Content Blocks Flashcards
What is a political ideology
A political ideology entails a certain set of social and economic principles which is perpetuated by its supporters to be the ideal method of governance. Different parties are often representatives of different ideologies, however very few purely follow a single ideology unwaveringly – and those which choose to are often on the fringes of politics. In the United Kingdom, the Conservative Party is said to be representatives of the conservatism ideology, whereas the Labour party is traditionally a party which represents socialist doctrine – however neither completely follow these ideologies. The principles of conservatism directly conflict with those of socialism, with conservatist doctrine promoting the principles of Tradition, human imperfection, authority and private property, whereas socialism adopts the principles of community, co-operation, equality, needs and common ownership.
What is the difference between branches of socialism and conservatism
Both socialism and conservatism have numerous branches that differ in both values and degree of ideological purity; however, all branches will have the same overarching values. It is often argued that conservatism has no ideological basis and is instead a practical attitude about politics, however the accuracy of this observation greatly depends on the branch.
Explain Traditional and Authoritarian conservatism
Traditional conservatism is the least ideological branch and takes a very adaptable approach to its stance on socio-economic issues. This method of reforming policy to reflect voter beliefs has been integral to the success of the Conservative Party in the age of Modern Democracy. Authoritarian conservatism is a deeply ideological branch of conservatism that is based upon the belief that strong leadership is required for a country to maintain the status quo – with or without the support of the people. Margaret Thatcher was a strong proponent of this ideology
Explain socialism and the relationship with its branches
Socialism can be understood as both an economic model, method of political empowerment and social model. The degree to which of these is emphasised varies greatly between branches, with Communism being the most extreme branch which aims to completely alter all institutions within society – both political and economic.
Explain communism and democratic socialism and the relationship between the two
communism strongly parallels the beliefs of theorist Karl Marx and therefore places no faith on the electoral system as a method to promote communism, instead they believe that the only way to enact communism would be through a revolution lead by an authoritarian vanguard party which would lead the people and command the economy based on needs. Democratic Socialism is another branch which is formed on the principle that capitalism cannot be made to fit the needs of the workers, and therefore the only viable option to empower the workers would be a command economy. However, unlike communism, democratic socialists believe an electoral system should still exist, however all government should have to answer to worker councils – which entails a group of workers setting wages and production for their respective industries – as they will set the economic foundation for which the government would rely on its taxes.
How does conservatism approach human nature
Conservatism is based upon the belief that human beings are imperfect and cannot be perfected, and that the average person is psychologically limited and dependent on others guidance. Therefore, they argue, that the average person enjoys the stability that authority and hierarchy allow for and therefore only a smaller portion of the population are capable to take on positions of power.
How does socialism approach human nature
Socialism, however, believes humans are naturally inclined and better suited for co-operation rather than following authority figures. They believe that when working together, human beings develop bonds of sympathy, caring and affection which enable them to be physiologically able to make important decisions in society.
What is the difference between socialism and conservatisms approach to criminals
Furthermore, conservative believe that crime and other destructive and immoral actions by members of society to not be a product of society but the consequences of natural human imperfection, therefore they believe the only reasonable deterrent to be a strong state and laws. Socialists, on the other hand, argue that the destructive in society are actually a product of society itself and are not naturally occurring. Therefore, they argue that such people can be rehabilitated and prevented from developing in the first place by garnering a more equal society which promotes co-operation and removes the social divisions in society which create hostility. This, they argue, would allow for all people to develop skills and traits that are intrinsic to a moral and responsible member of society.
What is conservatism’s view on property ownership
One of the key principles of conservatism is private property ownership. Conservatives believe that property ownership contributes to the values of authority and tradition in society by giving homeowners an incentive to promote and contribute to respecting people’s property as they have made an investment in such. Therefore, property owners are said to have a stake in society and a vested interest in maintaining the law and order of the country. The value conservatives put on property ownership can be seen in thatcher ‘right to buy’ scheme which allowed some council house tenants to purchase the property.
