiliaries, demands for new loans, and the construction of the Lines of Communication, eleven miles of fortifications built around London, Westminster, and Southwark. Chapter 3 explores how winter 1642–3 – and a previously poorly understood period of London’s wartime narrative – led to a moment of unprecedented action, a time when London’s Common Council behaved like “a third house of parliament,” a body eager to implement its radical agenda.
war memories which emphasises continuity rather than rupture. There is continuity in themes
and preoccupations, for example the post-war politicalmanipulations
of a resistance legacy or the suffering and hardship of life under occupation, as well as continuity of production; research shows a steady flow of
publications over the post-war period with peaks and troughs which can
be attributed to the visibility of memory discourses of war more generally in the public domain. Indeed, the patterns of publication in French
crime fiction about the
much wider variety of film types than hitherto, including the classics.
Spanish films are also making greater inroads into foreign markets, as
indicated by Amenábar’s Tesis , which has been sold to
thirty countries and Ventura Pons’s El porqué de las
cosas , currently among the top three grossing films in France
(Fotogramas 1997 :
169). In short, after decades of ideological and politicalmanipulation
’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4 (October 1995), pp. 773–96.
6 These ‘new parties’ include: the Democratic Unionist Party, founded in October 1971; the Social Democratic and Labour Party, founded in August 1970; and the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, founded in April 1970.
7 Northern Ireland Political Collection, Linenhall Library, Belfast (NIPC), NILP Box 1, ‘Internal NILP Memorandum’, 14 March 1987.
8 Pringle, D.G., ‘Electoral Systems and PoliticalManipulation: A Case Study
This book explores the evolving African security paradigm in light of the multitude of diverse threats facing the continent and the international community today and in the decades ahead. It challenges current thinking and traditional security constructs as woefully inadequate to meet the real security concerns and needs of African governments in a globalized world. The continent has becoming increasingly integrated into an international security architecture, whereby Africans are just as vulnerable to threats emanating from outside the continent as they are from home-grown ones. Thus, Africa and what happens there, matters more than ever. Through an in-depth examination and analysis of the continent’s most pressing traditional and non-traditional security challenges—from failing states and identity and resource conflict to terrorism, health, and the environment—it provides a solid intellectual foundation, as well as practical examples of the complexities of the modern African security environment. Not only does it assess current progress at the local, regional, and international level in meeting these challenges, it also explores new strategies and tools for more effectively engaging Africans and the global community through the human security approach.
outspokenly critical of his own government’s tendency to confuse intellectual exchange
with politicalmanipulation. There were plenty of USIS officers, for example, who saw
their role as seeking to influence Australians to embrace a US-style approach to trade
unions, business management and trade (among other things). Some might ask therefore whether there is evidence that sixty-plus years of Fulbright exchanges have simply
resulted in American domination of Australia, and that facilitating academic exchange
with the United States has not served Australia’s own interests