1/25
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced | Call with Kai |
|---|
No analytics yet
Send a link to your students to track their progress
Creation of consensus 1940-5
WW2 saw shift to the left
Paul Addison = all 3 parties go to polls with same policies
heyday consensus 1945-70
principle of welfare
comprehensive
access based
entitlement not concession
state directs
CRADLE TO GRAVE
nationalisation and mixed economy
relatively cautious
limited to failing industry and utilities
not controversial accept iron and steel
1946 = aviation, wireless and cable, Bank of England
1947 = coal, railways
1948 = electric, gas and road haulage
1951 = about 1/5th under state
acts
1946 NI act, 1946 NHS act
housing programme = 1.35 mil new houses
ministry of info from war rebranded = increased state role in everyday life
1951 CON gov
denationalised iron and steel as well as road haulage
reduced income tax
talking of removing controls
but continued house programme and welfare state
butskellism
policies of Butler and Gaitskell so similar same person
post war consensus
mixed economy
keynes
negotiates with TU
high tax
moderate redistribution of wealth
welfare state
increased consumer spending and consumer boom
macmillan
Thorneycroft wants budget cuts but Mac refused
knows public opinion will shift against them if budget cuts
change to what people expect of gov
consensus under threat
CON back 1970 = Heath
wants to curb TU power, cut direct tax and increase indirect which would hit WC more, reduce subsidies
coal strikes end in disaster
industry crippled
only enough for 3 day week 1974
leads to hung parliament = LAB form ministry
1970s inflation and economic donwturn
inflation crisis 1970s
1973 arab-israeli war
oil prices rose, not much LAB can do but 27% inflation
solved by: rejecting TU demands, increase tax and unemployment LARGE SPEND CUTS
1976 = 1.3 mil unemployed
Callaghan 1976
tries to get party to undertsand how bleak situation is
CANT SPEND WAY OUT
Stagflation
begins to doubt keynesian economics
rising unemployment and inflation at same time
so monetarism = milton friedman
stop inflation by limiting money supply
class based approach = would affect WC more
increased TU militancy
1972 most days lost to strikes since 1926 = 23.9mil lost but only 3mil in 1960
end of consensus
monetarism
causes higher unemployment but had used it against LAB in campaign
changed how unemployment calculated so it understated by approx. 500,000
reduced income tax
1976 IMF loan for $3.9bn
orders gov to make £2bn in spending cuts
split LAB
radical left forms in LAB calling for:
withdraw from EEC
large firms = nationalised
nuclear disarmament
abolish HoL
higher tax for welfare
michael foot and tony benn
defeat of TU
inequalities
privatisation
CON leadership challenged
want Heath out and thatcher stood against saying they should vote her as a protest vote to embarrass him
thatcher won 130 vs 119 so heath steps aside
thatchers supporters
no consensus
thought CON leaders betrayed CON values
increased after winter of discontent 1978-9
1979 election
shift to right?
LIB = 13.8%, 11 seats
LAB = 36.9%, 268 seats
CON = 43.9%, 339 seats
not landslide but comfortable
defeat of TU
TU = radical threat to society
pit closures and gov stockpiling coal 1980s
1984-5 strikes
NUM
long bitter strike
gov wins
closed bulk of mines over next decade
police used as strikebreakers
inequalities tolerated
incentive to work harder
1797-90 number in poverty increased by 1.6mil
370,000 homeless by 1987
crime up 79%
regional variations = northern england, scotland, wales and northern ireland do worst
south east and london
people need to aspire to be affluent
privatisation
not in 1979 manifesto but key part of thatcherism
believed more efficient = better allocator
can gain revenue
can buy votes by undervaluing companies and creating a rush to buy shares
British telecom over £1bn undervalued
LAB wilderness years
splits and schisms
some formed social democratic party 1981
Landslide defeat 1983
also lost bad 1987 and 1992
Blair landslide 1997
on right wing of party
doesn’t renationalise
introduced min wage 1999
windfall tax on private utilities
more spending 2001 onwards
slight break from T but new consensus?
abandoned clause IV
no attempt to restore TU power
tolerate high unemployment
doesn’t talk about class
courts right wing press
was there really a post-war consensus?
1960s and 1970s says there was e.g., addison
thatcher says she was ending it
kevin jefferies = parties still apart on social issues
how different was thatcherism
there are contiunities
presenting wc as clear stake in economic system as savers, tax payers etc
is thatcherism cohesive?
thatcherism as term coined by rivals 1980s
saw it as moral project
did thatcher transform society?
racial protests
manifestation = neighbourhood watch = called them her troops and 20% covered
anti bomb protests
womens rights protests
gay rights protests
most social groups protest
section 28 bans talk in schools
1983 election
vote for = 13mil
vote against = 17.65mil
florence sutcliffe-braithwaite
concluded it is coherent
shirley letwin
treats thatcherism as a cohesive political project which aimed to stop the national decline which thatcher thought was caused by increased dependence on the state
andrew gamble
some think thatcherism was ill-suited to conservative party
one of paradoxes of thatcherism = she wants to reaffirm tory culture in an unconservative way
Thatcherism as combination of neoliberal economic policy e.g., monetarism and neo-conservative social ideology e.g., strong central government
he says “free economy and strong state“
leon campos maschette
tensions between thatcher as a neoliberal and a traditional tory
thatcherism showed a conservative worldveiw and should be seen as part of conservativism
aled davies
there was no coherent, pre-formed neoliberal individual a thte heart of thatcehrism intentions were marred with inconsistencies
steven evans
many commentators said that the british people and thatcher had a relationshio which meant she articulated their attitudes to the point where there was a thatcherite ideological hegemony