What is socialism’s view on private ownsership
However, socialists believe that private property ownership is the origin of inequality and competition in society, and therefore is responsible for the corruption of individuals as it is the main barrier to co-operation within society. Socialist believe that private property conflicts with principles of community, caring and affection by encouraging people to be materialistic and causes conflict between members of society as non-property-owning workers feel exploited. Property ownership also directly conflicts with socialists’ goal to dissolve social divisions as private property creates a social division between those which own property and those which do not and thus promote selfishness instead of equality. Therefore, socialists believe that since wealth should be a collective effort, property should have common ownership. In the post war period, British socialists tried to promote common ownership through the nationalisation of industry, large public sector housing and through the public ownership of utilities.
What is socialisms views on the distribution of materials and resources
One of the key principles of socialism is that the distribution of materials and resources should be based around the needs of the people. Socialists argue that needs are objective and universal – such as food, water, shelter and companionship – and therefore everyone should have access to materials which will allow them to satisfy these needs. This focus on equality of distribution regarding basic materials lead to institution such as the National Health Service being introduced in the United Kingdom by the Labour Party. Due to this emphasis on the importance of helping everyone satisfy their needs, socialists have often condemned work that they view as being materially successful but not contributing to satisfying the needs of the people – such as high interest lending by banks.
What is conservatisms view on the distribution of materials and resources
This is in direct contrast with the conservative’s faith in the free market that dictates the distribution of resources based on who can afford it. Conservatives believe that satisfying needs is at the burden of the individual and that those which fail to do so are simply a harsh reality of human imperfection. They believe that commanding resources to be distributed to people based on need rather than financial position would hold society back from advancing its wealth. Therefore, they condone industries that are financially successful and often act against public industries that may help people, but do not produce adequate profits. An example of this can be seen in Margaret Thatcher shutting down the government funded coal mines which were operating at a loss, subsequently leading to significant job loss and strikes throughout the United Kingdom.
Who is karl marx and what are his views
Karl Marx is one of the most prominent theorists in socialism and is one of the most outspoken critics of conservative values through his book’s ‘capital’ and ‘The manifesto of the communist party.’ Marx believed that all human societies were based around the dynamic between the rich and powerful and the poor and powerless. The rich aimed to maintain their positions of hierarchy at the expense and exploitation of the working class beneath them. Marx believed the capitalist society in which an elite owned the land and means of production to be the final evolution of the exploitative society and that this will only end once a small group of working class people, labelled a vanguard party, rise up and lead a revolution against the powerful, with the end goal of recreating society from the ground up to benefit everyone through the use a command economy in which the public owns the means of production and distributes resources to eliminate competition and thus create a society based on co-operation and community.
Who is margaret thatcher and what are her views
Margaret Thatcher is seen as one of the pioneers of ‘the new right’ branch of conservatism which is seen as a deeply ideological branch of conservatism that promotes minimal government intervention in the free market and instead promotes the government as a method of protecting the law and order of society. Thatcher heavily promoted individual responsibility and accountability in the forms of free enterprise and initiative – believing escaping poverty to be the burden of the individual and not the state.
What are power, authority and legitimacy
Power, authority and legitimacy are three principles which can be used to analyse the relationship between a government and society.
What is a government?
A government describes a governing body and leading individual that hold a degree of power to make decisions on the running of a country, with some being elected in a democratic way which allows the citizens to choose who has power, Such as the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom – Boris Johnson, and other’s obtaining power in a less than democratic way such as the current President of China, Xi Jing Ping.
How can power be described
However the management of a country is a complex and time-consuming operation, and therefore it is unrealistic for one individual to uptake all responsibilities. Therefore power can be described as the ability to command others, however in a democratic system, the only way in which a government can receive this ability is to be granted authority by the people and other institutions within society, such as the police force, to make decisions.
What is legitimacy and its relationship to authority?
However, in order for a democratic government to be granted authority, their governance must be perceived as legitimate by the people. Often this legitimacy is obtained through partaking in an highly regarded process which is seen is seen as an official part of the institution such as a democratic election, however, sometimes legitimacy is gained through an absence of other reasonable options, such as the United States designated survivor who is declared president in the event that a fatal attack is taken place during the state of the union.
How present are power, authority and legitimacy in government
it is clear that in a fully operational democratic government all three factors will be present, however other, less legitimate governments, do not require authority due to having absolute power and the threat of violence.
