In what ways, if any, do the UK's major political parties of today reflect political ideologies?

Discuss this essay question in relation to liberalism and one other political theory.

Alex Parish January 2008 – Essay UK-4

The very nature of a representative democracy encourages political parties to pursue populist policy and cater to the widest range of political support. This often means ideological beliefs are not at the forefront of a party’s campaign; and the policies on which their main agenda is based might go against the traditional ideological basis of the party. To examine how far modern political parties reflect traditional political ideologies, I will, after defining ideology, examine how the post-war consensus of liberal, social democratic policy seemingly appealed to many people from several ideological backgrounds, and whether the radical change in UK politics after the economic crisis of 1973 - the rise of ‘Thatcherism’ and Blair’s avoidance of ideological classification - has rendered traditional ideological descriptions meaningless in regard to modern parties.

What is Ideology?

The term “ideology” was first used in towards the end of the 18^th Century by the French philosopher Destutt de Tracy, who used it in reference to the “science of ideas”. The term has since developed to mean an organisation of someone’s core ideas, or beliefs. Someone’s political ideology can be summarised as their viewpoint on the world; their beliefs in regard to how the country should be run, economic policy and human nature. Ideological differences, for example, could include the preference for a strong monarchy over a democratic government; or a preference for a command economy over a free market economy.

Ideology is often used by Marxists as a negative term, implying that they are inherently biased against the working class. Furthermore, modern political commentary utilises the term ideologue, for someone who follows their political beliefs continually, despite the consequences of their actions.

Ideology and political parties

Edmund Burke believed that a political party is a group of people united for promoting a “political principle on which they are all agreed”. It could be argued that it is the ideology which attracts a member of a political party. However, this is a simplistic approach; within parties inevitably there will be many conflicts – and, as such, compromises are inevitable. Even if the party is broadly agreed on the ideal solution to the problem, there are differing opinions on the best way to achieve this. For example, revisionist socialists have argued that a socialist revolution is no longer necessary as capitalism had been reformed enough to allow economic equality, but still have similar aims in regard to equal opportunity and equality of income as radical socialists.

As Burke’s definition suggests, people support the party which best reflects their interests. Traditionally, this meant the working class supporting a left wing party with socialist elements such as Labour, whilst the middle class and wealthy supported conservative policies. However, the difference between the ideologies of the main parties in UK politics has narrowed significantly, with both Labour and the Conservatives, at the 2005 election, agreeing on issues which had previously been divisive, agreeing in the principles of the free market and greater public spending in key services.

This trend towards agreement between parties arose in the mid-20^th Century, as the United Kingdom struggled to rebuild after the Second World War leading to an agreement on ‘new’ liberal principles as expressed by William Beverage and John Maynard Keynes, with the role of the state as a force for good to protect citizens against ignorance, want, squalor, idleness and poverty. Although these values were against traditional conservatism, the Conservative Party pursued “one-nation conservatism”, where the state acts as a guiding force for moral good, and accepts the role of the state to help citizens through a welfare state.

The Conservatives and Thatcherism

Traditionally, conservatism as an ideology holds a cynical view of individualism; with the belief that humans are, by nature, impossible to predict and therefore any radical change could have entirely unforeseen consequences. However, as the worldwide economic crisis of 1973 hit the United Kingdom with spiralling inflation and huge unemployment as a result, the social democratic consensus that had enabled co-operation between the parties fell apart, and new solutions to the problem were sought.

During the period of consensus, the Conservatives, under Heath and MacMillan, had pursued one-nation conservatism. This was a left-wing approach to the conservative ideology, with elements of ‘new’ liberalism alongside traditional conservative policy on the family and law and order. The idea behind one-nation conservatism is to unite together different classes under moral conservative guidance. It accepts the need for the welfare state and the need for social institutions to create harmonious relationships between class and wealth divisions in society, whilst maintaining traditional values. The term one-nation conservatism originates from a political novel by Benjamin Disraeli, in which he claims Britain is “two nations” who are “ignorant of each other's habits, thoughts, and feelings” - the rich and the poor. One nation conservatism aims at bringing the two together.

Appointed in 1975 as the leader of the Conservative Party, Margaret Thatcher radically reformed the Conservative Party’s policies. The idea of “One-Nation Conservatism” as pursued between 1945 and 1975 was discarded; replaced by Thatcher’s - what could be considered – Neo-Classical Liberalism. The state was simply a tool to maintain law and order and should not interfere with other services. In this view, the state was “rolled back”, and privatisation of previously state owned industries, such as the railways, and utilities such as water and electricity. Thatcher also showed a great commitment to the liberal idea of individualism, once commenting that the Conservative Party believed people should be “individuals” as opposed to the socialist idea of people being “numbers in a state computer”. She had a strong love of economic and personal liberty, against the ideas of Burkeian conservatism and a hostility towards the welfare state, believing it encouraged people to live of the state, instead believing that private enterprise rewarded effort.