How prominent are the principles of authority, legitimacy and power in the 21st of century
These concepts are increasingly prominent in the 21st century, with some government’s such as the United States become increasingly illegitimatised through claims of fraudulent elections, and with the United Kingdom’s debate over the Monarchy and it’s basis on traditional, unelected authority figures.
What is power
Power is central to any government, as without power a government suffers from an inability to enforce its will. The degree of power and how it was achieved differs between countries, with some methods being more prominent in the twenty-first century when compared to others.
How can the level of political power by analysed
The level of political power – the ability of an individual or party to control the institutions and legislation of a government, such as the Armed forces – can be analysed by reviewing the branches of a government and determining whether there is any sovereignty and where it lies.
How much power does the UK Government have?
For example, in the UK the parliament has sovereignty over all other branches, including the supreme court, however this doesn’t not mean that a single party has absolute power. As not only must legislation be voted on by all parties, there are also several bills which a form an uncodified constitution, such as the magna carta which details that no person of authority is above the law. Furthermore, democratic elections take place and thus they are held accountable to the will of the people.
How much power does the United States government have
the United States has a codified constitution which is used to limit the powers of the governing party. This was introduced as a reaction to the what the American colonists viewed as a tyranny under British Rule.
What is the impact of absolute and unchecked power
The ability to practice unchecked, absolute power can result in a corrupt regime, that uses extreme measures to make sure society continues to operate within their will. If a regime has no accountability, they will inevitably be able to reward and punish effectively at will – rewarding those who obey them and punishing those who disobey.
How did max weber define the state?
This lead to Max Weber, a German sociologist, defining the state as having a monopoly on “legitimate violence”, meaning an undisputable right to punish people with no consequence.
How does americas system of checks and balances work
One method of preventing this is by enlisting a system of checks and balances, as seen in the Modern US, which creates several government branches that are independent of each other and are able to hold each other accountable as all must comply for legislation to be passed. In the United States, the executive branch, which includes the President and his/her staff, cannot enact law without it passing through the houses of congress and then being reviewed by the supreme court to determine its legality to the constitution. Therefore, it is essentially impossible for the ruling President to become tyrannical.
What do some argue about absolute power
However not all view the prospect of absolute power negatively, with some arguing that absolute power promotes stability within society as without an authoritarian figure, people in society will turn on each other as they try to develop the country in their vision. A Government can use their power to act as a peacemaker to ensure all people’s views are taken into account during the political process in order to reach a consensus.
How does consensus work in the US and an example of it failing in the Uk political system
Many forms of modern democratic systems, such as the Untied States, are designed to make consensus a necessity, for example the US system requires a simple majority of votes in both houses of congress to pass a bill, and subsequently this forces co-operation between both the Democrat and Republican parties to enact legislation. However this doesn’t not always work as if a Party gains a majority of seats in political system, they don’t have to seek compromise to pass legislation, for example Boris Johnson’s conservatives won a majority of seats in the 2019 Uk General Election, therefore allowing them to pass bills on Brexit regardless of the opposition parties opinions.
Why do some argue consensus is not desirable
Many argue attempting to reach consensus is not desirable, and instead slows down the opportunity for real change as political gridlock’s form.
How is power relevant in modern politics?
that power is still relevant in modern politics, and that the degree of power between branches of government differs, with some holding more than others. Furthermore, how power is achieved and used differs greatly, with countries such as China being ruled by a single party with absolute power that command through controversial and severe punishments for those that don’t follow their doctrine, such as the persecution of Uighur Muslims, whereas countries such as the US have democratic elections to determine a President who is still held accountable by the supreme court and opposition parties.
Who is steven lukes?
One of the most prominent theorists on power is Steven Lukes, who theorised that power has three “dimensions”.
What is steven lukes theory?