Therefore, the Conservative Party, in its modern form, cannot be considered as party following traditional conservative ideas; more accurately, the Conservative Party since 1975 has pursued Neo-Classical Liberal principles. Between 1990 and 2006, the party continued to pursue Thatcherite policy after she left office, with continued reduction of the state and policies of low taxation. However, amongst the broad trend of Classical Liberalism, there remains a traditional conservative moral presence in the party. For example, Classical Liberalism places immense significance on the freedom of the individual. This contrasts with traditional conservative suspicion of individualism and the role of the state to maintain order, and the Conservative Party has a strong stance on issues like discipline in schools and immigration.

In 2005, under the leadership of Michael Howard (once a supporter of Thatcher), the Conservative Party continued to pursue Thatcherite policy. However, whilst promising to lower taxes, the Conservatives also promised to maintain the existing welfare funding for the health service and education – making savings through streamlining these services and reducing the state. The 2005 election showed great agreement between the Conservative and other political parties, with the key “election pledges” for 2005 being broadly similar between Labour and the Conservatives, showing the effect Thatcher had on British politics.

Therefore, the importance of a clear ideology in election clearly remains. Despite negative connotations of the word ideology, a party with underlying discrepancies and contradictions in its policies and ideas is seen as unelectable, as shown throughout the 1980s with Labour’s struggle to form a clear identity and, more recently, with the Conservatives after Thatcher.

‘New’ Labour and Blair’s ‘Third Way’

During the period of economic crisis in the 1970s, the Labour Party suffered from ideological factions forming in the party, disagreeing on the best course of action to deal with the crisis. This plunged the Labour Party into a period where they became the opposition for 18 years. The party was split into factions between extreme socialists, and the moderate social democrats. Previous Labour governments had pursued social democratic policy - most successfully under Clement Attlee between 1945-51; nationalising the health service and developing the welfare state - and, during a time when a radical solution was needed, many socialists in the party proposed transforming the Labour Party in to a fully socialist organisation, as these policies now seemed ineffectual at dealing with the crisis.

Between 1980 and 1983, leader Michael Foot tried to create a balance between the two factions. However, many senior social democrats in the Labour Party were unconvinced and left to form the Social Democrat Party – followed by a total of 25 Labour MPs. This seemed to signify the end of Labour’s social democrat policy, with the party becoming more socialist in its approach after the loss of many revisionist figures from the party. After the election defeat and the popularity of the SDP amongst the electorate, however, Labour’s leadership realised the need for a change if they were to defeat Thatcher’s conservatives and needed to become more moderate to get more support.

Neil Kinnock was appointed leader in 1983 after Foot resigned. Kinnock was a moderate, who was unpopular with a large section of the left wing of the Labour Party and he took steps to reduce the extreme socialist influence in the party. The ‘militant tendency’ was a Marxist group within the Labour Party who, in 1972, committed Labour into accepting that the next Labour government should introduce a “socialist plan of public ownership”. From 1985 Kinnock attempted to purge the radical socialist elements in the Labour Party, and Militant Tendency abandoned Labour in 1991. With the socialist power in the party diminished, the party could continue modernisation in order to improve its public image and become electable.

Although Kinnock had begun the modernisation of the Labour Party, election defeat in 1986 and 1992 led to his resignation and John Smith took over the party in 1992. He curtailed the powers of trade unions, removing the block vote which had previously been one of the main criticisms from social democrats in the party. The block vote enabled trade unions, at Labour Party conferences, to block proposals for Labour policy. This could be seen as the main change that broke Labour away from socialist roots, and although John Smith tragically died 2 years after becoming leader he made a large contribution to the modernisation of the party, which Tony Blair continued.

Clause IV, commitment to Nationalisation, one of the founding principles of the Labour Party - being present in the party constitution since 1917 - was abandoned in 1995. It was rewritten, defining Labour as a “democratic socialist” party. The clause regarding public ownership dissuaded many new liberals from joining the Labour Party. Many members in the party believed that so long as the public perception was that the Labour Party was a socialist organisation it would never gain popular support, and Tony Blair sought measures to change the perception making other key changes to Labour Party policy. Privatisation schemes taken place under the Conservatives would not be reversed and income tax for the wealthy would not be increased, taking the party beyond social democracy and new liberalism, instead showing agreement with Conservative neo-liberal ideas regarding the economy and free market.

Tony Blair and current Labour policy is hard to define ideologically, and one term that has been used by Blair himself is the “third way”. This relates to Blair’s attempts to move away from traditional ideology, policy that is neither “old left nor new right”, and appeal to a wide range of society as a moderate centre-left party. Modern Labour policy could be seen as a compromise between Thatcher’s neo-liberal economics and revisionist socialism, and Blair’s attempts to move away from traditions shows the emphasis on broad public support in modern politics rather than conflicting ideas. Labour’s acceptance of Classical Liberal ideas mean today could even be seen as a new period of consensus echoing that of the consensus after the Second World War of new Liberal ideas.

The Liberal Democrats

Formed in 1988 after a merger between the Social Democratic Party and the Liberal party, the Liberal Democrats have, it could be argued, remained the most consistent with its member’s ideology, with little of the infighting and conflict associated with the Conservatives or Labour. Fundamentally, the Liberal Democrats are a social democrat party, broadly promoting policy along a new liberal line. This has been inherited from the policy of the Liberal party after 1945, rejecting the idea of the Classical Liberalist minimal state in favour of progressive liberalism. As the SDP was formed out of Labour’s moderate social democratic members who disagreed with the extreme socialist elements in the party, new liberal policy would appeal to both of these groups, and as such, the new Liberal Democrat party continued the ideas of the Liberal party.

This commitment to new liberalism has been shown through a variety of policies at the 2005 election. Their belief that higher taxation to pay for university fees and elderly care shows a commitment to the ideas of William Beveridge and New Liberal policy after the second world war, with the role of the state to provide protection to British citizens from the “five giants” to enable them to fully enjoy individual freedoms. By combating poverty and ignorance, it is believed that people will be truly able to enjoy the freedoms granted to them. The Liberal Democrats have also continually campaigned for electoral reform, to create greater equality in the value of each vote.

The Liberal Democrats, therefore, could be considered a party true to an ideological tradition, with a longstanding commitment to new liberal policy and emphasis on the role of the state to enable people to enjoy their freedoms. From 1945 to 1975, the Liberal party received a very small proportion of the vote, as little as 2.6% in 1955, as the Labour and Conservatives pursued similar ideas at this time nut with wider electoral support. Since 1975 however, these parties have drifted away from new liberal principles, instead returning, economically at least, to a more classical liberal approach. This has led to the Liberal Democrats now taking the moderate ground, and gaining large amounts of support in the recent elections, attaining roughly 25% of the vote.

Liberal dominance in Western states

During the 20^th Century, western democratic states have been dominated by variants of liberalism. In the United Kingdom, liberalism, economic at least, has been adopted by both right wing and left wing parties, and liberal ideas seem to be the most popular amongst the electorate. Socialist policy and support has dwindled, and throughout the 1980s Labour were not seen as a viable choice due to the socialist elements within. In 1992, a book published by the American philosopher and writer Francis Fukayama entitled “The End of History” argued that the dominance of liberal democracy in the 20^th Century and the popularity of Western liberalism has meant that ideological conflict in the future will not occur, leading to an “end of history”.

Politics in the UK now places more emphasis on electoral success and therefore the competence of a party rather than their ideological basis, as the main parties now chase votes rather than campaign for change. Politics reflects the values of the society, and it would appear that society has become steeped in classical liberal values. A recent survey was conducted by the Government-backed National Centre for Social Research, which produces an annual report on “British Social Values”, the findings of which suggest agreement with Thatcher’s ideas amongst a significant amount of the electorate. For example, only 34% believe that wealth should be redistributed by the government, in comparison with nearly half in 1995, and 25% believed people are poor due to their own actions.

Conclusion

It could be argued that modern party politics in the UK has little relevance to traditional ideologies. During the 20^th century, the United Kingdom has been dominated by Liberalism, and the acceptance of the change needed after the Second World War to promote stability by the Conservative Party led to Labour and the Conservatives pursuing similar social democratic ideas, based around Keynesian economic policy and enabling freedoms by an active state, protecting its citizens through a welfare state. This changed during a period of crisis in the 1970s, and both parties became more radical in their approach, with the Conservatives becoming part of the “new right” and Labour returning to socialist ideas. However, Labour’s modernisation throughout the 1980s and 1990s has led to a new period of classical liberal consensus. The ideological gap between the major parties has become almost indistinguishable, with both parties in broad agreement on the principle of the free market and greater public spending at the 2005 General Election, and Blair’s avoidance of ideological classification shows the emphasis on election victory, not wishing to alienate members of the electorate to gain popular support.

Bibliography:

· Garnett M. & Lynch P., AS UK Government and Politics, Phillip Allen Updates 2005

· “Antoine-Louis-Claude, Comte Destutt de Tracy” Encyclopaedia Britannica Online, Retrieved 15^th January 2008 from http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9030096

· Burke, E., Thoughts on the Present Discontent and Speeches, Retrieved 15^th January 2008 from http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=2173

· “Policies: Our Opportunity Agenda”, Conservative Party website, Retrieved 16^th January 2008 from http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=people.opportunity.page

· “Labour in government”, Labour Party website, Retrieved 16^th January 2008 from http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies

· “The Party Policy”, Liberal Democrat party website, Retrieved 16^th January 2008 from http://www.libdems.org.uk/party/policy/index.html

· “What is Blair’s Third Way?”, BBC News Online (27^th September 1999), Retrieved 22^nd January 2008 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/458626.stm

· “Britain in 2008: A nation in thrall to Thatcherism”, The Independent online, Retrieved 23^rd January 2008 from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/britain-in-2008-a-nation-in-thrall-to-thatcherism-772335.html