The first dimension of power is the visible execution of power, meaning the aspect that the public are aware of. For example, when a government in the UK proposes a new law, they produce a bill, debate it in the houses of parliament and within the media and subsequently hold a vote between all members of parliament to determine whether it will become official legislation. This is a visible form of power as it is clear where the power lies within the process. The second dimension of power, according to Lukes, is the secretive dimension. This describes power that is exercised behind doors, which means the ability to dictate the political agenda, such as what is discussed in the public dimension and what isn’t. Therefore, power can be seen as an ability to prevent decisions from being made Aswell as making them. An example of this concerned the Scottish issue of devolution as during the period of conservative government from 1979 – 1997, the issue of devolution was kept off the main political agenda due to the conservatives opposition too it. Following the election of the pro-devolution Labour Party in 1997, the referendum for devolution was held, however the SNP wanted an option to vote for independence in the referendum however it was not allowed due to Labour’s opposition to it. Therefore, both Labour and Conservatives used the secretive dimension of power. Lastly, Luke suggests that the third dimension of power is one in which power is exercised through manipulation. Luke suggests that a key ability of those in power is being able to persuade us that the decisions being made are in our best interests. For example, some feminists argue that women are being persuaded that being a housewife and mother is the best role for women in society. Often, times of economic and political crisis can be used by a party to push a certain agenda, such as the 2008 Financial crisis, which many have accused the Conservative party of exploiting to push Austerity.
What does modern power mean
What is implicit and explicit authority
At times this authority is explicit – such as being granted by an election and at other times it is implicit – meaning it is assumed to exist in the absence of any effective challenge. Therefore, if power is the ability to issues commands, then authority is the reason they are able to do so.
How does authoirty relate to different systems of governance
The foundation of a liberal democracy is that although a certain government or leader may hold authority, it does not correlate to an authoritarian regime as the authority can only be granted through the people via a democratic election, and therefore it can equally be taken away. Authority is not a feature of many countries in the modern world, such as North Korea for example, who maintain absolute power and face no opposition as they are the entirety of the government and therefore can punish people at will as a consequence. Therefore authority is not required for them to operate.
Who is max weber
One of the most prominent theorists on authority is max weber, he theorised that power is finite in society and therefore power held by a specific group is exclusive to them. Therefore, authority is the basis on which a group gets a share of power.
What is max webers theory
Weber theorised three types of authority, one of which being traditional authority. Traditional authority depends upon a belief in established customs and traditions. Those with traditional authority expect obedience on the basis on traditional and respected customs. For example, the British Monarchy is an example of traditional authority, and therefore it demands that the successor of the crown is respected as much as their predecessor as it is traditionally process. The second version of authority is charismatic authority, which is dictated based upon the special qualities of a leader. People are drawn to leaders that command charismatic qualities, often these qualities can shroud peoples thoughts and lead to follower becoming manipulated into developing radical ideologies, a historic example of this would be Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party. Charismatic leadership is entirely dependent on the leaders personality, and therefore any movement is vulnerable to die with them. Lastly, rational-legal authority depends upon a formal set of rules which grants authority to command others. This has a moral dimension in that people have freely handed power over to another person. Therefore, a democratic government can be said to exercise rational-legal authority because the electorate hands over power to it through the ballot box.
What is legitimacy?
Whereas the obtainment of power can be achieved with or without the will of the people through force, authority is only accessible through permissions, therefore for someone to have authority they must first have legitimacy.
When is legitimacy not required?
Legitimacy is not required in an undemocratic state such as China, a Dictatorship, as they have absolute power – no authority is required - however in a democratic state it is impossible for an illegitimate government to exercise control as the different branches of the state will be unwilling to co-operate and accept authority.
What is one way in which government achieve legitimacy
One way in which governments achieve legitimacy is through the electoral system. By making a collective and democratic decision on who rules us, society is showing support for those which win the election.
How has legitimacy been called into question in the United Kingdom
In the UK, for example, the legitimacy has been increasingly called in question by the general populace due to the disproportionality of the system resulting in an unreflective parliament. This results in people resisting the authority as they don’t view the government as a legitimate representation. The UK’s first past the post system results in a candidate winning a seat in the house of parliament if they have the most votes out of all other candidates in their constituency, therefore members often win seats with less than fifty percent of the vote due to the remaining being split between numerous candidates, meaning more people voted against them than for them. As a consequence, nationally the percentage of votes a party gets is not always proportional to the amount of seats they hold in parliament. For example, the 2015 Uk General Election was the most disproportionate in history, with 331 of 650 MPS being elected on under 50% of the constituency vote, and 191 with less than 30% of the vote.
